By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

KZ3 wasn't bad, it just wasn't the best. KZ2 in the benchmark of the series, and if 2 can equal or best that then the franchise may gain traction. i'd like to see it outsell COD on the PS3.



Around the Network
platformmaster918 said:
curl-6 said:
platformmaster918 said:
DirtyP2002 said:
Turkish said:
Killzone 2 deserved 4 times the sales it got. Like with many sony games, it never got the marketing it deserved. Btw the game was too hardcore I reckon, the heavy controls made many complain.


I love that sentence. I really do.

"I think the controls suck."
"No, the game is too hardcore for you!"

Awesome.

he's saying it isn't a twitchy shooter like COD.  Your character moves more realistically as opposed to sprinting around at 100mph and lining up his sights in a millisecond after leaping tall buildings in a single bound.  This goes against what people expect in a shooter today so they view it as slow and boring many times.

Frankly, Killzone 2's character movement and aiming were no more realistic than COD, unless I was supposed to be playing an overweight drunk. I'm sure real soldiers don't have as much weighty inertia. I don't and I'm far from a soldier.

that's a gross exagerration.  Besides Killzone takes place on a different planet maybe the gravity is stronger.

Other characters behave as if the gravity is earth-like, and I don't remember any references to a stronger gravitational field. The sense of momentum and acceleration to Sev's movements felt unresponsive, real people don't have so much sluggish weight and lack of balance to their movements, at least I don't.

It made the game a chore for me as lining up every other shot became an annoying process. I got better over time, but it never felt intuitive.

I believe this is a powerful barrier against casual players, since they're likely to just find it irritating and give up rather than stick with it, and you can't have a megahit without at least some casual support, there just aren't enough core gamers to propel something to COD status on their own.



I love the Killzone franchise but I say no. Sony doesn't market nearly enough and Microsoft has a lot of the types that ONLY play CoD or Halo. I just don't see it being as successful to the masses as CoD.

But the core gamers/enthusiasts can love it if GG stays true to their vision and DOESN'T try to copy CoD again. Killzone 2 was awesome, Killzone 3 was a let down because they tried to turn it into CoD to gain a piece of that audience. If GG can make Killzone 4 with the core gamer in mind instead of the fly by night "gamers" who jump from one over hyped game to the next, then maybe Killzone 4 can be something amazing.



curl-6 said:
platformmaster918 said:
curl-6 said:
platformmaster918 said:
DirtyP2002 said:
Turkish said:
Killzone 2 deserved 4 times the sales it got. Like with many sony games, it never got the marketing it deserved. Btw the game was too hardcore I reckon, the heavy controls made many complain.


I love that sentence. I really do.

"I think the controls suck."
"No, the game is too hardcore for you!"

Awesome.

he's saying it isn't a twitchy shooter like COD.  Your character moves more realistically as opposed to sprinting around at 100mph and lining up his sights in a millisecond after leaping tall buildings in a single bound.  This goes against what people expect in a shooter today so they view it as slow and boring many times.

Frankly, Killzone 2's character movement and aiming were no more realistic than COD, unless I was supposed to be playing an overweight drunk. I'm sure real soldiers don't have as much weighty inertia. I don't and I'm far from a soldier.

that's a gross exagerration.  Besides Killzone takes place on a different planet maybe the gravity is stronger.

Other characters behave as if the gravity is earth-like, and I don't remember any references to a stronger gravitational field. The sense of momentum and acceleration to Sev's movements felt unresponsive, real people don't have so much sluggish weight and lack of balance to their movements, at least I don't.

It made the game a chore for me as lining up every other shot became an annoying process. I got better over time, but it never felt intuitive.

I believe this is a powerful barrier against casual players, since they're likely to just find it irritating and give up rather than stick with it, and you can't have a megahit without at least some casual support, there just aren't enough core gamers to propel something to COD status on their own.

that all goes with more realism and a bigger learning curve like BF compared to COD.  I had a much harder time lining up a shot in BF3 than I did in Black Ops.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

UnitSmiley said:
I love the Killzone franchise but I say no. Sony doesn't market nearly enough and Microsoft has a lot of the types that ONLY play CoD or Halo. I just don't see it being as successful to the masses as CoD.

But the core gamers/enthusiasts can love it if GG stays true to their vision and DOESN'T try to copy CoD again. Killzone 2 was awesome, Killzone 3 was a let down because they tried to turn it into CoD to gain a piece of that audience. If GG can make Killzone 4 with the core gamer in mind instead of the fly by night "gamers" who jump from one over hyped game to the next, then maybe Killzone 4 can be something amazing.

I have a feeling a lot of those COD only players will be migrating to PS next gen if PS is the same price with free online and not a year late so their friends don't already have Xbox for them to play with.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Around the Network
platformmaster918 said:
UnitSmiley said:
I love the Killzone franchise but I say no. Sony doesn't market nearly enough and Microsoft has a lot of the types that ONLY play CoD or Halo. I just don't see it being as successful to the masses as CoD.

But the core gamers/enthusiasts can love it if GG stays true to their vision and DOESN'T try to copy CoD again. Killzone 2 was awesome, Killzone 3 was a let down because they tried to turn it into CoD to gain a piece of that audience. If GG can make Killzone 4 with the core gamer in mind instead of the fly by night "gamers" who jump from one over hyped game to the next, then maybe Killzone 4 can be something amazing.

I have a feeling a lot of those COD only players will be migrating to PS next gen if PS is the same price with free online and not a year late so their friends don't already have Xbox for them to play with.

That's a decent possibility but I don't think so. Microsoft advertises pretty well and of course their whole philosphy basically boils down to "Make people believe we are the best". They talk a big game and people buy into it. I think next gen unless Microsoft pushes kinect a ton and becomes a casual machine that Microsoft will retain those types of "gamers". Not only will people do/buy what is considered the "popular choice" but if all their friends have a 360, more than likely they will all want to move on to the Nextbox together.

Just my opinon anyway :p



I'd have to play the games, but from the sales trends I'll just say no. It doesn't seem to be catching attention like CoD has, there is no word of mouth as far as I know.



Once Sony discover : Marketing



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)

Am I the only one that thought Killzone as a series was mediocre at best?



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

No, Call of Duty was lucky.

It became the first big huge hit, besides Halo.

Unless it does something stupid COD and Halo will continue to be the 10+ million seller shooters, while all others in the genre regardless of quality get a few million.

Call of Duty and Halo are selling of Brand name alone their numbers, not because of some unique or revolutionary features they are adding each iteration.