My problem isn't with the game, it's with the amount of enthusiasm and thoughts of revolutionary gameplay this cover system has gotten from the OP. Did it bring something new to the table? Maybe. There are countless other cover systems in FPS games, and possibly one other that is in first person, so maybe not. The fact that it's being implemented for single player, yet unavailable in multiplayer speaks volumes to how unimportant the cover system is in the scheme of things. I can see people marvelling over Gears' cover system, because it is an important an element of gameplay as any other in that game. This just seems like an optional method for forward progression in the game, nothing more, nothing less.

Before you get any more on your "Onyxmeth just hates the game" phrases, Killzone 2 is a day one purchase for me as long as it garners some cool reviews, and I still don't think the cover system is a big deal.

@ onyxmeth, the reason for removing the cover system in MP is to encourage quicker paced action, they are trying to mimic CoD 4 here, but go for a more tactical SP, so I doubt we are going to see the CoD mad rushes to trigger the next invisible checkpoint, it will be a more sit back and pick the enemies off a la Gears of War

I have no problem with changing the gameplay style slightly for MP. In Geow 2, in SP I used my sniper rifle when ever I could and just went for headshots (I killed most of the enemies in that game with my sniper, but in multiplayer it is completely different with the shotgun being the king in every single way

I also believe that Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter games had a cover system in SP, but they ditched in MP, so it is hardly an unprecedented move

So if they wanted the MP to have quicker paced action, then why does the SP have a different philosophy behind it? I don't play GRAW, so I won't comment on it, but if Epic pulled this with Gears I would call it out the exact same way if someone made a topic claiming it was a big deal. The cover system in Gears is a big deal because it encompasses your entire experience. Your ability to cover is as important as your ability to shoot and that is what made it so revolutionary and special. This just seems like the same cover system that is in most other FPS games, but it happens to not take you out of first person to achieve it. Well whoopdie doo. In plenty of these other games I've played in first person, you still had limited to no vision around cover or corners unless you poked your head out, so it achieves basically the same function. Kyliedog already mentioned that a crouch and lean tactic gets almost the exact same end result.

So again, I'm not saying the cover system in KZ2 is bad, or poorly done, or completely useless. I just don't see the big deal to warrant the gushing praises the OP laid before it, that's all. This is a slightly tweaked but practically standard feature in many FPSes these days. This isn't the Gravity Gun here.

@ onyxmeth, I agree that it is not that incredible or world changing, I was just trying to justify the removal for the MP

As per this article http://ps3.ign.com/articles/944/944857p1.html?RSSwhen2009-01-14_045700&RSSid=944857

"The cover system isn't quite so forgiving as Gears' and if you duck behind a low barricade you'll still expose yourself to fire, meaning you've got to choose your resting points carefully, especially when Helghast troops are clever enough to attempt to outflank you."

It seems like its a more realistic cover system.

That's not a correct statement. Depending on your position, you can shoot someone behind cover in Gears also, even if their cover is facing you.

@Munkeh-Fair enough, but it would be nice to leave it in and let the community decide whether they wanted to quicken the pace or not.

Cover system is the most overrated feature in videogames right now. I hate cover systems like those people that hate CGI over in-game videos. If you have to rely on a cover system to protect yourself, the game is broken. You should be able to just go behind barriers and not have to hit a stupid button to be "in cover." If I'm behind an object, then I should be protected.

Multiplayer didn't have a cover system but you can hide behind objects. That's how it should be. I liked Uncharted but having to hide behind a rock or column every single room you went into was rather annoying.

@ windbane, I think SOCOM Confrontation has a similar system to that. When behind a crate or something (not directly behind) and crouching, your character will hide and you can use the SIXAXIS to peak over the top or around the sides to shoot.

Anyway, in most games you can just stand behind cover, but sticking you to the wall helps align the camera, but of course its just your view

Maybe some people have gotten the wrong idea of my something to ponder threads these threads are intended to ponder

i don't think that the cover system in KZ2 is going to be a huge deal to most i just wanted to let people that are not into FPS know that KZ2 has a cover system in case that was holding them off on being into it as it was holding me off b4 i knew it had a cover system Who knows if KZ2 turns out well maybe all FPS will implement it they also need a quicker way of looking behind you especially in MP

To me cover systems in shooter games are a big deal i feel that FPS haven't offered any thing knew since the days of doom and unreal for the pc

yes windbane If ur behind an object, then u should be protected. but picture urself in a real gun fight are u just stand behind and object or get close to it and embrace it and value it as it's  saving u from gun fire For TPS gamers like myself it's feels like im taking a step back wen playng a FPS that doesn't use a good cover system the ign qoute says it best "Going back and playing other FPSs just isn't the same anymore. When I duck behind a corner, I don't want to stare at a poorly-textured wall before strafing out into the open. I want to peak around the corner, line up a shot, and shoot things"

@KylieDog i like blind fire the ability to shoot aimlessly from cover like they do in the movies or if i feel frustrated gives it more of a sense of realism

A cover system in a FPS that maintains the first person perspective is an interesting concept, that if done correctly will probably be adopted by other FPSs.  I don't think the op was hyping it up as the best thing ever, but it is something that will make him consider buying an FPS.  I think he made some valid points comparing cover systems between TPS and FPS.

Gears is a TPS so the fact that the cover system works in multiplayer isn't a fair comparison to the cover system not working in Killzone's multiplayer.  From what I've read, Guerilla is very excited about the lean and peak system in the single player campaign because it keeps the player immersed in the action while in cover.   I think they are the best people to determine if the system adds value to the multiplayer or not.

I think you guys are making too much of cover systems and the lacking of coop in Killzone.