By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - what game should i get killzone 2 or halo 3?

Mendicate Bias on 11 May 2009
uber said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
uber said:
also, black had a point reticle which means you can have perfect accuracy with a pistol regardless of distance. that is the polar opposite of kz's gameplay mechanic.

 

It matters not, Black uses a point reticle in the gameplay....so what? On certain weapons there is a point on a crosshaire and on some it's just a crosshaire in KZ2. Certain weapons enlarge crosshaires depending on the weapons ability to get a kill. It's harder to attack with a point a body without a crosshaire in shooters (especially on moving subjects).Scoping in KZ2 makes it easier for a kill does it not? KZ2 uses a point reticle for Sev's Assault Rifle, while scoping, doesn't it? Of course it does. Stop trying to find things that aren't individualistic factors to products which are practically kin.

 

you missed my point.  the point reticule never changes.  this means that your accuracy is in no way affected by movement.

 

kz is not like that at all.  the reticule changes with movement, so as to decrease accuracy.  in black i could pop a headshot with any weapon regardless of how i moved.  that is actually closer to halo than it is kz.  also, kz built range into its weapons, so even with a line of sight i can't take down distant targets with a pistol.  these are very significant differences between black and kz.

 

the fact that the m82 has a point sight is irrelevant, mainly because movement is so hindered by it.  bottom line, the play in black is fundamentally different from kz.  i would say it's closer to halo, but i don't really want to ruffle more feathers.

 

aw hell, i did already.

 

and to the new guy to jump in...halo3 has pretty much the exact same look and feel of halo 2.  playing team deathmatch was an experience in de ja vu.

to illustrate what i mean, both cod3 and cod4 are technically next gen games, yet when i first played cod4 it felt like a next gen game compared to cod3.  that's some serious innovation and improvement.

frankly, i think this thread would have been much more debatable if it were about choosing between halo3 and resistance 2.  those are much more able to be compared.

I'm sorry but your above description of how the guns in Halo 3 work show's your inexperience. The only weapon in Halo 3 that is a hit scan weapon is the sniper. In fact in Halo:CE there was not a single gun that was hit scan. Also the multiplayer gameplay between Halo:CE and Halo 2 is very different, an experienced player would know this. Although you could argue there was not a huge difference in gameplay between Halo 2 and 3, there was no reason for a drastic change. Like the person above me said Halo 2 was a massive success with a huge online population, any large change from the core mechanics of the game would have been foolish to say the least. Killzone on the other hand came out to mediocre reviews and had some major flaws in its multiplayer component. Killzone 2 had to be redifined in order for it to be successful.

Also you keep talking about going from the sequel of one game to another and saying it was technically a next gen game. Could you please tell me besides graphics, what gameplay innovation constitutes a "next gen" game?

@STAGE

I don't remember all the posts but in one of them you mentioned that Bungies great integration of vehicles into the game was the reason there were many pro Halo players. While Bungie did implement vehicles very intuitively into the gameplay the reason Halo has such a large community of proffesional players as well as being the flagship title for MLG is because the core mechanics of Halo allow for a very high competitive level of play. It is the deep interplay of individual skill, team work, weapon control and map control that make Halo a very suitable game for a proffesional gaming circuit. Of course that explanation barely skims the surface but you get the gist of what I'm saying.



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Around the Network
Mendicate Bias on 11 May 2009

@Torillian

Yes most have been done before in previous games but I was making the list from the perspective of a console FPS in which case most of the things are more or less innovative. Although you are correct, many of the listed items have been done individually in previous games.

Also the argument was based around whether Halo 3 or Killzone 2 was more innovative in which case I would lean heavily towards Halo 3. Although I have never played Killzone 2 so I can't say that as a fact.



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Rpruett on 11 May 2009
Mendicate Bias said:
@Torillian

Yes most have been done before in previous games but I was making the list from the perspective of a console FPS in which case most of the things are more or less innovative. Although you are correct, many of the listed items have been done individually in previous games.

Also the argument was based around whether Halo 3 or Killzone 2 was more innovative in which case I would lean heavily towards Halo 3. Although I have never played Killzone 2 so I can't say that as a fact.

Lol if you count inclusion of previously used concepts as innovation then,  Kill Zone 2 is the king of innovation.  Since it's the melting pot of several different FPS games.

 



Signalstar on 11 May 2009

Neither get Red Steel.

C-C-C-Combo Breaker.

Seriously why ask this question you knew what would happen. Get both they are both great games.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

Dark_Rulez89 on 11 May 2009
Rpruett said:
Mendicate Bias said:
@Torillian

Yes most have been done before in previous games but I was making the list from the perspective of a console FPS in which case most of the things are more or less innovative. Although you are correct, many of the listed items have been done individually in previous games.

Also the argument was based around whether Halo 3 or Killzone 2 was more innovative in which case I would lean heavily towards Halo 3. Although I have never played Killzone 2 so I can't say that as a fact.

  Kill Zone 2 is the king of innovation. 

 

 

I would like an examples of why killzone 2 is innovate? Amuse me.



Around the Network
Mendicate Bias on 11 May 2009
Rpruett said:
Mendicate Bias said:
@Torillian

Yes most have been done before in previous games but I was making the list from the perspective of a console FPS in which case most of the things are more or less innovative. Although you are correct, many of the listed items have been done individually in previous games.

Also the argument was based around whether Halo 3 or Killzone 2 was more innovative in which case I would lean heavily towards Halo 3. Although I have never played Killzone 2 so I can't say that as a fact.

Lol if you count inclusion of previously used concepts as innovation then, Kill Zone 2 is the king of innovation. Since it's the melting pot of several different FPS games.

 

Please tell me which console fps that came out before Halo 3 has interactive saved films, forge, screenshots, campaign skulls or the equivelant of, ability to upload and view saved screen shots and videos straight from the console, and enough customization option to allow you to play anything from vehicle races and football to traversing giant mazes. And for your information those previously used concepts were from Halo 1 and 2 hence why I expanded on them where neccesary.


But please go ahead and make a list of Killzone 2's innovations, no ones stopping you.

 



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Thechalkblock on 11 May 2009

I think you should get Killzone 2. Personally I think Halo 3 is very boring (probably because I have played it too much).



uber on 11 May 2009


to put it simply, killzones innovation lies in its ability to immerse the player. it really improved on what was thought as total immersion. before killzone cod4 was the king of immersion.

killzone set the bar higher than it ever has been before in a couple of key ways.

1. the weighty controls and non-infinite range forces the player to be more cautious due to how much it reduces the twitch factor. other fps allow you to kill as long as there is a line of sight regardless of the weapon.
2. subtle tweaks to the way the player moves adds to immersion, aka, the jumping. before killzone one could accurately fire while jumping...*cough*halo*cough*.
3. the use of weather to create immersion. the weather in killzone is no longer just a backdrop, but rather it makes its presence felt as you play. last i checked no major release has done it like that.
4. the enemy AI is so advanced that it feels more like playing against real adversaries than bots working on routines. cod4 was great, but killzones AI blows it away.

those are just for the campaign. as for the mp,
1. the ability to customize classes for individual preferences
2. perks and unlockables that are awarded for feats for a single game. normally perks are just based on rank or cumulative stats.
3. massive clan support with online wagering for clan battles.
4. badges and rank for weekly top scorers.
5. comprehensive stat tracking and support on killzone.com

these are just things off the top of my head. i'm sure others can list more.

enjoy.





art is the excrement of culture

HanzoTheRazor on 11 May 2009

I own both and both are awesome! Kz2 beats Halo 3, tho for me, it is easily one of the best shooters ever crafted.



Playing and finishing games first>>>>>>>>>>Then talking!

Opinions are subjective and just like moods, can change.

TOP 12: Deus Ex, Shadow Man, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturn, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Metroid Prime, Zelda (series), Uncharted (series), FF Tactics, Persona (series), Demons Souls, Vagrant Story.

MOST WANTED: Deus Ex: Human Revolution, The Last Guardian, ICO/Shadow OTC HD

S.T.A.G.E. on 12 May 2009
Mendicate Bias said:
uber said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
uber said:
also, black had a point reticle which means you can have perfect accuracy with a pistol regardless of distance. that is the polar opposite of kz's gameplay mechanic.

 

It matters not, Black uses a point reticle in the gameplay....so what? On certain weapons there is a point on a crosshaire and on some it's just a crosshaire in KZ2. Certain weapons enlarge crosshaires depending on the weapons ability to get a kill. It's harder to attack with a point a body without a crosshaire in shooters (especially on moving subjects).Scoping in KZ2 makes it easier for a kill does it not? KZ2 uses a point reticle for Sev's Assault Rifle, while scoping, doesn't it? Of course it does. Stop trying to find things that aren't individualistic factors to products which are practically kin.

 

you missed my point.  the point reticule never changes.  this means that your accuracy is in no way affected by movement.

 

kz is not like that at all.  the reticule changes with movement, so as to decrease accuracy.  in black i could pop a headshot with any weapon regardless of how i moved.  that is actually closer to halo than it is kz.  also, kz built range into its weapons, so even with a line of sight i can't take down distant targets with a pistol.  these are very significant differences between black and kz.

 

the fact that the m82 has a point sight is irrelevant, mainly because movement is so hindered by it.  bottom line, the play in black is fundamentally different from kz.  i would say it's closer to halo, but i don't really want to ruffle more feathers.

 

aw hell, i did already.

 

and to the new guy to jump in...halo3 has pretty much the exact same look and feel of halo 2.  playing team deathmatch was an experience in de ja vu.

to illustrate what i mean, both cod3 and cod4 are technically next gen games, yet when i first played cod4 it felt like a next gen game compared to cod3.  that's some serious innovation and improvement.

frankly, i think this thread would have been much more debatable if it were about choosing between halo3 and resistance 2.  those are much more able to be compared.

I'm sorry but your above description of how the guns in Halo 3 work show's your inexperience. The only weapon in Halo 3 that is a hit scan weapon is the sniper. In fact in Halo:CE there was not a single gun that was hit scan. Also the multiplayer gameplay between Halo:CE and Halo 2 is very different, an experienced player would know this. Although you could argue there was not a huge difference in gameplay between Halo 2 and 3, there was no reason for a drastic change. Like the person above me said Halo 2 was a massive success with a huge online population, any large change from the core mechanics of the game would have been foolish to say the least. Killzone on the other hand came out to mediocre reviews and had some major flaws in its multiplayer component. Killzone 2 had to be redifined in order for it to be successful.

Also you keep talking about going from the sequel of one game to another and saying it was technically a next gen game. Could you please tell me besides graphics, what gameplay innovation constitutes a "next gen" game?

@STAGE

I don't remember all the posts but in one of them you mentioned that Bungies great integration of vehicles into the game was the reason there were many pro Halo players. While Bungie did implement vehicles very intuitively into the gameplay the reason Halo has such a large community of proffesional players as well as being the flagship title for MLG is because the core mechanics of Halo allow for a very high competitive level of play. It is the deep interplay of individual skill, team work, weapon control and map control that make Halo a very suitable game for a proffesional gaming circuit. Of course that explanation barely skims the surface but you get the gist of what I'm saying.

I never said Bungies intergration of vehicles into the game was the reason there were so many pro Halo players. I understand your point though. My logic wouldn't stray from what you're saying.