De85 on 12 May 2009
| uber said: after reading through the responses, the one thing i am convinced of is that people don't seem to know the definition of innovation. my post should have been simple to understand. the killzone level of realism and immersion has never been done before, so to do it is by definition innovation. Evolution =/= Innovation. Doing something better is not the same as doing something new. battlefield bad company was awesome, but its chief innovation was due to environmental damage. its controls were pretty much the same as cod4 in feel. in fact, one can successfully play both games the same way. i know becaue i do. killzone is a unique game in that to play it requires a completely style of play. as far as the AI, i recall the baddies on halo3 jumping from side to side to avoid incoming fire. wolfenstein 3d anyone? real sharp AI there. If you think that's the extent to which the enemies are intelligent in Halo 3 then you are just showing that you don't know Halo 3 at all. as for there rest of what i included, i still cannot tell whether you are being obtuse on purpose or not. you show in what you responded to really not know killzone at all, but more than that you seem to have a paucity of knowledge of what would be considered innovative. for you to say that a repackaged halo2 is mega-innovative, but a game which does something in spirit which has never been done before in generic and blah blah blah. so much of what's coming from you reads like what xbots were saying on gamespots user reviews when they were trying to lower the score. pathetic. and more people like immersion that you seem to think. all my halo friends dumped it for cod4 because of the immersion, and now they love killzone. you represent the voice of a militant group of gamers who think fps evolution peaked with halo. well i got news for you....twitch shooters are a thing of the past. now that consoles have the power to pursue total immersion that is where the future will be. Saying total immersion is the future is just fanboy talking points. Halo 3 is not going anywhere because Killzone 2 came out, and in fact a few weeks ago (http://vgchartz.com/weekly.php?date=39922) more new people opted to purchase Halo 3 than Killzone 2. Clearly it's all about the immersion factor. In the same vein, people will not stop playing Mario Kart when GT5 comes out, in fact I bet Mario Kart will have better legs, just like Halo is outlegging Killzone. Teh vast majority of people play games because they think they are fun, not because they think the pretty graphics make them more "immersive." one last thing, i completely agree that halo3 will live on with many people...but for the exact same reason that bret michaels still has a music career. Wrong, it will live on because of its fun and addicting gameplay. You seem to like CoD4 a lot, well guess what - more people play Halo 3 every week on Live than play CoD4, and it's an older game. Try to explain that away with talking points like "it only sold because of M$ marketing," or "it's a repackaged Halo 2." I'd love to see what you can come up with. |
Responses in blue.
