Killzone 2 Almost Lives Up to the Hype

Andrew Weymes of The Nightly Gamer writes: "You don't have to have a bias towards any console in particular to understand why the original Halo is as well renown as it is. It changed the way the world perceives console first person shooters. Killzone 2 was expected to be a lot of things. Perhaps too much was expected of it, because it certainly lives up to the hype in terms of visual appeal and while the gameplay is refined, it's doesn't easily surpass other games in the genre as was expected of it."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Chris3993502d ago (Edited 3502d ago )

FPS' were strictly in PC territory at that point. Aside from that, the story - aliens/ invasion - was cliche and a bit rubbish. If you take away the multiplayer, there's not much to the game. The mass appeal of Halo is that is IS GENERIC, everyone can appreciate it.

People need to leave KZ2 alone. All this harping makes them look bitter.

A question for you Andrew (and it's a question, not an argument or a debate - I think you're a decent guy). What WOULD have made KZ2 groundbreaking at this point? Awesome graphics, perfected controls and phenomenal multi-player weren't enough? Especially compared to all the other mediocre shooters on the market? And I also wonder, in your opinion, what made Halo 3 so special, aside from the advertising and hype?

Edit: @ below. Alright, so do the other elements not outweigh a limp storyline (which I enjoyed anyway, especially Visari)? And again, what about Halo 3's rather generic tale? Did the greater aspects - multi-player, marketing, hype - of that game not overshadow the weaker ones - storyline, graphics? And why was it given a free-pass?

MrWeymes3502d ago (Edited 3502d ago )

It's an excellent game. I think people just had unrealistic expectations of it. Realisticly, it's a great first person with gorgeous visuals and good multiplayer. The story telling just doesn't hook you like other games in the genre.

Edit @ Above

Halo isn't given a free pass. It's a series that earned its place in history for popularizing FPS multiplayer on consoles. It's like saying that Mario is given a free pass. His series popularized the platforming genre.

I feel that Killzone 2 was supposed to bring more the genre than stunning graphics. I still thinks it's great, but the talk surrounding it made be believe it would be something more.

thereapersson3502d ago

To be honest, the ending of Halo 3, for all that it was hyped up to be, was really disappointing. The same goes with Gears 2, which has one of the worst endings in a current gen game that I've seen in quite some time. I don't understand why these games are held so highly and their storytelling shortcomings overlooked, and games that are just as equally hyped like Killzone 2 get over-scrutinized on the same token.

Marceles3502d ago (Edited 3502d ago )

"The story telling just doesn't hook you like other games in the genre."

There's not many stories that make sense at all in the genre. Bioshock, Half-Life, and F.E.A.R. really stand out but as far as war and army style FPSs I really haven't seen a huge epic hyped storyline. COD:World @ War to me actually had an opposite effect on me, the story wasn't bad at all for an FPS but the game sucked to me.

Killzone's hype was based on what you thought of realistically: gorgeous visuals of realtime gameplay people thought couldn't be done on a console, and good multiplayer demonstrated on the successful beta. The other elements that people try to drag down like the controls (which can be changed and the "delay" has been fixed) and the storytelling of an FPS game which people rarely ever pay attention to starts to come off as nitpicking because thats not what it was hyped for in the first place.

MrWeymes3502d ago

I can understand where you're coming from saying that picking on the storyline comes off as nitpicking. Perhaps it's just my personality. I'm not a summer blockbuster type of guy. I'm not the guy that would buy Iron Man for the special effects. Killzone 2 feels like that summer movie. It's gorgeous and took a ton of money to make, but it probably won't have a lasting effect on me.

I'll be fair when I review it. I know it will be a mainly positive review, but unless a game has no storyline to speak of such as a puzzler, I include my thoughts on how well told the story was in the review. I gave Street Fighter IV's storyline a 6.5/10 because it didn't even try to progress storytelling within the genre whatsoever.

Chris3993502d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

As in Resident Evil 5. They should be judged based on what they accomplish CURRENTLY. Halo 3 did nothing new. At all. It wasn't a bad game, it was quite good actually, but it was hardly innovative.

The biggest gauntlet thrown down at KZ2 was towards it's GRAPHICS; stemming from the E3 "target render" fiasco. And it picked up the gauntlet and smashed the media in the face with it. Now it seems that there are a lot of people who would like to forget what the measuring stick for Killzone 2 was, and would rather critique it on merits that it was never ordained to possess.

SL1M DADDY3501d ago

Of the same folks that were in support of HD-DVD when BD won the format war... They all had something negative to say about BD but really no substance to back up the negativity. In the end, Killzone 2 lives up to the hype and is a great game. People who bashed the game prior to launch are just upset that their dreams of seeing the game fail were dashed when it continued to receive great scores from reviewers around the world. Let it go you bitter idiots!

Marceles3501d ago

lol @ Street Fighter's storyline, yeah...I kinda learned take a game's storyline lightly unless it's mostly an RPG and maybe a few adventure games.

If a game's story really intrigues me then I'll pay attention, but if not then that doesn't make me stop playing the game if the gameplay is actually good. I think a good storyline is icing on the cake on any game, but it's like saying a storyline sucks on a kung fu fighting movie. If the fighting is good then who cares if it's the same guy-killed-my-father-must-seek -vengeance story. You're watching the movie or playing a video game kinda for the wrong reason if you're so deep into a game's plot. If a developer really says "pay attention to the story, it rocks!", then I would rate a game with the story in question, but if it's never put in the spotlight then I rate it on pure gameplay.

MrWeymes3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

The rating of the story for Street Fighter IV didn't effect the overall score too badly on TNG. I know that it's a genre that has a focus on the fighting mechanics.

I feel that people give games like Halo 3, Killzone 2, Gears of War 2 as well as many more a free pass when it comes to how entertaining the story and how immersive the world is. I personally prefer a game like Bioshock or Condemned 2 over a random shooter with a formulaic storyline.

I still see Killzone 2 for what it is which is a great action game.

anh_duong3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

funny how you gave flower a 8/10 for storyline.. and complain about killzone 2 not having a storyline..

i think this says it all for me.

seems like anyone with a games console can post an article on N4G these days.

MrWeymes3501d ago

I really enjoyed the interpretive nature of the storyline for Flower. It's not within a classic genre, therefore it has nothing to be compared to really.

Killzone 2 has a huge list of games to be compared to and it also has a traditional storyline unlike Flower. I like how Flower transports you to a world of fantasy where traditional story elements weren't present, thus my rating.

anh_duong3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

you enjoyed the interpretive nature of flower?

don't get me wrong since i own flower but flower has as much storyline as tetris. you are a petal, you fly around touching other petals whilst avoiding electricity pylons. its plot and synonym (correct word?) can be deduced by a 5th grader within 1 minute of playing - there isn't anything deep about it: nature is in peril save it by flying a petal around, end of.

the game is designed to be relaxing and mesmerising - and it achieves it - but that is about it. it's not going to make me realise that nature is in danger from the pollution of humanity.

honestly, flower has a better storyline than killzone?? weally?

DelbertGrady3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

What's the name of the main character in Halo 3?

Gears of War 2?

Resistance 2?

Killzone 2?

I don't blame you if you can't name the last two (although PS3 fans will google them and say they knew). Because of weaker storylines they didn't have the same impact on gamers, and are easily forgotten. No memorable main characters like Master Chief and Marcus Fenix.

StephanieBBB3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

But for me it kept me hooked untill the end. The strange thing about it is that it didn't make me feel like a hero nor a villian. It pretty much shows you that in war no one is either good or bad, it's all a grey mist.

In halo your potraid as the champion of mankind and as some people may prefer the story that way having it like that in KZ2 would be very cliché and unimaginetive. You don't know if your the good guy or the bad guy. Sure you might look like the good guys but your still invading someone else's planet.

Killzone 2 looks great, it plays great and most important of all it's realistic. The downfall of killzone 2 is that it's not similar to gears 2 or halo 1,2,3. But I wouldn't want it any other way.

@Soda Popinsky

How about you tell me the name of the main characters in COD4? Or CodWaW too for that matter?

No one is picking them apart so why is there that killzone 2 gets this special treatment?

jadenkorri3501d ago

a game getting caught up with all this fanboyism crap, i bet 100 billion dollars, that if Killzone 2 was exclusive to the 360, it would be marked as innovative, best graphics, best multiplayer and singleplayer campaign, giving Halo a run for its life....but its not, so every 360 fanboy up in arms, grab your labtops and get a typing, 360fanboys mission objective - kill killzone 2, next to ending ps3..

boodybandit3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

the one thing I don't feel KZ2 gets enough credit for by far is it's animations. Name me another shooter that has better animations? No name sites writing articles saying anything they can to bring this game down for what they "feel" it doesn't or should have had but rarely do they praise it for what it does.

It's laughable how GG has surpassed what they were being most under the scope for, the graphics. Yet now all these want to be journalist are nit picking things that every other shooter gets a pass on.

Let it go already. This game does every thing well and some things better than any other shooter before it on a console. Deal with it and move on. Am I saying it's the best shooter ever made on a console? IMHO there is only one other shooter this generation I enjoyed as much and it is multiplatform (which I played on the 360 for those that might think me a fanboy).

All these nit picking articles only tell me one thing. KZ2 really is that good!

BTW I think it's shameless when the person that writes the article, contributes the article to N4G (which I don't understand why N4G allows that) and then comes here to defend said article. Stand by what you wrote on it's own merits and let the members of N4G share their opinions. IMHO you lose credibility if you feel the need to come here and defend it.

Nineball21123501d ago

Soda posted: "What's the name of the main character in Halo 3?

Gears of War 2?

Resistance 2?

Killzone 2?

I don't blame you if you can't name the last two (although PS3 fans will google them and say they knew). Because of weaker storylines they didn't have the same impact on gamers, and are easily forgotten. No memorable main characters like Master Chief and Marcus Fenix. "

LOL! What's funny is that I couldn't remember the name for Gears 2! I knew Master Chief and I also knew Nathan Hale and Sev (I gotta admit I can't remember his last name).

Why do I know this? Because pretty much everyone knows Master Chief (he's an icon rightly or wrongly), I love the Resistance series and I just finished the SP of Killzone 2.

Why didn't I know Marcus (until you mentioned his name?) Becuase I've not played either Gears 1 or 2. I did an "Oh yeah" when I read his name, but I couldn't think of it.

I think Nathan Hale and Sev are just as iconic to fans of the series as Master Chief and Marcus are to their fans.

rockleex3501d ago


I never knew Killzone 2 was hyped to be the most INNNOVATIVE FPS ever!

I never knew Killzone 2 was hyped to have the BEST STORY EVAR!

All this time Killzone 2 was hyped because of its graphics. Well it certainly achieved the graphics.

I guess people have to pretend the hype was all about storyline or innovation JUST so that they can say it didn't live up to the hype. -_-"

MrWeymes3501d ago

I never said that Flower has a better story than Killzone 2. I obviously rate PSN games a little more generously than a retail game because of the price point.

Also, Flower may not seem to have a deep story upon first glance, but if you were think about it, the whole concept could be a metaphor for a variety of things. I really enjoyed how it was up to open interpretation.

Killzone 2's story and Flower's story are in no way comparable. Even I were to give Killzone 2's story a lower rating then Flowers, it is not a comparisson of which has the better story. Two games that would compare better would from the same genre such as Halo 3 and Killzone 2.

JokesOnYou3501d ago

I think sony/GG missed a golden opportunity to make KZ2 a game with mass appeal, graphics are great with alot of effects but aside from the lighting I don't see a leap over Gears2, which imo has better textures. I'm a huge shooter fan and I think KZ2 is definitely among the best out there but it seems to me that GG really overlooked some *simple things that would have made the game have that huge mass appeal. Now first lets be honest most shooters story is mediocore, just there for a reason to shoot people/monsters basicly but the great ones have always had at least one or two things in the story, great moments, or charachters, or gameplay mechanics that set them apart from others, in KZ2's case where is that memorable thing?, that memorable KZ2 charachter? or that memorable "holy shiii KZ2 thing", or hell how about just a cool twist on a weapon or two to make something new, or a unique KZ2 vehicle stage.

I think KZ2 lacks the staying power some of the other big time shooters because it seems to borrow alot from COD4 but never takes any one concept, ups the ante to make it uniquely KZ2. I mean there is also a simple but IMPORTANT factor GG overlooked, the failure to add variety to the enemies is inexcusable on their part, afterall games like COD are tied down to human opponents because of it being a WW shooter, while KZ2 could have at least thrown in some mutated Helghast bosses or something to that affect, I mean its a futuristic shooter and its certainly plausible given the background of the game. Also yeah I know its been said before and not to beat a dead horse but NO Co-op, this is sonys flagship big budget shooter made to showcase the ps3, the game has you with a squad/partner already, its just wreckless NOT having co-op option available in 2009 for such a game. Finally the online is awesome but once again a few bad descisions *limit its appeal, its more clan or team oriented focus is great, the new KZ2 tweaks like jumping from mode to mode is cool but having the option to just pick up and play popular modes only like deathmatch would have been a smart choice. I'm not knocking KZ2 for not innovating since the same can be said for most games especially shooters but imo, KZ2's biggest weakness is GG just didn't seem to bring any content to the table that stands out.


Unicron3501d ago

The Helghast. Iconic.

Ya see, the games aren't based on ONE superheroic megaman type like Master Chief. Play the KZ series. In the first game, you have a 4 man squad, where you can play as anyone you want. You are going against a traitor on your side. Same for KZL. KZ is about regular soldiers, and shows the war from a bunch of differing points of view. Jan and Sev and Rico are stereotypes like the Gears characters, but the difference is the story isn't about THEM, its about THE WAR as a whole. Frankly, I kind of like that. While it gives up a definitive "hero" at the same time since you have something as iconic as the Helghast plastered everywhere, the series doesn't lose its identity.

JokesOnYou3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

"The Helghast. Iconic."

-uhm, No...well OK I guess everybody's entitled to their opinion but for me the enemies in KZ2 are very vanilla, I mean the whole red-eye thing is cool, but when they all look the same it becomes a weakness, really I'm trying to keep things in perspective and not just point out my gripes as if I didn't like the game because I did, there was alot to like about the game in fact its so good the poor choices are only more evident. I mean please tell me even YOU were expecting maybe a gigantic Cyborg secret weapon created by the Helghast to come crashing down from the sky, etc(you know what I mean) or a stage where you could actually hop on that flying pod and take control of a overwhelming situation while actually raining down some heavy firepower on the Helghast mofo's or a little variety with some menacing enemies, dogs -anything or maybe just maybe god forbid a specific new improvement on already existing gameplay features in other big budget shooters. In the end the game turned out well but theres some obvious flaws, every game has them how much it hurts the game is a matter of opinion, hell I love Halo3 but I have a few gripes about it as well.


Ju3501d ago

Heros...well, the story obviously not written by a Hollywood gauging script writer where the hero has to survive at all costs to make sure the sequel sells. I mean I am really fed up with that. In all these "action flicks" you can tell right from the start, who won't die. There are almost no exceptions to that (no, not almost! There is NO exception - well, Nathan Drake won't die, we no that for sure, too - but where's Sulley and Elena ?).

This is not a symbol of a better story but just a sign of a (overly capitalistic) marketing strategy. Does it make a story deeper ? No. Small twists do, having those around the corner, unexpectedly, does.

And in my eyes, both R2 and KZ2 outclass any other 360 centric shooter, etc (which caters to a primarily American audience, IMO - Soldiers looking like Football players on steroids - who cares ? The rest of the world doesn't play Football). Everybody who played these games will understand (no spoiler from me).

Anyway, the characters in these games are taking part in a much larger universe. A game is just an episode within that universe. Not having a hero allows to show this universe from multiple perspectives. I like how they carve this out and I like how this generates a living world beyond just one game. (Good example is Resistance Retribution, where the story telling takes a complete new turn).

Now someone please explain to me, why by creating these complex worlds, the storyline in those games is "just average". Maybe its just the loss of the ability to be able to read between the lines which seams to plague the game playing audience - focused on the next kill.

N4g_null3501d ago

Boodybandit said it best!

"Yet now all these want to be journalist are nit picking things that every other shooter gets a pass on. "

That is the main problem all FPS have been getting this past since the HD era. Hardly any of them live up to the hype. Starving people will eat any thing yet when you apply this to gamers I don't know many that have not player quake, half life, Ut series etc on the PC.

The xbox players made FPS on a console cool when it was just ok or better yet golden eye on a high end box. Then the PS3 owners fell right into the fanboy fight which was a fight to gain those same gamers that loved halo which is why we are here now. Killzone looks great yet so did UT3, is it fun is it some thing new... not really. So many game do it better when it comes to game play and the type of players they attract.

Fanboys put them selves in this shallow argument. Maybe it's the fault of the Hardware makers for putting the two groups against each other? Maybe it's the fault of the fanboys for falling for such tactics? Either way it sure does suck to be a HD fanboy right now unless your on PC.

You guys are trying to win some thing that can not be won right now. This gen is mostly over the recession will likely seal the deal. This does not mean HD console will die but they may have saturated their market. That market is actually made up of first adopters almost excursively. The same goes for HD pc gamers.

If you are having fun then good for you but hype will kill your machine of choice. It always does, well hype and waiting. Had Killzone 2 came out before crysis then things would have been different yet they are late to the party.

+ Show (21) more repliesLast reply 3501d ago
Jerk1203502d ago (Edited 3502d ago )

Almost lives up to the hype my ass.

Crappy FPS game that doesn't come close to the excellence of Halo 3/Gears/Gears 2.

What you expected was a game that would revolutionize the FPS genre, a game that would kill Halo, Gears, COD, a game that would sell 10 million copies while also being a mass system seller.

What you got was a game that did nothing new, a game that failed to succeed over Halo, Gears, COD, a game that only managed to sell 1 million copies and a game that hardly sold consoles at all.

Chris3993502d ago

There is no reasoning behind your arguments, just an opinion - not even an educated one. A PS3 must have killed on of your family members for you to hate a piece of electronics so much. Only PS3s are inanimate, so that's not really possible.

My condolences (for your mental illness).

The Peoples ARMPIT3502d ago

As expected. Nothing but false bickering from a veteran troll such as yourself. Tell me, do you sleep better at night knowing Uncharted single handedly destroyed your entire 360 line up let alone Killzone2 lol.

Better luck next gen boy. Now go fetch me some deodorant from under your bridge Troll boy.

thereapersson3502d ago

It's not hard to see why you only have one bubble. Keep ensuring you'll stay that way, too.

SmokingMonkey3502d ago (Edited 3502d ago )


it destroys cod4's campaign and online


and that is exactly what i wanted/expected kz2 to do, surpass the current FPS "king"

thats what it was hyped up to be, and it certainly has achieved that for me,

PS... im one trophy away from earning the platinum kz2 trophy war hero

best FPS ever (by which i date)

Frankenberg3501d ago

I just finished the single person game, and while it was definately good, why is no one talking about how short it was? I am old (over 40) and I was able to finish it under 8 hours. I remember people complaining that Gears of War was short at 10 hours? I finished it in less than 2 weeks and I feel I was short changed.

I don't prefer the online because all the young kids have much faster reflexes so I rarely play any game online.

Still, why all the hype on a game that took 5 years to make and it only lasts 8 hours?

Is Killzone 3 going to be out in 2014?

Ju3501d ago

I'm 38, and I think KZ2 does appeal to the older crowd way more because it plays slower, and the reflexes are not that important, but a proper strategy is (even in those frag fest scenarios) - just yesterday I managed to defuse that one bomb in a room full of guys from both sides - that gave us one win, and it was close.

Well, not much of a strategy, not much of reflexes either. Pure luck at some point, but you need to focus on the bomb and ignore everything around you to have a chance. So, its kind of a strategy, IMO. Not just being faster around the corner to just make that one kill to move you up the leader board for no apparent reason.

Anyway, I would recommend trying the multiplayer. I think the difference is, even if your not a pro in that genre (which I am certainly not) it allows for some succeeding moments. And I actually like that a lot. I am not on the top ladder, but I am usually somewhere in the middle and that's good enough for me to enjoy the game.

And BTW, the MP kept me from running through the campaign in 8 hours. And collecting all intels or destroying all symbols or getting that one damn trophy to finish the game without dying (which I just missed recently because of one stupidity in an area where I became arrogant and didn't pay attention).

Zeus Lee3502d ago

It definitely matches the hype,the Multiplayer is a bit odd in structure but the Single-player delivered without a doubt.

It's amazing though;a year ago,people were questioning whether or not Killzone 2 will suck like Killzone 1 did.Now people are questioning whether or not it surpasses the highest quality shooters out there(Cod4 and Crysis).

I wonder if Killzone 3 is being planned for this gen,hmmm....

piramides303502d ago

Well, The best graphics on console, awesome gameplay and It's selling enough even with the terrible marketing of Sony. What more do you want?

Halo 3= normal graphics.
Halo 3= short Campaign.
Halo 3= Awesome gameplay.

Kz2= Awesome graphics.
Kz2= Long enough Campaign.
Kz2= Awesome gameplay.

Kz2 should have the Halo's marketing. It's the only mistake Sony has made with the game.

kewlkat0073501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

and what do you think one game did for their respected brand console...

It's so easy to just look at graphics and not the whole picture.

KZ franchise will never have the same appeal as Halo. One game has been termed to save a console and pushed Live subscriptions and there is more to it..besides just marketing.

Games don't sell well 3 times if at least 1 or more persons didn't like the original.

DelbertGrady3501d ago

If a game is good enough it will sell itself. Apparently Killzone 2 is not that good.

Unicron3501d ago

Even if a game is great, that doesn't guarantee sales. Say hi to Okami, Beyond Good and Evil, Psychonauts, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus...

At the same time, just because a game sells a crapload, doesn't mean its good, just means its popular. But if you feel Titanic really IS the best movie of all time, well there ya go.

Sales =/= Quality.

Ju3501d ago (Edited 3501d ago )

The only reason why KZ2 won't reach Halo's level is because its a gritty world out there which you can't market towards women and kids. I guess Halo is the one M rated game which is played by most kids under 17. Its art style is colorful and apeals to a more casual audience. And nobody will feel offended if a pink [what-ever-they-are-called] guy is shining off a schoolbus advertising poster. That's why. Guess "war perfected" might not fair well with all these first or second grade teachers...

DelbertGrady3501d ago

Depends if it's a niche game or not. The ones you mentioned were artistic niched games trying to break new ground. Neither Killzone 2, Halo 3, Gears of War 2 or Resistance 2 were niche games. They all tried to be blockbusters and appeal to a broad audience and Halo 3 and Gears 2 came out as winners.

The Sales =/= Quality argument can be spun any way you want it. I could say the Dreamcast was a much better console than the PS2 by using that logic. The consumers didn't think so, and they don't think PS3 exclusives are better than 360 exclusives either.

Ju3501d ago

^^ that's BS. Point is, the quantity does not describe the quality. No matter if 5000, 5M or just 5 play the game. 5M can be right, but so can be the 5 who actually buy and play the game. It can have various reasons why only 5 bought the game or why 5M do. One is a strong marketing campaign and the efforts to sell the product. Quality can lead to word of mouth marketing but its is not an objective measure if the numbers sold actually reflect the quality of a product (price is not an option since games sell for the same price, usually). And then, obviously the number of potential customers (== available machines) will have an direct impact on how many games you can sell (and the attach rate + competing products in the same segment).

Just to simplify this by saying "by these standards the Dreamcast is the better product" is rubbish.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3501d ago