A game that had upwards to a 50 million dollar budget - 60 million dollar budget with no 'set' release date.  More of a "It's done when it's done".   That was a HUGE game for Sony (To get right).   With beta testing and a whole variety of things.    You mean to REALLY suggest that the 'laggy' controls were just "Over looked".  

LOL.

Let's get real.   The controls were designed the way they were.  Kill Zone is meant to be played in a more tactical approach.  It IS NOT a twitch shooter.   You aren't meant to do jumping 360 headshots while in the middle of throwing a grenade like you do in Halo. 

Suggesting the controls were just fudged from the beginning and NOBODY within the company took notice that they should 'fix' this DIRE issue,  is so far-fetched and unrealistic it's a pointless conversation to have.  

The FEEL of the game is unique and it feels good.  In many ways it controls like a First Person Gears of War and that's a lot of fun.

I have a 120 gghtz LCD and my friend does not. My friend said the game runs smoother on my tv than on his. Its interesting to know that this input lag that people are talking about can just be equated to the acceleration effect the devs added in. lifting a gun up from a stationary position takes time, but then the sweep of the arm gets faster as it moves through the air.

Isnt this the problem people are having? Anyways, get use to it people, To me it is different, but not bad. after 2 hours I was loving the way it aimed.

Why is it that people think that if KZ2 was to get responsive controls like CoD4/5, all the sudden that would make it a reskinned CoD?

Apparently many people don't even realize where KZ2 got it's class system from...

Anyways, as I play this game online more, it seems that it's jampacked with lag, all the way from the menus to the nametags to the death animations, which is the worst.

Everything seems to feel unresponsive in some way, but those death animations online......they're just horrible.

Probably Team Fortress more than CoD 4 actually....

People think that people complaining about controls are ridiculous and haven't put nearly enough time into using them.  

Why do people feel that the controls have to be like 'other' shooters to 'feel good'?   Why can't every game have it's own feel?

For anyone saying there is no lag:

Prove it.

Record it, freeze-frame it, put it on youtube and prove it.

 The way the game is now, it's basically a heavily reskinned Team Fortress, yet most of the people that favor the controls only know how to pull out the "go back to CoD4", line even though there's not much of a CoD feel in it at all.

Even with fast responsive controls, KZ2 would still have it's own unique features. You can't even jump and shoot in this game. It's somethin I really like, especially compared to jumping 15 feet into the air with a shotgun in Halo.

Some of the reasons why I'm somewhat dissapointed with this game arn't even all control related though.

Going back to the OP, and trying to address the issues presented in the videos, I did a few tests comparing the only other FPS I have right now on the PS3, that is Resistance FOM.

Sorry but I don't have a way to record a video of this test

1) reproducing the "flick" issue, default sensitivity in both games

This is hard to do in a consistent way, but my impression is that trying to flick always at the same speed, the movement registers more or less the same number of times in KZ2 and R:FOM. It is true that it doesn't register each and every time, and it is true for both games, it registered about 40% of the times with the flicking I was doing. The real difference is that when the flick is registered the actual movement of the crosshair is bigger in R:FOM and usually it's barely more than a few pixels in KZ2.

2) finding the dead zone, default sensitivity in both games

This surprised me a bit, because the real dead zone in KZ2 appears to be approx. as narrow as that in R:FOM. KZ2's feels wider because it's slower right outside the dead zone though.

3) trying to measure turning speeds and accelerations, various sensitivity settings

Top turning speed in R:FOM is approx 1.5x that of KZ2 (default sensitivity). An intermediate position of the analog stick (tried to obtain same position using the same object as a wedge :) ) scales down speed of a factor 2.5 in R:FOM, and of a factor 3.8 in KZ2. In other words KZ2 is slower at top speed, much slower in intermediate positions, as its x-position-to-x-speed curve has a wider ramp than R:FOM. Basically the numbers tell what everybody feels: R:FOM has a more "standard" feel, whereas KZ2 has a very pronounced acceleration curve.

Ironically a closer feel to that of R:FOM, and thus a more "normal" acceleration feel, can be achieved by turning _down_ the sensitivity in KZ2. This of course also means slower top speed, so I'm not going to recommend that for MP

My conclusions about KZ2?

- just as the "lag monster" issue, the "ghost flick" issue exists only in a comparable amount with other games, where nobody complained about the controls.

- the dead zone is fine, but wide acceleration ramp makes it feel wider.

- the less steep acceleration curve gives much lower intermediate speeds, thus the player will usually need to move the stick much more, and again when going back to rest, making it more difficult to gauge the movements.

Thus everything, once again, brings me to state that there is nothing _technically_ wrong with the controls. But the response as I could be measure is indeed very different from a more traditional one.

I have numbers for turning speed at different sensitivties in a spreadsheet, but since on the Internet no video = didn't happen you're invited to test for yourself the "flick" thing in different games.

And with that, I'm done.

I disagree.  The game has elements of almost every quality shooter I have played recently.  The game itself plays like a COD/First Person Gears of War.  The class system is reminiscent to Team Fortress but also COD4 with the progressive setup.

The simple fact about this game,  is that it's not a twitch shooter.  It's not a game that they wanted you to 'master' within a night of playing.  It's a game that the only way you'll be 'better' than anybody else is to play it and get a real good feel for the game.

Asking for fast responsive controls in a game that wasn't designed or intended to be played that way is like asking Halo 3 to be different than what it is.  Gears of War doesn't have fast or quirky controls either.  It has acquired controls.  Just like Kill Zone.

I'm a bit tired of repeating myself, but...

The OP proved it. Take the first video _he_ posted, watch it. It is on youtube, and it goes frame-by-frame. It measures the lag of KZ2 in 4-5 frames.

Go to Gamasutra and read their measure of responsiveness: Halo 3 has a lag of 4-5 frames, GTA IV has a lag of 4-5 frames.

On this same thread you'll find a video doing the same masure for Far Cry 2. Again same lag.

QED

Questions?

Precisely.

Again,  this game was intentionally designed the way that it is.  The aiming is 'different' than most games of it's genre and for good reason.  It gives a totally different 'feel'.  Some may love it, some may hate it .   But it certainly feels unique. 

The real issue people have.  Is the increased acceleration as you hold a direction longer.  It makes moving back and forth more of an acquired skill. 

It's a different game, with a different control scheme.  The design is to get you hooked on improving your game (Which you will) as well as give the game itself a totally unique feel from ANY other shooter on the market.