Lucky bastard!

I wasn't really impressed with Resistance: Fall of Man, but unlike you, after playing the beta, it changed my mind, and it is one of my most anticipated game for this holiday.

I am happy that you enjoy the game, but it seems that you couldn't stop talking about Killzone 2 even for the R2 impression post. :)

I have doubts for Killzone 2's success, the game is great, but there is something wrong with it...A bit like Alone in the Dark, great game but...

You lucky person you! :(

Fight any bosses yet? That's what I'm really looking forward to.

 Did you just compare K2 to alone in the dark???......are you.....serious....

I haven't played the beta but just from videos I can tell you that it is shaping up to be one of the most well polished games ever. Do you know why Alone in the Dark sucked? Lack of polish. Ok, the game might not be for you, but seriously, think about that for a moment.

We have our ways.......

I'm enjoying this game much better than RFOM. I can't really explain why, though. It's just more fun. Maybe it's tighter controls, maybe it's better pacing, I dunno.

I Kind've fought one boss. I fired a couple of shots from crazy weapon at the Kraken. Not sure what the weapon does. It just kind've shoots this part sonic, part energy blast in a general direction. You see the air moving around it and stuff.

@zones: Wait until you play Killzone. :P

:D

Calm down dude, Killzone 2 is one of my most anticipated game, and it's a day one purchase for me regardless of whatever happens to it. What I am saying is, the game is great, the game is polished, but the direction of the game is not completley right, it could be better, but we have only seen two levels, so I hope I am wrong. I am only referring to Single Player here, I think the MP is good enough, but I unlike some lucky ******** I don't have the beta, so I don't know. :P

By the way, I am in no way comparing Alone in the Dark to Killzone 2, I am just saying that Alone in the Dark was a great game but it suffered due to lack of few simple issues that could've make the game way better in the eye of the reviewrs.

I didn't want to go into detail here, becasue I guess this thread is not right for this arguement.

Breaking news fellas, Gamespot has a vid up of them playing some single player but in the begining of the video the guy mentions that the other guy is REVIEWING the game for Gamespot, and the reviewer says that "I've played through the game and enjoyed it and am looking forward to playing it again" this is a very good sign for a good score from GS. Here is link to vid

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/resistance2/video/6200460/resistance-2-marathon--10-31-08?om_act=convert&om_clk=videos&tag=videos;title;1

I hope for a 9.0 then, hope it is higher though.

By the way, do you guys also think that the .5 point system from GameSpot is terrible? I liked IGN and GameSpot reviews becasue they were not like these pointless star or A/B/C raitings, they were plain and simple, and had a much better way to show the identity of the games. Like, you might say a 9 is too much for some games and an 8.8 is great, but 8.5 is low, so you'd be stuck in your decision, and that is why the raiting system from Eurogamer, 1UP, GameSpot..etc sucks in my opinion.

If I read any review, it would be from IGN, and the Video Reviews from GameTrailers are good, but too bad the whole site is ran by one person (Shane Saterfield).

Those guys couldn't play very well according to some of the posters there. Couldn't figure out how to do beserks or what meter was there life and which was there beserk meter and stupid things like that. lol