Myth was an decent PC game (not a big hit by any means), never played Marathon, and I still own Oni. It was a very bad game.

Marathon is an excellent series - so yes, Bungie has a good past reputation compared to Guerilla.

This just in leo-j..........Sony drop PS3 and adopt new version with N64 processor.

Are you trying to mock me? Becuase if you are its not working.

Lol, ok seriously. A lot of the point is being missed. There are a lot of games on both platforms that look like they will have tremendous graphics. I dont believe that K2 looks any better than the rest of them (personally i think MGS4 pawns it). So the point is, why are Sony fanboys using this game which by all accounts will have bland gameplay and graphics that are great but not revolutionary to hype their platform? If it comes out and Sony have made the gameplay excellent then use it, but in the meantime their a so many excellent games coming out for PS3 that we KNOW have good gameplay AND graphics. Also someone mentioned that Halo 3 doesnt look that good graphically and i quite agree, K2 will LOOK better. But the difference is we all KNOW Halo 3 will play better than any shooter out for any console out now or coming out in the next year. So hype something that can compete like MGS4

You hard headed fanboy, how can you say halo 3 will play better than any shooter out if you havent played it? And how do you know killzone 2 will  not boost hardware? You dont know anything to be talking a whole load of BS.

well in it's category Myth is one of the most known in the world... name me a serie of game of the same kind you think is higher than it ??? I have some in mind but not a high nmber....
marathon was to macintosh what doom was to PC basically.....

being a bad game is your opinion for oni, I don't like it either but it still won the award so I don't think it's that bad... and it was Fing innovative for the genre.... that's probably why it got the award in the first place...

So yeah at the end I say it again Bungie is over Guerilla.... in term of fame and game quality

I mention earlier that i have only ever played halo 2 once. But i know halo 3 will be great because its going to follow halo 2's gameplay with a few improvements. It WONT be revolutionary but it will play FANTASTICALLY. Killzone on the other hand was a very poor game, if K2 follows K1's gameplay it will be the same. So what im saying is the dev team have a poor track record with this series and by the looks of the trailers they arnt doing anything to change gameplay beyond pretty graphical upgrades. It will move some systems because of Sony's hype, but unless something DRAMATIC happens with the gameplay and there is every indication it wont, it will be a poor game. Why then leo-j, dont you concentrate your hype efforts on a game you KNOW wont let you down?

Want to know why killzone was a poor game? From gamespot:

"A coat of paint would have made killzone alot better"

"No background sound, very dull colors and nothing going on around you killed the game, as well as dumb AI"

Regardless, I want somebody that actually owns the game to help me with this, Right now KZ2 isnt following KZ1 anywhere in gameplay besides being able to shoot. If people are saying the onstage demonstration was unbelieveble its still going to be considered a dull game? If it was nominated for best of e3 while halo 3 was not what is that supposed to mean? Dont ask me ask the reviewers. I hype this game becuase I think that it can generate to an extent that it would be considered a better game than gears of war.

"This is the best selling game so far this generation and it continues to sell well each week."

What!?!? The best selling game of this generation is not gears of war!! It's Wii Sports with over 8.5 million. And wii play is next with 4.58 million, gears has 4.46 million. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.