Top
830°

'BioShock,' 'Fallout 3' Creators Discuss 'Killzone 2' Review Reaction

Remember how so many reviewers said that Killzone 2 didn't have much in its single-player campaign that was new? And remember how people couldn't agree if that was a problem or not? At last week's Comic-Con panel, N'Gai Croal and Stephen Totilo asked 2K Boston's Ken Levine ("BioShock") and Bethesda Softworks' Todd Howard ("Fallout 3") all about that and the disputable value of "newness."

(Videos not viewable by users logging in from Canada or the U.K.)

Read Full Story >>
multiplayerblog.mtv.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Jager4511d ago

So... again, ill ask. What did these guys say. Again, im deaf, so im asking N4Gers here. This time, lets refain from bombing the deaf kid with disagrees as if i was Saddam approuching the UN building.

TOO PAWNED4511d ago

They bascially owned Stephen Totilo and wvery other douche that doesn't really understand games or doesn't know how to properlly judge them OR gives biased narrow minded comments that game "is nothing new".
Both of them gave PERFECT answers, Ken was first to answer so his answer was better, i could not agree more with him. Todd gave different perspective but was also correct.

Stephen Totilo probably expected some moronic comments that he hears from likes like him....some 360 "logic".
Hey Stephen we all remember how "newness" abd "fresh" Halo 3 was....don't we?

faisdotal4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

Or simply put: Stephen Totillo asked if a game (i.e Killzone 2) that doesn't exactly do anything new but really perfect's the genre, if it's a bad thing or good thing.

Ken Levine basically said if it add's to the experience, then no it isn't a bad thing. He also used a Pizza Analogy lol.

Todd Howard said the same thing except detailed that stuff like the Field Of View or the Offset of the Gun is to the screen are little things that game devolopers niggle about and also can be mentally tested in 5 seconds if a game sucks or not, and he thinks Killzone 2 does them right.

Totillo asked again, if it's a good thing or a bad thing again, and they said nope it's entirely good thing.

INehalemEXI4511d ago

Now im itching to play the demo again.

beavis4play4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

he said what was most important was that games were fun. and both he and howard said they were impressed with what they've seen of KZ.

edit: i wonder what those boobs from Edge magazine (and Andre from gamesradar) are thinking after hearing Levine and Howards comments?

MasterBlaster4511d ago

Damn Jager, people bombed you with disagrees just for asking what somebody said? That's pretty f'd up. N4G ftl.

bassturd4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

basically asked if games must have newness and then threw in Killzone 2 as an example. Saying it doesn't feel new but is that okay?

Then the 2 game devs (whom said they haven't even played Killzone 2 yet so why the hell is he asking them in the first place?) said, as long as it is fun....we don't care. Fallout 3 dev said Killzone 2 looks awesome basically.

@below. And eveything they did with the graphics. I mean, everyone says the game looks pretty. Ya, it looks pretty cuz they are doing stuff that hasn't been done in a videogame's visuals before. I don't understand why this is always an oversight when it is right there in your face.

4511d ago
Pretend_PS3_Owner4511d ago

yeah i can't wait to play this, i will probably pick it up after Halo:ODST comes out.

FarEastOrient4511d ago

Yeah, if a game has to add more spokes to the wheel after reinventing it over being fun is more important than the reviewer has lost the ground of being objective. According to what Edge thinks about Killzone 2 for example and complaining that it doesn't add anything is bogus.

According to Edge, than one of my favorite games Starcraft, Command & Conquer, Red Alert, and Bejeweled ^_^ should all be getting scores less than 7 because of lacking in 'innovations.' The reason why I'm willing to spend $150 on the Starcraft II Trilogy is because it plays exactly like Starcraft 1.

MAR-TYR-DOM4511d ago

again? WTF is up with these websites and their blackouts? multiplayerblog.mtv.com ----> f u

Armyless4511d ago

For example, I doubt something NEW like a FPS Katamari Damacy would set fire to the indsutry...

(wait... that actually sounds kind of cool lol)

Xymes4511d ago

But I think it's the fact that you have the man that killed around 20 million Russians as your avatar what makes people press that disagree button. But whatever, my opinion.

xxsnowmanxx4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

(Videos not viewable by users logging in from Canada or the U.K.)

bummers for me too man...

Ozzyb4511d ago

Don't feel TOO bad. I can't watch the Mercer Report here, and that show is funny!

LeonSKennedy4Life4511d ago

Disagreeing???

What's up with that?

GameGambits4511d ago

I liked watching this. Not often you get to hear game developers of highly acclaimed franchises speak out on gaming, UNLESS of course they are a certain someone with baby Gap-Tshirts, crooked smiles, and a slight lisp. You know who you are, let's just call him Bliffy C for now.

Seriously though, I hope no one uses these videos as arguments to either side of the Killzone 2 rocks/Killzone 2 is over hyped + sucks war going on. This needs to stay in the warm friendly gamer space where the guys who make us what we love, just discuss another aspect of games they think might or might not make it a success. Innovation is great if done well, and redoing is excellent if polished to perfection.

Great vids. :)

Legion4510d ago

Did you notice the comment about the camera level compared to the rest of the environment? Was he picking on the fact that the character has been described as feeling short in the game when compared to other characters?

redsquad4510d ago (Edited 4510d ago )

Can't watch the vids being a Limey, but as I said elsewhere: If we demanded 'innovation' in EVERY game, there'd only be around three new titles a year.
If a game does what it set out to do WELL, then it's as deserving of praise as a game that offers something new in my view.

prowiew4510d ago

Good answers by them. Now both of you go make more good games.

StephanieBBB4510d ago (Edited 4510d ago )

I must have missed the bandwagon where the fun level in games doesn't matter anymore, so as long as they invent something new they should be praised like jesus himself?

Or this might have been invented by fanboys whence they saw that the KZ2 CGI trailer looked pretty much like the actual gameplay... I've never in my life seen this much nit picking at a game before. Either people want KZ2 to fail or they are too excited to drop the subject.

Either way, KZ2 is getting one hell of a free advertisement trip so even if it's bad PR it's still PR.

_Q_4510d ago

Pay no attention to them Jager.
BTW I loved the answers they gave. Its common sense,If its fun then theres nothing much else to it.
I hate that they had to point out the lil details these jackasses ignored so now theyre gonna act all informed when they write another article on KZ2 about "how detailed the game really is after all"

callahan094510d ago

@Beavis4Play, I'd predict that they would disagree with Levine and Howard. Sure, those so-called journalists have no expertise or actual skill of any actual creative value, all they do is criticise the hard work of truly creative & skilled people. But then again, that's precisely the point. They have no constructive talent, so they can't feel good about themselves unless they use their "power" to criticise the very sort of work that they'd never in a million years be capable of doing themselves.

They gave Fallout 3 a 7, and they gave Bioshock an 8. So, even though they have no idea what goes into making a game, and have no creative skill to match the sort that game developer's have, they feel that they are right and the developer's are wrong and have no idea what makes a worthwhile gaming product. Arrogance, I tell you.

The Lazy One4510d ago

no. As long as they do it better or slightly differently.

@ prcelain- killzone 2's cover system isn't "revolutionary", the original ghost recon let you hide behind things and lean out too. The fact that you stick to things isn't really "revolutionary" moreso evolutionary. revolutionary goes against the grain, evolutionary builds on old systems and makes them better. I can't really think of a "revolutionary" way to do cover come to think of it, maybe by waggling your feet?

That said, Edge seemed much more upset with the fact that the story felt very stereotypical and unimportant than anything to do with the gameplay.

Shepherd 2144510d ago (Edited 4510d ago )

so its ok when Killzone 2 doesnt really add much that is new but apparently according to most N4G users its not ok if Halo 3 didnt re-invent the genre either?

Halo 3 had the innovative Forge map editor, the theater system that lets you take screenshots and film clips of your matches, the amazingly flexible custom games lobby that lets you create the exact gametype you want, then Halo 3 has a fileshare system to let you advertise and send everything to your friends, then log onto bungie.net and publish all your things to millions? And since no other console game has done that before its not innovative?

All ive seen that Killzone 2 has done is the beautiful graphics and a FPS single player cover system that doesnt even carry over into multiplayer. Thats like Rainbow Six Vegas giving you the cover system in single player but taking it out in MP it takes half the game away if you do that.

As i stated before, apparently its ok if KZ2 doesnt add a lot of new things(what this article is about) but it is most certainly not ok that Halo 3 did add in mind blowing changes either. Someone intelligent please explain this to me.

+ Show (21) more repliesLast reply 4510d ago
NegativeCreepWA4511d ago

Good interview, both know what it takes to make great first person games. From what I've seen KZ gets all those things right. The first thing I notice when watching a KZ vid is that it has that COD weight to it.

Hallucinate4511d ago

you obviously havnt played killzone2..unless im misinterpreting you the only thing FPS can do now is have diffrent feels

NegativeCreepWA4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

The feel of your characters weight in the game environment is what I'm talking about. The way it feels when you walk, run, jump, landing from a fall. COD 4 does this way better than any game to date, all I'm saying is from what I've seen KZ seems to have that same feel to it which is a good thing.

Maybe its something only a console player could notice, since all you do on a PC is press a key to move.

beavis4play4511d ago

these are points where KZ appears to excel.

Johnny Jiron4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

CoD hits a nice balance of arcade and realism. KZ leans more in the way of realism as compared to say Halo which goes for the more arcade style. I honestly can't tell which of the three I like the most. Only other game to really put weight into the control was GRAW strangely enough. I liked it, but most seemed to have disliked it.

EDIT: LoL I just realized I lost a bubble for that comment I made the other day in which I knocked KZ2 and Halo 3 in the same post...guess it's not a good idea to disagree with both fanboy camps.

Mr Tretton4511d ago

COD has no realisitc feel to it. Quite the opposite. It's still a floating gun game.

NegativeCreepWA4511d ago (Edited 4511d ago )

You guys have no clue what your talking about, I guess I cant expect from the people on this site. You spend more time on here than actually playing games.

I don't recall saying anything about CoDs weight being realistic.

NegativeCreepWA4511d ago

2.5 It could be worse, My area code happens to be 360 so I get disagrees from both camps every time I say something good about the PS3.

RememberThe3574511d ago

lol thats a bit ironic. Where is the 360 though?

Unlike the rest of these guys I think I got what you were saying and i see what you mean.

Ozzyb4511d ago

I thought Rainbow Six: Vegas had better weight than CoD, especially the gun weight. CoD does it alright, but not the best, even though it's one of my favorite games.

Kleptic4511d ago

i'm not sure what you are talking about with CoD 4 having 'weight'...I know you then back peddled to say 'I didn't say it had realistic weight'...er something...

in either case...KZ2 and CoD 4 have absolutely zero in common in this regard...if you prefer the floaty feeling of CoD...where you can sprint forward as fast as possible, then stop spin 180* while firing a LMG in .3 seconds...you will hate killzone 2...

if you are saying the 'weight' as the way the gun bobs and the way a character absorbs a fall...that too is completely different, as killzone 2 feels like you actually stumble and put a hand down to catch yourself, while you still move forward...the camera shakes and adjusts much more appropriately to a fall than anything in cod...

but yes...I agree...CoD did get it right though, at least in terms of fun...I would have just called it a 'lack of weight' instead...as cod seemingly has zero gravity unless of course you jump...its equally as unrealistic as Halo 3's 10 foot jumps...but its fun to play...and VERY easy for anyone to get used to...killzone 2 is the complete opposite...its NOT easy to get used to...and takes hours and hours of tweaking in order to get down effectively (in terms of the gun acceleration and sensitivity settings)...

I am expecting a huge skew in terms of players on killzone 2 in the coming months...where the 'noobs' (for lack of a better term) are absolutely awful at the game...and those who get it...where as CoD pretty much anyone who played 5 minutes of the campaign will be using martyrdom and spamming grenades for quick kills in just 30 minutes...and easily end up with positive kdr's with very little talent whatsoever...all the while doing well at what I just mentioned; they will be getting used to the insanely fast aim speed of the game...

in the end...i think this is a latent product of how the game was designed...as GG inadvertently made a game that will have a massive hardcore following...that will push pretty much any newcomer out of that fun zone...even though GG wanted a shooter that 'anyone could enjoy online'...obviously yes, some will enjoy it regardless of how well they are doing in online matches...but i am anticipating something similar to Warhawk...where the guys that spend 100's of hours on it are simply untouchable entirely...where as CoD?...anyone can rack up kills by any number of cheap gimmicks that the developers either overlooked, or left in there for that exact reason...

madpuppy4510d ago

The character you play in bad company has a feel of weight as well, moving jumping down and especially running you can feel a sense of substance.

NegativeCreepWA4510d ago

2.9 Its in Washington, The 360WA is just an easy way to meet players from my area. Anyone from my area knows instantly what it means.

To the other people, I don't see how you can think COD4 is floaty compared to other games on the market. I haven't played KZ yet so I know how it actually feels, my view of it is just from what I've seen so far. In a few weeks ill make my own judgement on it because I don't believe a thing people say on this site, most them just want to make a game on there preferred console seem like the best thing ever.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 4510d ago
grantps34511d ago

i didnt think call of duty had weight.

"cheese, broccoli, and fake sausage" lol.

majorsuave4510d ago

I have all the Call of Duty (except the 3rd because the morons didn't make it for PC) and I can't say that the whole stack of boxes is an excellent paper weight.

So yes, in a way, it has weight.

OOG4511d ago

:( cant watch lol anyone else have other links for this vid?

faisdotal4511d ago

http://www.ultrareach.com/

Use this. It's a proxy thing I used to watch it.

I live in LONDON KNNAA WHAT I MEAAN BLUD INNIT SSAFE BYE.

2FootYard4511d ago

I love these two fine gentlemen.