I 3rd this, but Killzone 2 looks like a really good game. I'll have to invest in a PS3 really soon.

The site has been around for a while now and has been a part of metacritic. All of those reviews we've mentioned you can head over to metacritic and see them posted. And really, I don't see any "omg! ps3 rox 360 now! ps3 is god!" posts in this thread at all. And I don't see anymore "this game is going to be awesome!" in this thread then any other thread about a hotly anticipated game. I didn't go into threads about "Halo 3 just got a 10! It's going to be an amazing game!" and act like I'm on my period. And i'm sure more then a year ago when they rated Halo 3 that they gave it an 9.8 plotting all that time to one up it with Killzone 2 and grant Gears 2 a 9.7 just before to make it look even better. Also, comparing K2 to Gears 2 is nothing like comparing it to lets say viva pinata. They are both shooters that rely on cover. So your saying a comparison can't be made because of the view points? Bull crap. He was comparing K2 to what is probably to hottest shooter on the market right now. And he didn't say Gears 2 was crap, what he said was that K2 is so amazing that everything else fails in comparison. Either way, let people celebrate a great score if they want. There's no need for comments like yours with no base. Your just screaming "ps3 fanboys" when the only proof there is that they really aren't. Your throwing out worthless point after worthless point trying to degrade the review in every way you can think when there really is no reason. If you had a worthwhile argument about it, then that would be fine. But you don't. You haven't read the review. You take everything out of context and twist the words to your own liking. You degrade the publication (and maybe even the people of the middle east with that jesus comment, what was the purpose in that?) for no reason other then the fact that it scored .1 better then Halo and that they broke the embargo (they are not even the first to do so! and as I said before ALL reviewers have had their review copies for a month. The only reason other publications haven't published reviews is because of the embargo which this site and another obviously broke). In fact, if you attacked the site for breaking the embargo and not just making stupid assumptions I'd have no problem with your posts.

I don't understand why disolitude is so upset that KZ2 is good, and that people like it.

Is it so upsetting that Sony could do a truly great game on their own console, merely by embracing the technology under the hood, and the embracing the aspects of console shooters that actually work well to make a better game?

Yeah, any shooter designed for a console should take this into account.  Halo1/2 and Gears 1 are good examples of how differently a console game controls differently than pc centric games, as these games have pc ports.  Many would rather use the 360 controller for the pc version of Gears.  But when you think about it, console shooters should definitly have weight and inertia figured into movement and looking because they utilize analog controls.

I disagree with it being different than all other shooters because the Halo games definitely were designed with analog sticks in mind and move and look is very different than keyboard/mouse movement.

Anyone saying they are PC-only FPS players are rubbish and do not like video games.  I love games and I will play them no matter what controller there is.  I was born and bred playing pc fps games(Quake 1/2(hell I had a LAN party for the Quake Beta release), Tribes, Doom, Unreal, UT, RotT - cool points to anyone who gets that acronym) and I absolutely do not mind playing FPS games on the console.  There are several recent shooter games that handle console controls very well, CoD MW/WaW, Halo 1/2/3, Gears 1/2, etc.

I will definitely be trying KZ 2 at some point this year.

I've played a lot of Halo (and other shooters), and the KZ2 beta.  I totally agree that one of the reasons Halo is so loved as a console shooter is that it is designed around the analog input sticks.  KZ2 does the same thing, except it really hits the nail on the head.  You feel like you are your character, much moreso than shooters I've played in the past, including Halo 1/2/3, all of which did a pretty darn good job.  Everything from the "weight" of the movement to the realism of the 1st-person animations yields this "extra awesomeness" that you have to experience to really understand.

KZ2 does a great job of rendering, animations, level design, etc. and utilizing the PS3 in general.  But what it really excels at, and this is something a 360 game could do just as well IMO (but hasn't, yet), is that feeling of being there.  Only the CoD series, over the years, really comes close.  The KZ2 love is not all from its excellent utilization of the PS3 hardware.  GG really did a good job, and that has little to do with the platform.

I do like the first person view bobs.  Does it effect aiming?  I guess, realistically, it should if your head is being bounced around.  But I do like the way that looks.  Also, I am interested in the cover mechanic because I don't usually care for that in FP games, like Rainbow Six, etc.  But having not played it, I cannot say either way.  Definitely wanting to check out this game.

Let me clear this up. I think the original Halo was excellent. It's one of the best shooters of all time.

I think the second Halo was almost as excellent as Halo. They made a few questionable changes, but it was still full of win.

Halo 3...sigh. It was a disappointment. I really expected more from Bungie. Not least in the graphics department.

Halo: Combat Evolved > Halo 2 > CoD4: MW > Halo 3 IMO.