Masakari said:
Long time lurker, when i saw this thread i finally registered.
I work in the industry, and i really think these types of threads are pointless. A lot of you guys were talking about the prices and how much an equivalent PC rig costs, have you stopped to wonder how much Killzone 2 cost and how much Crysis cost to make? The latest KZ2 rumoured figures had put it at 42m euros in budget, although this months 3D World magazine has an article on it and states it cost around 32m euros. Crysis cost half of that, if even that much.
Guerrilla also worked with several other outfits on this game, including Massive Black, Liquid Development, Sony's Tech R&D division, and consulted with other Sony affiliated devs.
I was working in Amsterdam when KZ2 went gold, and the Guerrilla guys went to pubs in Leidseplein to celebrate, and i felt happy for them that they finally completed it.
But there's this bad mentality in gaming to compare some games with others just looking at whats in the screen. I also think people go crazy for KZ2's graphics, but what they really like is the art direction, thats what makes it visually different. Because if we're looking at "best graphics", several other games are equal to, or beat it, like the aforementioned Crysis. Gears 2 has better textures and models than KZ2, Far Cry 2 has great graphics, Resident Evil 5 as well.
As it is, i think KZ2 is a pretty standard shooter, its fun, but nothing out of the ordinary save for the visual direction. It doesnt do anything new, but what it does it does well. However, as i also read somewhere (i think in Edge), if it had arrived 2 years prior, it would have made an insane impact. Now, after CoD4, after Crysis, after Gears 2, all huge action blowouts, KZ2 just feels well done, but everything in it ive seen or experienced before.
I felt kinda the same with Crysis as well - i played it before, it was called Far Cry except now it had powerups lol
|
