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

Forums - Sony - Killzone 2 Is NOT Generic

Bobo012893 said:
sieanr said:
Bobo012893 said:

They even went as far as saying the game did not have certain gameplay aspects that everyone knew were already in-game and even demostrated in videos on their own website, lol.

Thats the point where I stopped taking this guy seriously.

It is also hysterical how he claims that being a scifi game is unique, unlike WW2 or modern day shooters.

 

It is unique. Name another Sci-Fi game that is based in reality where there are no lasers or energy swords.

Fallout 3

:)

 



Around the Network
Bobo012893 said:
MrBubbles said:
Bobo012893 said:

 

It is unique. Name another Sci-Fi game that is based in reality where there are no lasers or energy swords.

 

......?  something cant be science fiction and reality.

 

Sure it can. Just look at Fallout 3. That is based in 1950's Washington DC (Also known as reality) but it is also a science Fiction game.

Uh, doesn't Fallout 3 have mutants... so that's realistic but lasers aren't?



Killzone 2 is absolutely a generic shooter game and no amount of reasoning can legitamately dispute this. The Sci-Fi shooter has become almost as generic as the WWII shooter in recent years and the game itself features very few features that are genuinely unique and almost none that are truly significant.

However, what many people fail to realize is the being a "generic shooter" is not a bad thing. Call of Duty 4 is an excellent example of a generic shooter and it's probably the best shooter on the market. It's laughable that some people try to discredit the game by comparing it to the best games of the genre and saying that it's too much like them.

Killzone 2 is essentially Call of Duty 4 meets Team Fortress with a Sci-Fi twist. If that description alone doesn't excite you, then you aren't a shooter fan.



I read the rant and I still think Killzone 2 is going to be generic in terms of gameplay. I do admit the art style is pretty good (amazing compared to other games in the genre) and the animations are great but that doesn't make a good game.

When the vast majority of the hype of a game is about its graphics this is just the view I'm going to keep until proven wrong. Yes, I've seen positive impressions of the gameplay but I'm still just skeptical.



CAL4M1TY said:
Bobo012893 said:Killzone 2:

 

  First-person cover system (never before done in a FPS) - There's a reason it has never been done before, a cover system that goes into first person would mean that every hit you take is either a direct headshot or the hands. It's also a little un-necessary because it has the same effect in MP as tilt in CoD4 has OR going from lying down to crouching behind an object (except now you've got the system forcing you to push a button to un-attach yourself from the object).


 

 

This I will disagree with, the basic idea of a the pop-up cover system is basically the same idea as most gamers who have always used cover in games like Counter Strike, Half-Life, Halo, Battlefield, Unreal Tournament, etc. Basically it added to the basic idea of crouch next to object, pop-up, shoot, crouch again. Its the same thing but added the ability to aim at targets a certain way over the barrier without really having to stick your neck out completely.

I for one find it a better system then the crap Gears, R6V, and several others uses.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Around the Network

I just gotta ask .....

DMJ, how the hell is Resistance 2 a Gears clone?!? That doesn't even make sense. Don't feed the trolls, you were responding to a trollish comment with more trolling, and a horrible observation at that. Resistance and Gears feel different, play different, and have totally different features.

OT: Killzone 2 has a lot to overcome. It's gorgeous, it's animation is unparalleled, and it had tremendous potential, but I'm still cautious that they've done it right. I look forward to trying this puppy out.




Seihyouken said:

Killzone 2 is essentially Call of Duty 4 meets Team Fortress with a Sci-Fi twist. If that description alone doesn't excite you, then you aren't a shooter fan.

 

I think that was really well said.

This should (Im almost willing to say WILL) be a REALLY good game.  At this point, its hard to do more than hype its graphics (which we've seen, and yes they are top of the heap) and pimp its features (cause they are known factors). 

No one can truly hype the gameplay, or rag on it either...cause its not out yet.

There will likely never be a revolution in FPS's again, its evolution now, and thats fine by me.

 



 

PSN: TheGodofWine (Warhawk / R2 / MotorStorm PR)

AND

PSN: Skigazzi (for KZ2 and future games)

ssj12 said:
CAL4M1TY said:
Bobo012893 said:Killzone 2:

 

  First-person cover system (never before done in a FPS) - There's a reason it has never been done before, a cover system that goes into first person would mean that every hit you take is either a direct headshot or the hands. It's also a little un-necessary because it has the same effect in MP as tilt in CoD4 has OR going from lying down to crouching behind an object (except now you've got the system forcing you to push a button to un-attach yourself from the object).


 

 

This I will disagree with, the basic idea of a the pop-up cover system is basically the same idea as most gamers who have always used cover in games like Counter Strike, Half-Life, Halo, Battlefield, Unreal Tournament, etc. Basically it added to the basic idea of crouch next to object, pop-up, shoot, crouch again. Its the same thing but added the ability to aim at targets a certain way over the barrier without really having to stick your neck out completely.

I for one find it a better system then the crap Gears, R6V, and several others uses.

 

I haven't read (or seen) much on the first person cover system and while I don't think I love it I do think it's interesting.  I like the cover system in things like Gears of War because I can look around still but if I'm stuck in cover in first person I don't know what's on the other side of that barrier unless I poke my head out (or wouldn't it be cool if they gave you a mirror?).

It's neat because it will put you into the game a little more but I'm just still not convinced the mechanics are going to beat that of the third person cover system I love so much. 

That's the problem when trying to compete with something that's already been done really well.  Props for trying something new, but unless they blow it out of the water it's just going to be seen as Gears of War did it better (and I'm just using Gears as an example because I like the game, pick whatever third person cover system you like).



twesterm said:
ssj12 said:
CAL4M1TY said:
Bobo012893 said:Killzone 2:

 

  First-person cover system (never before done in a FPS) - There's a reason it has never been done before, a cover system that goes into first person would mean that every hit you take is either a direct headshot or the hands. It's also a little un-necessary because it has the same effect in MP as tilt in CoD4 has OR going from lying down to crouching behind an object (except now you've got the system forcing you to push a button to un-attach yourself from the object).


 

 

This I will disagree with, the basic idea of a the pop-up cover system is basically the same idea as most gamers who have always used cover in games like Counter Strike, Half-Life, Halo, Battlefield, Unreal Tournament, etc. Basically it added to the basic idea of crouch next to object, pop-up, shoot, crouch again. Its the same thing but added the ability to aim at targets a certain way over the barrier without really having to stick your neck out completely.

I for one find it a better system then the crap Gears, R6V, and several others uses.

 

I haven't read (or seen) much on the first person cover system and while I don't think I love it I do think it's interesting.  I like the cover system in things like Gears of War because I can look around still but if I'm stuck in cover in first person I don't know what's on the other side of that barrier unless I poke my head out (or wouldn't it be cool if they gave you a mirror?).

It's neat because it will put you into the game a little more but I'm just still not convinced the mechanics are going to beat that of the third person cover system I love so much. 

That's the problem when trying to compete with something that's already been done really well.  Props for trying something new, but unless they blow it out of the water it's just going to be seen as Gears of War did it better (and I'm just using Gears as an example because I like the game, pick whatever third person cover system you like).

there has been many videos with the cover system, its actually pretty cool. Seems more indepth since you can move around and see everything like you said.

 



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Millennium said:

Storyline: a space marine fights aliens. Verdict: GENERIC

Graphics: Same old bloom-ridden gray. Verdict: GENERIC

Features: Hiding behind objects is considered a great and innovative feature. Verdict: GENERIC

More Features: The destructibility gimmick. Verdict: GENERIC

Weapons: A melee weapon, a shotgun, a gun that shoots rapidly, an explodey weapon that bounces, an explodey weapon that flies, a highly-accurate weapon with very fast bullets but a low fire rate, and a BFG. Verdict: GENERIC

Sounds like you are describing Gears of War and Gears of War 2.  Why doesn't that franchise get labeled as generic.  It does nothing special.

 



Thanks for the input, Jeff.