Its funny that FPS games are measured up to Halo, I don't see anything amazing about it except that it did a good job with controls (mainly vehicle controls). Other than that. . . Or maybe it's just console FPS games, whatever.

Anyway, my excitement for Killzone is based on how it looks compared to the pre-rendered footage. Even if it doesn't look as good, I'm also eager to see the immursive experience to see how it matches up with the pre-rendered footage as well when it comes to sounds and things happening all around you (that's what I like the most about games like Battlefield 2 with 64 players online, crap happening everywhere).

---

To the origonal Killzone's defense, it indeed seems to have suffered a lot from glitches and such where a little more time could have fixed all that. If it is true that it was developed for the PC and then switched to PS2, I can forgive that a little bit too because it's like saying Half-Life 2 is crap because it didn't look that great on the Xbox (even though the PC version is much better).

Okay, Blue3 is saying:

Money will fix the issue that Killzone 1/2 sucked +
The power of the PS3 will greatly help the graphical issue.

But really, in the end, what the crap is Killzone going to have to it's name to make it stand out from every other FPS out there? Halo is known for it's remarkable online play. Gears was known for it's cover system. HL/UT were known for great PC multiplay. What exactly is Killzone 3 going to blow gamers away with? Graphics? Crysis is coming out soon, and looks far far far far better.

Money and dev time DONT mean games get uber-better. Look at Shemmue. 5+ years and 70m+ dollars equaled a poor selling, critcally-panned game. I like it, but the critics and sales hated it.

KZ might sell 2~3m over its lifetime. I can't stand Blue and everyone thinking that the next game (Uncharted, Killzone, MGS4, FFXIII) is going to magically re-invent a poor selling system. They'll help, but the more important issue of "OMG Killzzones! OMG I want cuz Im a PS3 fanboy", is if Sony can start securing exclusives or start stealing back some of the Wii and 360s thunder. Unfortunately, they aren't.

mrstickball said: Okay, Blue3 is saying: Money will fix the issue that Killzone 1/2 sucked + The power of the PS3 will greatly help the graphical issue. But really, in the end, what the crap is Killzone going to have to it's name to make it stand out from every other FPS out there? Halo is known for it's remarkable online play. Gears was known for it's cover system. HL/UT were known for great PC multiplay. What exactly is Killzone 3 going to blow gamers away with? Graphics? Crysis is coming out soon, and looks far far far far better. Money and dev time DONT mean games get uber-better. Look at Shemmue. 5+ years and 70m+ dollars equaled a poor selling, critcally-panned game. I like it, but the critics and sales hated it. KZ might sell 2~3m over its lifetime. I can't stand Blue and everyone thinking that the next game (Uncharted, Killzone, MGS4, FFXIII) is going to magically re-invent a poor selling system. They'll help, but the more important issue of "OMG Killzzones! OMG I want cuz Im a PS3 fanboy", is if Sony can start securing exclusives or start stealing back some of the Wii and 360s thunder. Unfortunately, they aren't.

You shouldnt be saying crysis looks far far far better becuz nobody has seen any images of the game of killzone ps3, Sony is doing everything they can to bring good exclusive titles both through th ps network and disc format hard core exclusive games, your acting as if sony arent doing anything for the ps3 and they arent going to do anything for it but you keep hatting on them at leat they are bringing games to the ps3. So wat if killzone 1 sucked the only reaoson why it sucked was becuz of the glithces overall it was a rather good shooter, Killzone liberation on the psp was actually a pretty good psp game one of the best one's, its like every single person in the forum is bashing at sony for no reason wat so ever.

leo-j said: mrstickball said: Okay, Blue3 is saying: Money will fix the issue that Killzone 1/2 sucked + The power of the PS3 will greatly help the graphical issue. But really, in the end, what the crap is Killzone going to have to it's name to make it stand out from every other FPS out there? Halo is known for it's remarkable online play. Gears was known for it's cover system. HL/UT were known for great PC multiplay. What exactly is Killzone 3 going to blow gamers away with? Graphics? Crysis is coming out soon, and looks far far far far better. Money and dev time DONT mean games get uber-better. Look at Shemmue. 5+ years and 70m+ dollars equaled a poor selling, critcally-panned game. I like it, but the critics and sales hated it. KZ might sell 2~3m over its lifetime. I can't stand Blue and everyone thinking that the next game (Uncharted, Killzone, MGS4, FFXIII) is going to magically re-invent a poor selling system. They'll help, but the more important issue of "OMG Killzzones! OMG I want cuz Im a PS3 fanboy", is if Sony can start securing exclusives or start stealing back some of the Wii and 360s thunder. Unfortunately, they aren't. You shouldnt be saying crysis looks far far far better becuz nobody has seen any images of the game of killzone ps3, Sony is doing everything they can to bring good exclusive titles both through th ps network and disc format hard core exclusive games, your acting as if sony arent doing anything for the ps3 and they arent going to do anything for it but you keep hatting on them at leat they are bringing games to the ps3. So wat if killzone 1 sucked the only reaoson why it sucked was becuz of the glithces overall it was a rather good shooter, Killzone liberation on the psp was actually a pretty good psp game one of the best one's, its like every single person in the forum is bashing at sony for no reason wat so ever.

this site has always been like this since i joined... im apart of alot of neutral sites but this one is very anti-sony... any good sony posts get shot down out of the sky... just the other day i was playing around saying sony is god.. and everyone took it serious ...it really does surprise me how anit-sony it is being that alot of other sites are not as anti as they used to be...... i guess its the cool thing to do.. or sony fanboys have pissed off too many people on this site...

 

Further, if the KZ 1+2 people are involved with KZ3, and those people did not know how to use the PS2's hardware efficiently/well (as evidenced by these supposed dropped framerates, I don't know b/c I pretty much skipped last gen), what is there to say that they will be able to use the new hardware of the PS3 more efficiently?

As a coder, I've learned that bad coding is bad coding, no matter what the machine that runs it is. Sure, the same code may run faster, but it's not like the same code that was in 1/2 will be in 3. Chances are they are going for making it look better, and there is absolutely nothing stating that the new code will run better than the code they wrote for the first ones (NOTE: this is not saying that it *will* run poorly, just that there is no guarantee it will not. Newer hardware does not a good coder make.)

Indeed, some might say that the newer hardware will have the opposite effect. They may try to do something ambitious, but because of the learning curve involved in learning the cell they may run into trouble, and spend longer debugging it than they would if they just had a standard processor in there.

Also, @Blue3:
I see absolutely nothing in YourBiologicalDaddy's posting history to peg him as a wii fanboy. Indeed, the only thing i see that would make you say that is some posts in a SSB:B thread. Oh, and that he made the grievous error of disagreeing with you.

DISCLAIMER: I am a lapsed gamer who returned to the fold b.c of the wii. If that makes me a fanboy, so be it. I prefer to think of myself as a rational individual, but that may not be the case and I accept that.

URNotE iF you truly make a good post, it cannot be shot down. If you post something filled with nothing but hype and personal attacks like Blue often does you are going to get "shot down." No one in this thread has made a decent argument for why Killzone should be so anticipated.

Throwing money at a problem isn't a cure all. Just because the budget for the game is higher doesn't mean its going to be better. The original Killzone had framerate issues because the game was poorly designed. The PS2 was powerful enough to fun a good fps game with minimal frame rate issues. Time Splitters ran fine on PS2 for the most part. The PS3 is more complex in its hardware design, if the developers couldn't properly optimize Killzone to run a steady frame rate on PS2 why should it be assumed that they will be able to better on PS3? Guerrilla Games is not iD, Epic, Free Radical, Crytek, or Star Breeze. They have not shown that they can make game worthy of Killzone 2's hype in the past. A good developer makes a great game in spite of the hardware not because of it.

Blue3 said: Gballzack said: Hopefully the framerate drops PS3 games tend to encounter doesn't plague this game as well. I hope its just programming that is the issue and not the Console's ceiling of processing power that is at fault here. what frame rate drops, you probably thinking of the crap ubisoft ports.

 Why do you get worked up and defensive over simple little comments like that? 

 

alpha_dk said: Further, if the KZ 1+2 people are involved with KZ3, and those people did not know how to use the PS2's hardware efficiently/well (as evidenced by these supposed dropped framerates, I don't know b/c I pretty much skipped last gen), what is there to say that they will be able to use the new hardware of the PS3 more efficiently?

 Just a little in the PSP's defense: making levels in that thing is wierd.  If too much of a tri is cut off the screen it will just not draw that whole tri meaning you have to have some terrain with a lot of triangles.  Since it's the PSP, it can't handle a lot of triangles and that usually means shitty models or dropped framerate.  Making things for the PSP, PS2, and PS3 are all completely different beasts.

I personally haven't played the PSP version since, well, I don't own a PSP and don't plan to anytime soon so it could be either of those.  Either way, dropped framerate is pretty inexusable.  The level designers know what the system can handle and they should plan that.  No uber cool event is worth dropped frame rate. 

 

URNotE said: leo-j said: mrstickball said: Okay, Blue3 is saying: Money will fix the issue that Killzone 1/2 sucked + The power of the PS3 will greatly help the graphical issue. But really, in the end, what the crap is Killzone going to have to it's name to make it stand out from every other FPS out there? Halo is known for it's remarkable online play. Gears was known for it's cover system. HL/UT were known for great PC multiplay. What exactly is Killzone 3 going to blow gamers away with? Graphics? Crysis is coming out soon, and looks far far far far better. Money and dev time DONT mean games get uber-better. Look at Shemmue. 5+ years and 70m+ dollars equaled a poor selling, critcally-panned game. I like it, but the critics and sales hated it. KZ might sell 2~3m over its lifetime. I can't stand Blue and everyone thinking that the next game (Uncharted, Killzone, MGS4, FFXIII) is going to magically re-invent a poor selling system. They'll help, but the more important issue of "OMG Killzzones! OMG I want cuz Im a PS3 fanboy", is if Sony can start securing exclusives or start stealing back some of the Wii and 360s thunder. Unfortunately, they aren't. You shouldnt be saying crysis looks far far far better becuz nobody has seen any images of the game of killzone ps3, Sony is doing everything they can to bring good exclusive titles both through th ps network and disc format hard core exclusive games, your acting as if sony arent doing anything for the ps3 and they arent going to do anything for it but you keep hatting on them at leat they are bringing games to the ps3. So wat if killzone 1 sucked the only reaoson why it sucked was becuz of the glithces overall it was a rather good shooter, Killzone liberation on the psp was actually a pretty good psp game one of the best one's, its like every single person in the forum is bashing at sony for no reason wat so ever. this site has always been like this since i joined... im apart of alot of neutral sites but this one is very anti-sony... any good sony posts get shot down out of the sky... just the other day i was playing around saying sony is god.. and everyone took it serious ...it really does surprise me how anit-sony it is being that alot of other sites are not as anti as they used to be...... i guess its the cool thing to do.. or sony fanboys have pissed off too many people on this site...

 Anf just for the record, I'm not some super Nintendo fanboy or anti-Sony non-fanboy creation, true I have no love for the PS3 at the moment and the Wii is my favorite system right now, but that doesn't mean anything.  I don't shoot down every positive Sony post, but if someone comes on and says all you have to do is throw money an no creativity at a game to make it good I will more than likely say something.

Killzone has been pretty much overhyped for no reason. It's coming off 2 really bad reviewed and sold games before. And with only a fake trailer showing it has no difference than any other shooter out there really the hype is simply coming from the demand for a worse Halo replica on the PS3. That or simply just for a game in any sense.

I'm not here to say Killzone PS3 will be bad cause Sony could turn the game around and make a great game. But right now we don't know that and all we do know is it had 2 bad games before it in the series. The only thing giving this game anything is the hype around the internet with no causes even behind it. All I'm saying right now is there will be better games on the PS3.

Indeed overhyped, the worst thing is that the developers actually did nothing at all to hype it. Yet Sony and the media did.
So if i comes out this year you can expect it will be compared screen by screen with the famous E3-trailer. So the graphics will be percieved bad anyway.
I think it will just be another good game, but it will be blown away because too much people expected too much of it.
Same thing for Lair.

Look on the other side: Halo. People expect it to be good, but there isn't a hype surrounding it. No-one expects it to be 'the greatest thing ever', or the most beatifull XBox 360 game. It just has to be better then Halo 2, and everyone will be happy. Same thing for Metroid en Mario Galaxy.

Now for the reference text out of the first post: you mention it as 'a great write up', i won't ask myself what it tells about you like the others do. (your signature shows up everywhere on this site, and your 'writings' speak for themselves)
But look at what the article says: it will look better then the E3 demo, maybe not like we expect it. The writer is excited about KillZone and it has to deliver and will so because there is a giand budget and team behind it. And then he says Jurrasic Park wouldn't be the same without the sound effects. (what horror movie does?)
And the some tech stuff and some more great effects like light shining trough bullet holes, like in Red Steel (Wii).
And that's what you call a 'great write up'. I think the PS3 failed because too much people like you are working for Sony.

That was rude, i know.