Zing.

lol, the swears were a little excessive I guess.

But he supposed to be acting like hes at work or something? On the clock and cant write stuff he feels like? I think not.

Well, this kind of reminds me of the Wiitards reactions to that one female gaming journalist's (Jessica Chobot, was it? I don't remember) remarks about Mario Galaxy 2.

I'm glad this discussion has been civil, but where are those folks saying he has a right to his opinion? For the record I don't agree with him; I love Halo and really look forward to Reach.

Shane is also the same guy who said that in Halo Reach you play as a young Master Chief even after we knew he wasn't in the game and you play as Noble Six.  Shane doesn't know anything about Halo so his point doesn't mean anything.

can i enter in the conversation? =P i'll do it anyways ^^

Well, IMO, Killzone 2 has an advantage over Halo in terms of Technology in terms of MP&SP because in SP is pulling big set pieces with over 20 enemies AIs and over 20 Allies AIs with those crazy graphics...and in MP because it's hosting matches of 32 users with really big maps fighting with Turrets, Sentinels and destructible environments...

also Realism it's much clear in Killzone 2...when you play the game for the first time, you can see that the controls weight are much more realistic, the recoil is much more present, and the collision detection is pretty much nailed.

but in Multiplayer Mode as a whole...it's subjective, IMO the core MP part of Killzone 2 is much more refined than in Halo where you've lots of modes with none of them being the MAIN mode...let me explain, in Killzone 2 you've Warzone which is a competitive mode with lots of different game modes in it, like capture the flag, team deathmatch, free for all, bodycount, etc. and it's pretty well balanced...and that's all you got. but in Halo you've lots of competitive modes, co-op modes, forge, theater, etc. and it feels like you don't have a classic competitive multiplayer in it. (i'm not saying that having only one game mode is good, i'm saying that the MP in Killzone 2 is more focused and that makes it better in a way)  but like i said, Multiplayer is subjective.

KZ2 has bigger set pieces than Halo 3? Lol dude I hope your joking because the battle with the two MASSIVE scarabs, all the marines driving around them in Warthogs, Mongoose's, and Hornets both on air and land with dozens of enemy Covenant AI running around all while being completly open to roam and not a "corridor shooter" FAR surpasses anything K2 has in terms of assets running and scale. And thats not even mentioning what Halo Reach will bring to the table.

KZ2 obviously has a huge advantage graphically though. And is much more realistic.  But Halo doesn't have any desire to be realistic.  I mean your playing as a genetically altered super soldier who has been bred since he was 6 years old to kill every single thing that gets in his way.  Plus your in space fighting a giant alien invasion who's sole intent is to completely turn the human species extinct.  Realism is the last thing Halo is worried about.

Also dude there is not one part of KZ2 with over 20 enemy AI as well as 20 allies on screen.

The arcady feeling is the only reason i like Halo more than other FPS (multi player) which is usually the selling point for FPS. Killzone 2 was boring not bad, but lacked variety and scale. Also Co-Op > single player for shooters, which is why Borderlands was so succesful.

People vote with their wallets so we will see just how far behind Halo: Reach really is!

Shane is known on GT to dislike anything under the xbox brand but Its disappointing that someone in his position has to talk down a game because of it.

so now ps3 and 360 fans hates him

ROFL!!!! the raging in this thread is funny, calm down ppl 2010 isn't over yet.......