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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Consumers ruined Killzone!

I agree, Killzone 1 and 2 are the best. And then Mercenaries as a good third which I still play! 3 and Shadow falls are not that good and I must say Shadow Falls in my case because it's crashing all the time when I start one of the coop feature and new maps!!!! (still isn't fixed after +/- 6 updates)



Around the Network

The best Killzone games are on handhelds



Guerrilla Games in Amsterdam have two main teams so I think Killzone will come back (in 3 years) if they have anymore new ideas.



Don't copy random editorials.

I'm happy they got rid of Killzone. The franchise has taken an awful direction.



God no. Killzone 2 is one of the most overated games of last gen going by the meta score. How it scores anything above 80 is beyond me (games draught perhaps?)

All KZ games are around the same quality. No better, no worse.



Around the Network

It wasn't the consumers that killed it, it was the consumers of other rival systems that mocked it for the things that made it great.



theprof00 said:
It wasn't the consumers that killed it, it was the consumers of other rival systems that mocked it for the things that made it great.


This. Also, it was Sony's fault that wanted it to appeal to a wider audience. They killed SOCOM with SOCOM 4, and even though Shadow Fall is not as bad as that game, the franchise is no longer relevant, it's just another generic FPS.    



i've played kz 2, 3, and the mp part of shadow fall.


kz2 is easily the best if for no other reason than because it wasn't CoD. the franchise has really been CoDutiedfied which hasn't resulted in more gamers because now it is just another shooter in a sea of shooter. i miss the heavy feeling of kz2 but i still think all of the kz games have been good.



Nem said:
That is one of the most outlandish things i ever heard.

How can the consumer possibly ruin something they have no control over? Companies make products and they either appeal to the market or not. Theres no "consumers" ruined it. Thats not how marketing works.


Devs follow the feedback and change the game or make sequels accordingly. So if customers demand certain things and a dev follow it could be said that customers are responsible, not that I'm saying this is the case here.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

elazz said:

 Guerilla gave in and in Killzone 3 they added new areas (not that interesting) full with color and easier, more BF like gameplay and with KZ SF even more. So instead of building upon the story they were spending time and effort addressing things that were perfect in KZ2 (AI, gameplay, level design etc.).


So... Your argument is that the story isnt very good because they spent more time adding color and gameplay tweaks then they should have?

...Basically, you are saying that the programmers and artists should have spent more time writing story???

not sure you understand how developers work...