I liked the review. I don't think anyone who actually played both games would say this looked anywhere nearly as good as Crysis...unless they played it on a lesser computer.
I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.
NO NO, NO NO NO.
@zen
I don't think anyone in their right mind could compare crisis on ultra high with games on consoles.
but let's not forget that KZ2 also does some stuff that even crysis doesn't have like believeable dead animations, AI,awesome SP and MP,smoke effects,...
| SpartanFX said: @zen |
I recall a thread on here where someone happened to say KZ2 beat Crysis on the graphics front. I figured I would address that. And yes, an occasional "Halo Killer" pops up.
I hadn't tried multiplayer yet, so I can't comment on that, because I just played it with bots. I played on easy so I can't comment on the AI much either.
And the sides remind me a bit, since a saw a documentary of Sparta vs Greece (comment to insomniac17). Helghasts are Spartans, while the ISA is more like the Greeks. And the ISA isn't really that much of the good guys. Maybe they are marginally better, but it is best to see the back story. I believe you understand the Helghast side of things if you do.
I pretty much agree with that. I'm also hopeful that KZ3 delivers an even better SP campaign. Clearly a fair bit of effort for KZ2 was building the engine. They have that now, they have bots, etc.
Now its time to improve through tuning what they have and deliver a big SP campaign on the scale of Half Life 2 coupled with another solid online/offline MP effort.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
| ZenfoldorVGI said: I liked the review. I don't think anyone who actually played both games would say this looked anywhere nearly as good as Crysis...unless they played it on a lesser computer. |
I played crysis on ultra high and crysis warhead on the same, and particle effects, lightning and animations are better in killzone 2.
Check out my game about moles ^
Glad to see people enjoying it
To post in blackened out, do full text reply, and use the black highlight tool, I am interested to know how you found the final boss okay, I died about 50 times on him, and about 50 times throughout the rest of the game
| Munkeh111 said: Glad to see people enjoying it To post in blackened out, do full text reply, and use the black highlight tool, I am interested to know how you found the final boss okay, I died about 50 times on him, and about 50 times throughout the rest of the game |
lol yea he pissed me off too :P
Check out my game about moles ^
| richardhutnik said: I said I would post about Killzone 2 after I finished it. Well, I did, and I would post my thoughts on the game. I had been critical of it, well mostly the hype, but I did get it. Ok, onto my comments. First, the negative comments about the game: * Your character is 5' tall. Really? I didn't notice. Didn't seem to impact things at all.
* The controls are messed up. It doesn't control like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Does it have to? Maybe the game could use better customizing, but I found them find. The lack of aim assisting I found a greater issue, but not where the buttons were. Also, IT IS NOT CALL OF DUTY.
* The controls are sluggish. "I saw a Youtube video showing there is this delay in microseconds". Ok, maybe they patched this, but I didn't notice issues. I found it was a bit slow, but since there was no auto-aim, it helped.
* The game has excess amounts of brown and grey. Well, the trailers I saw did. However, the game, while it did tend towards this, did have places where there were sufficient other colors.
* Helghan looks like a lousy place to invade. Who would want to go there? That is still true. The place flat out sucks. It did work in the game though. The game goes into why the Slimy ISA would want to invade it though. And yes, they are slimy. I said ISA people, yes THEM. You know the side you are supposed to be fighting for.
* The game sucks because it has no multiplayer coop mode! Come on. The game allows bots and you can play with other people against bots. I recall what was said about the design of Resistance 2, in regards to coop. Most campaigns in a game are designed for single player in mind. Adding multiplayer coop to a campaign for single player doesn't do it justice. I believe adding bots and how KZ2 does multiplayer makes this not needed actually.
Other comments (not quite negative, but not positive): * Rico is a %@^%#^@%^! That is definitely true. I had wondered why people were saying this. Now I finished the game, I can see why. I won't comment as to the why not to spoil it.
* The final boss (before the last cut scene ending) is HARD. Well yes, but I found the boss was manageable and fairly easy to beat, IF you did the right thing. I would post it below, if I knew how to blacken things out. Best not to comment. It does seem counter-intuitive though. Will say how I did it, would result in a quick death if your timing was off.
The hype it up comments: * "This game is the BEST LOOKING GAME EVER! IT BLOWS AWAY CRYSIS!" I will say nope to that. Looks great. Not going to say it blows away Gears of War 2 either. This likely has to do far more with Helghan being a sucky place than the engine. Will be interesting to see what they do with the engine in the future. I am impressed by the engine though. I will say the grenades are the best I have run into in a game. I ran the game in 720P for awhile (had to drop to 480P for most of the time, due to my monitor cutting out between levels).
* This game is THE HALO KILLER! STOP! I know this comes more out of the Microsoft fan side, but come on. It doesn't not. I know Halo 3 doesn't look nearly as good, but only time will tell.
* This game will turn the table in the console war! Again like Halo Killer, STOP! The game would be a lot better letting it speak for itself, and speak of KZ2 being a great FPS title, and leave it at that. And add here, "The game will cause 360 owners to sell their 360s to get this game and play it!" as fitting this. Can we stop that?
* The game is THE BEST FPS EVER! If you feel that way, fine. Does Killzone 2 deserved to be discussed in real of best console FPS? Yes. I will say that it is hard to say it will beat Halo 3, considering what Halo 3 has become (and I am not a huge fan). What people consider the best will depend on what they look for. It DEFINITELY is the top candidate for best FPS on the PS3. Shoot, KZ2 borrows from a lot of other games, the XP from Call of Duty, and Bots from UT3.
My thoughts: * The game engine IS impressive. It works well. Sony needs to reuse it for other FPS titles they are doing. I do want to see how the engine works on a more organically based world, rather than the dust-pile know as Helghan. * The game is harder to aim right without aim assist. It makes me feel like why people say mouse and keyboard are better. * The backstory and storyline is great. * Rico is a %@^%#^@%^! * Yes, BOTS! * The ISA are slime. They are. They have questionable motives in what they are doing.
Conclusion: This game deserves the praise it gets. To hype up too much, to make it so it is supposed to drive console sales is unfair to it. The game looks great, and plays well. And I haven't even gotten to online multiplayer. I do know, via bot play, the mode is great. This MUST go onto any PS3 owner's list who likes FPS titles, to try and check out. Rent, borrow, or whatever, and see if you like it. Aiming IS harder than usual, and maybe you might not like it. I would say the numbers are few and far between this would be so, particularly among FPS fans. Ok, now I got my two cents in here. It is time to move onto other things. I will let this be my final comments on the game as a stand alone post. Onto other games people. |
Fanboy nonsense, you haven't been critical at all. Not in the slightest. You've just answered the critical points with defensive remarks to make the game look better. You haven't agreed with a singla negative remark and even twist the negative into a positive.
Are we supposed to take this seriously?
I haven't played the game, but this is purely aimed at your journalistic style, not the game. I'm only posting this at you because you're implying a critical opinion but it's nothing short of fanboy defense rhetoric.
I think the main negative from what I gather of reading the reviews is that it's just a generic shooter and 4 years too late
Now, how about you explain what it does right, why it is better than all the other shooters out there.
Finally why we should buy it, not "why we should not not buy it"!!!
Do you get me? You haven't said why it's good, you've just said why it isn't bad!
| SpartanFX said: @zen |
There are quite a few deranged people around then, Spartan.
| Baggins said: Fanboy nonsense, you haven't been critical at all. Not in the slightest. You've just answered the critical points with defensive remarks to make the game look better. You haven't agreed with a singla negative remark and even twist the negative into a positive. Are we supposed to take this seriously? I haven't played the game, but this is purely aimed at your journalistic style, not the game. I'm only posting this at you because you're implying a critical opinion but it's nothing short of fanboy defense rhetoric. I think the main negative from what I gather of reading the reviews is that it's just a generic shooter and 4 years too late Now, how about you explain what it does right, why it is better than all the other shooters out there. Finally why we should buy it, not "why we should not not buy it"!!! Do you get me? You haven't said why it's good, you've just said why it isn't bad! |
Me with fanboy nonsense? Are you serious? Please check out my other posts regarding Killzone 2. I have been critical of the game, or more like critical of the buzz about the game. If you don't know what I have written, you wouldn't know it. Anyone want to chime in here and argue how I have been a fanboy? I had been harsh about it. But what can I say? The main knock I have with the game is that I wasn't able to bring up aim assist (it can use it). That's right, that is my main knock on it. I pointed out other criticisms of the game, and why I don't think they matter. I did mention them though, if you read my comments.
As far as the main complaint you see, that it is a "generic shooter and 4 years too late", I am not sure how anyone can say that, considering it happens to bring together just about everything and executes well. If, for example, you want a game with Call of Duty 4 online stat building AND bots, this is your only option. It takes the concept and refines it. It is formulastic in this regard, but I believe it works.
The reality is that it doesn't need to be better than any other shooter out there. It just needs to be good enough to consider trying and buying, and I agree. I am sorry if I didn't flag what is good or bad here, but this is what I wrote regarding it:
My thoughts:
* The game engine IS impressive. It works well. Sony needs to reuse it for other FPS titles they are doing. I do want to see how the engine works on a more organically based world, rather than the dust-pile know as Helghan.
* The game is harder to aim right without aim assist. It makes me feel like why people say mouse and keyboard are better.
* The backstory and storyline is great.
* Rico is a %@^%#^@%^!
* Yes, BOTS!
* The ISA are slime. They are. They have questionable motives in what they are doing.
I also mentioned that the game deserves to be the discussion for best console FPS. I believe it does. What I am NOT going to do here, however, is go into and discuss every single facet of the game, like I am some sort of ultimate authority on this. You can read other people's reviews, and look to my comments on this.
By the way, I am going to go into the original post and try to add comments to how to beat the final boss darked.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
