CGI-Quality said:
Don't mean to be snotty, it's just that these two games are compared so frequently and I just don't get it. Yes, their FPS. Yes, their the two big FPS franchises of the HD console manufacturers. BUT, they're not comparable on any other front. I just don't get the frequent comparison and hate when it seems like Killzone 2's sales are bad because Halo's are HUGE, even if I think Killzone 2 should have performed a tad better. |
I don't think sales necessarily always equal a better game but its quite clear the games are absolutely comparable. They're sci-fi FPS first party games with a emphasis on both campaign and multiplayer. It's quite clear that they're targetting a very similar audience and demographic so can and should be compared. Sony must have tried to understand why Halo is a huge brand with the sales it obtains and the Killzone franchise isn't performing as well, it would be gross incompetence if they didn't themselves.
When you compare how Killzone 2 did critically then look in comparison at COD and Halo sales something has gone very wrong. I personally think its a combination of poor marketing, average first game in the series, control scheme thats not familiar enough to people and ultimately its on the wrong system with a smaller group of the demographic of users it targets.
The question Seraphic_Sixaxis asked is perfectly valid and one that Sony must have asked too so don't be so harsh on him. That being said there are too many Halo fanboys that use the comparison to somehow dismiss the quality of Killzone 2 so I can understand why you get tired of seeing the argument raised as it probably brings the same haters into discussions constantly.
Perhaps Killzone 2 going platinum and marketed (possibly bundled) well around E3 with any potential announcement of a sequel will drive it up to near 4 million LTD which would then in my opinion be classed a real success given the investment and quality of the title.
