Don't claim Killzone 2 will be sub-par without playing it.

[HappySqurriel]

windbane said:

HappyRat: firstly, i'd like to know the sources of those articles.

secondly, I think "annoying glitches" and not liking the enemy character design are a lot different than having problems with the control scheme for the entire game. I said all along that Lair's problems was the control itself and not the control method. I played it with analog sticks and it still wasn't good.

thirdly, Lair and Haze is a comparison that never really had merit. There was no beta for those games. There weren't 5 reviews in the upper 90s. Those things both built hype because people that have first-hand experience playing the game want to play it more. As I said before, a lot of people hated the Haze demo.

Source: http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3171677&p=37&sec=PREVIEWS

 

Beyond that, in my post where I reference Lair and Haze I said "I'm not saying Killzone 2 is in any way a similar result to those games, but the factors you listed for ensuring that Killzone 2 would be a better game have certainly not helped many games so far this generation." ... In other words, I was pointing out that he was looking at the wrong things for Killzone 2 being ensured to being a great game.

Even the reasons you listed are not that great as a prediction that the game will remain critically acclaimed ... there have been lots of games which started out with a few very high initial reviews, and as the game is reviewed by more sources the score ended up dropping to a high 70s to low 80s score.

Basically, you can't tell the quality of a game before you played the final retail version ...