The Official Killzone 3 Review Thread

[NYANKS]

CGI-Quality said:

osamanobama said:

kowenicki said:

Common points seems to be.... campaign is a big disappointment and they have buggered about with the multiplayer too much.

I wont be getting this, it needed to be significantly better than KZ2 in the campaign to tempt me.

thank you for your contributions. like anyone actually thought you were going to get this game anyway or say positive things about it.

by the way the multiplayer is awesome, very killzone like (they havent deviated much, still not copying COD)

and by the looks of it, the campain is very fun, its the story thats lacking, but really what FPS has a great story.

i give its multiplayer (with Move) 10/10

Interesting thing is, most reviews weren't actually disappointed with campaign (some going as far as championing it's new features, visuals, and split-screen). Key websites did seem disappointed by it, but the vast majority were happy with it. Listening to the reviews as a whole, even the more critical ones, they all agree that it's a better game than KZ2. For those that care for reviews, that should be good news. For me, it didn't matter either way, because I'm a fairly big Killzone fan.

Basically, the game's biggest issue is what happened with many recent sequels, it's freshness wares off, and despite being a better product than the previous game, it didn't make the same splash (Halo: Reach, LBP2, Black Ops [though not really a sequel]).

What's aggravating is people can't seem to understand this part.  All of those sequels seems to be better, but all you get is stupid people insinuating they were step backs because they got a 9.3 instead of a (gasp) 9.5.  Gimme a break already.  These number scores really have to go, they're basically excuses for people not too read and understand...