By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
makingmusic476 said:
geddesmond2 said:
makingmusic476 said:

Yes, some developers can make absolutely amazing games in only two years.  Naughty Dog are a good example of this.  However, most developers aren't quite so able.

To give a few examples:

  • Insomniac:  Released an incredibly underwhelming Resistance 2 after only two years, and switched to a three year dev cycle for Resistance 3.
  • Epic:  Released a somewhat underwhelming Gears 2 after only two years (it was mainly the multiplayer that had issues), and switched to a three year dev cycle for Gears 3.
  • Bungie: Has always taken three years to develop each mainline Halo game.
  • Valve:  Valve Time?  Lemme know when the announce Episode 3.

I think, just like the other big games in the cinematic shooter market, Killzone 3 should've had three years in the oven.  Or at the very least 2.5.  Everything I've read says the game is incredible on numerous fronts, but it has a few issues that could've (and should've) been rectified with some extra development time.  Issues like:

  • Cutscenes with weird audio mixing (almost no bass)
  • Weird transitions between cutscenes/gameplay
  • Cutscenes that people have said should've been playable ("should've been more like Half-life 2" I've heard)
  • Offline co-op but no online co-op
  • Missing features from multiplayer (patching in custom servers?  what the hell?)

Granted, I haven't actually played the game yet, but this is how I feel after having read various reviews and previews. 

Does anybody who has already played the game feel similarly?


Holy shit dude, before you make threads on games needing more development time play the dam game first. Don't make assumption based off any of these reviews. Half the reviews contradict themselfs while the other half just nip pick away at the title and some have even mentioned things like "you need to hold the crouch button to stay in cover which gets annoying" even though if they searched through the dam options they'd see a setting to have crouch set as toggle or hold.

If KZ3 did have another years development you'd be reading reviewers that downplay the game for its long development time like the way GT5 was downplayed. 1. This game has improved in nearly every single way it can over the last game in the series.

Just to clear up some of the points you mentioned. If this game took 5 years to make you'd still have only offline co-op. 2. For the same reasons that Uncharted 2 and Resistance 1 and 2 didn't have online story co-op is probably the same reason KZ3 doesn't have it. It might be to complicated to include.

3. Cutscenes that should be playable????If they could be played then they wouldn't be cutscenes?????

Audio mixing in cutscenes????? The demo seemed alright too me and if a reviewer wasn't trying to nick pick at the game then I don't know how a reviewer would pick up on something like that.

Again with the weird transition between cutscenes and gameplay. I don't have a clue what they mean but its all just nit picking really.

If the game looks good to you then Just play the dam game and make up your own mind based off it. Easy


The anger really wasn't necessary.

I realize most reviews have been incredibly nit-picky, and I get the feeling the game should've scored higher than it did (for example, the numerous complaints about the game "not doing anything new" or "not bringing the genre forward" while Black Ops got a pass on this).  I even said the game sounds "incredible on numerous fronts."

And in reality, most of the issues I mentioned (particularly those related to cutscenes) are pretty minor, and my point was that just a little extra polish would've fixed these right up, possibly propelling the game from Killzone 2's "really really good" status to Uncharted 2's " hands down game of the year" status.

As for the points I bolded and underlined:

1.  This is factually incorrrect.  The removal of features like the clan betting system and proximity chat in multiplayer attest to this.  There's also the fact they have to patch in custom games after release.

2.  Both Uncharted 2 and Resistance 2 had online co-op.  It may not have been story co-op, but that's entirely unrelated the decision to include online co-op.  Killzone 3 has co-op, and there's absolutely no reason it shouldn't offer that same co-op experience online as well as offline aside from the game's development time.

3. I've seen many people claim that there are certain sections of the game that were told via cutscene that would've been better told via gameplay, much like Half-life 2 often conveys major plot points directly via gameplay.  What's hard to understand about this? 

Imagine if you had watched the Poseidon fight in God of War III instead of participating via QTE.  Similar situation.

 


I'm sorry if I came off like that I wasn't being angry, I just use strong words like dam and holy shit to get my point across. I type these things fast and give them a quick read over. I should stop doing that really.

1:Well if you remember as far back as the KZ2 release the clan features were patched into the game a few weeks after the game released. You could create a clan and put on a tag but the other features wern't there yet. During the first closed beta before plus members got in Devs told us custom matches were removed to stop the boosters and cheaters. It was only after everyone wanted the feature back that they decided to give us it again. Its these reason why developers beta test there games.

2: Well if you think about it KZ3 does have its own type of Online co op in the form of Operations. Its not against AI opponents but the game mode is sort of story based and it does involve a lot of teamwork to succeed in capturing the objectives. I'm guessing developers find online campaign co op hard to code because only a few games have shipped with the feature. Uncharted and Resistances co op is differant because each level is only 20-30 minutes long and theres only a few maps to play co op on in each. UC2 has 3 maps I think and R2 had 6 I think.

3: Right I get you now. Well thank god they never implemented QTEs into KZ3 because I have always hated them in video games and I can't even count the amount of joypads I broke all thanks to QTEs in gaming. I will have to wait until I play the full game before I know what they mean but so far the demos cutscenes were fine. 

People need to remember that Sony always improves on there titles after they release. I even think they hold back on some features just so they can add them later on to bring back absent players and make themselfs look good.