I wanted Kill Zone 2 more than any other game this year. I am pissed off by this bad news.

Indeed. I am more looking forward to Resistance 2 anyway. At this point Killzone 2 is going to have to blow people away to live up to the hype. It's going to be even harder coming after Resistance 2...

More than just Sony London has been assisting GG. Actually, all of Sony's in-house teams keep in constant touch with each other, and actively assist each other in development of SCE development tools. Though GG has been getting an unusual amount of help from other parts of SCE. For instance, Sony Cambridge has been working with the team since the beginning.

This was the reason Sony bought GG. They liked GGs's ideas, and wanted to help them better execute these ideas. Hence why Sony has given them SO much. Budget, specific assistance from Sony Cambridge (the entire time, so don't say that proves the game is failing), contracts with third parties like Second Intention to improve their engine, etc.

And honestly, what's wrong with another delay to improve some problems (and I still don't believe it's been delayed)? The original Killzone would've been much better for it, as many of the prime complaints could've easily fixed with a little more time (insane amounts of texture pop-in, among other things).

And I wonder, why aren't you faulting Too Human for it's inordinate amount of delays? The videos and hands-on impressions of Killzone 2 have been far more favorable than anything seen on TH, yet your contenttpost on basing your opinions on rumor and speculation. Surfer girl and a single post on NeoGAF? C'mon man.

If you want to know more about Killzone 2's development history, just read through this thread from NeoGAF made in early 2007:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143426

Some of the highlights:

(bolded parts in parenthesis added by me)

As someone already mentioned cklmb, why would Killzone 2, and not Resistance 2, be the sacrificial lamb that gets delayed to the slow months if it truly is as great as Sony proclaim?

Edit:  @ Makingmusic

Oh but I do fault Too Human for it's epic development time.  By all accounts, the money it has used up over the last ten years is enormous.  However, not all of this has been spent by Microsoft, who only acquired publishing rights a few years back.  Furthermore, it now appears the game is rapidly approaching release, whereas it now appears by the time Killzone 2 comes out, it will have been in development for 5+ years.

But as I said a little while back in the latest Too Human thread, it is quite possible the game willl turn out shit, it's just unlikely given how much Microsoft has been talking about it lately. 

Insomniac is independent. They'd never let Sony get away with wasting their time and money by sitting on a completed project.

And I still don't think the game has been delayed, but even if it has, it's on Sony to take the loss, not Insomniac.

5+ years?  They didn't even start working on the game until after the CGI trailer from 2005.  KZ: Liberation wasn't even finished until the end of 2005.  That would mke 3 years, 3 1/2 if it's delayed.

And care to comment on the rest of my post?  That hardly paints the picture of a doomed development cycle. 

I was under the impression that they were well and truly underway with development PRIOR to the 2005 E3 demo, hence they were able to convince the world at large (for a time) that it was real-time footage.

As for the rest of your post.  There is one common theme in just about every section of it: Graphics.  Your post lends more credence to the likelihood that Killzone 2 will be nothing more than a graphical showpiece for the PS3.  That is not to say that graphical showpieces have no merit, but their is a difference between Gears of War as a graphical showpiece and Lair as a graphical showpiece (And no, I don't think that K2 will be "Lair-like," but I do believe there is much more stacked up against the likelihood of it having amazing gameplay than you are willing to admit). 

What about the parts about them play-testing multiplayer long before even GDC 2007 (Februray 2007)?

And you're acting as if the first had horrible gameplay. The first was knocked primarily for it's graphical glitches (omg the texture pop-in was horrible) and it's brain dead AI. I'll make the hefty assumption that the graphical glitches will be a thing of the past, and they've stated that they are focusing heavily on improving the AI, as they know it was a chief complaint with the original (they state this in the GameSpot developer walkthrough, I believe, though it may have been IGN's or GT's). Killzone Liberation even had much improved AI compared to the original, and it was a PSP game.

There's a reason KZ1's online was so popular compared to it's campaign, and it wasn't because the gameplay was crap.

And, imo, it's the impressive visuals combined with awesome death animations that will make the gameplay more immersive and fun than it was before.

Will the gameplay be excellent? I can't say, but it has a higher likelihood of being excellent than being below average. And I know it won't be "horrible beyond the point of return" like Surfer Girl said.

I guess we will wait and see then.  You seem to think that I believe Killzone 2 will be horrible, and I do not.  I just think that given the failings of the original, the constant 'pushing back' of 'assumed' release periods (as you don't like the word 'delay' ) and the trappings that come with a rapid expansion of the development team's size, there is a lot of clear doubt as to whether this will be the AAA title that Sony claims it will be.

I forsee a decent, low-to-mid eighties shooter, with passable online and full marks for graphics. 

Your constant reference of the Surfer Girl rumor (it's freakin' Surfer Girl) certainly points to that.

And, as I tried to point out, the original's failings weren't in gameplay so much as graphics and AI (the latter of which did affect singeplayer gameplay to an extent). 

Although another complaint of the game was that it never quite had the scale of a major war (I seem to recall IGN's review of the original complaining about this specifically, and I noticed it while playing the game).  Battles were often small, consisting of maybe 10 guys duking it out. The E307 (as well as the GDC07 trailer we never saw, as mentioned above) shows the complete opposite.  The size of the battles in KZ2 will be quite immense.

I see a mid-80s game in all areas BUT graphics.  The graphics will bring the game up to high 80s or low 90s, imo.  Of course, I'd hope (and believe it is quite possible) that the game will be a 90s title across the board.

I remain cautiously optimistic about the title.