linlhutz said: Kantor said: linlhutz said: MrBubbles said: they shouldnt have released the demo. the poor controls and aiming turned people off, reducing the sales. Exactly! I have been saying this for a while.   A FPS with terrible controls = FAILURE   That is why I hate KZ2. That is why I hate Resistance: Fall of Man.   That is why I absolutely love Resistance 2 - They finally got the controls figured out. If they ever fix KZ2 controls, I will give it another look.   As it is, pass.     Please tell 70 reviewers and 1.4 million people that the controls of Killzone 2 suck. The poor saps seem to think it's an awesome game, with perfectly good controls. Don't you pity them? Why would I have to tell them anything? I played the demo and  think the controls stink. Am I supposed to care more about what reviewers think over my own opinion?

Your opinion is fine. I'm not objecting to the fact that you are completely unable to adjust to a new control scheme, I am objecting to the fact that you think everyone thinks the controls suck. They really don't. I don't understand how I can use the controls with ease, and yet you have so much difficulty.

linlhutz said: MrBubbles said: they shouldnt have released the demo. the poor controls and aiming turned people off, reducing the sales. Exactly! I have been saying this for a while.   A FPS with terrible controls = FAILURE   That is why I hate KZ2. That is why I hate Resistance: Fall of Man.   That is why I absolutely love Resistance 2 - They finally got the controls figured out. If they ever fix KZ2 controls, I will give it another look.   As it is, pass.

Yeah. You'd have thought that with that budget GG would at least have put in multiple control schemes, or even sensitivity adjustments...oh wait.

Hell, even I got used to the controls.

An inability do do so is imo either attributable to stubbornness or an inability to adjust and learn new things, neither of which unfortunately can be cured by GG.

Infamy - i have provided sources everytime ive been asked unlike everyone else. i only stat what i know. and the facts dont lie. A GTA4 was multiplat. B GTA team was bigger. C GTA had 100,000 photographs of NY City taken and Cameras recording rain. D. GTA is coming off of GTASA,. which plays major role. E. GTA started after GTASA, was finished with a bigger team and less projects.. what makes you think GG had the resources for 2 ps2 games 1 psp and ps3 game? especially since sony didny buy em out till dec 05 go ahead try to dispute those facts. you said everything i said was pulled from my ass. and if you are so short sighted where you cant see employees who pulled in damn near 1 billion dollars for a company probably get paid well over avg then i feel sorry for your ignorance. (GTA3 - "As of March 26, 2008, Grand Theft Auto IIIhas sold 14.5 million units according to Take-Two Interactive." GTAVC- " As of March 26, 2008, Grand Theft Auto: Vice Cityhas sold 17.5 million units according to Take-Two Interactive." GTASA - "As of March 26, 2008, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreashas sold 21.5 million units according to Take-Two Interactive" 55million * 25 dollars per copy = 1.4 billion NOTE - these numbers are more than a year old)

Spankey said: linlhutz said: MrBubbles said: they shouldnt have released the demo. the poor controls and aiming turned people off, reducing the sales. Exactly! I have been saying this for a while.   A FPS with terrible controls = FAILURE   That is why I hate KZ2. That is why I hate Resistance: Fall of Man.   That is why I absolutely love Resistance 2 - They finally got the controls figured out. If they ever fix KZ2 controls, I will give it another look.   As it is, pass.     Yeah. You'd have thought that with that budget GG would at least have put in multiple control schemes, or even sensitivity adjustments...oh wait. Hell, even I got used to the controls. An inability do do so is imo either attributable to stubbornness or an inability to adjust and learn new things, neither of which unfortunately can be cured by GG.

 

The fact that you said "even I got used to the controls" shows that even you think the controls are screwed up.

 

So why is there a delay then? What purpose does it serve?

Can't GG figure out that when I press the analog stick I expect something to happen?

Is it too much to ask for?

Is it a radical new concept for FPS - responsive controls?

 

 

Kantor said: linlhutz said: Kantor said: linlhutz said: MrBubbles said: they shouldnt have released the demo. the poor controls and aiming turned people off, reducing the sales. Exactly! I have been saying this for a while.   A FPS with terrible controls = FAILURE   That is why I hate KZ2. That is why I hate Resistance: Fall of Man.   That is why I absolutely love Resistance 2 - They finally got the controls figured out. If they ever fix KZ2 controls, I will give it another look.   As it is, pass.     Please tell 70 reviewers and 1.4 million people that the controls of Killzone 2 suck. The poor saps seem to think it's an awesome game, with perfectly good controls. Don't you pity them? Why would I have to tell them anything? I played the demo and  think the controls stink. Am I supposed to care more about what reviewers think over my own opinion? Your opinion is fine. I'm not objecting to the fact that you are completely unable to adjust to a new control scheme, I am objecting to the fact that you think everyone thinks the controls suck. They really don't. I don't understand how I can use the controls with ease, and yet you have so much difficulty.

I guess my opinion is not fine then?

It's what I gave. You took it to mean I feel everyone thinks the controls stink.

No. It is my own opinion. I never said everyone thinks the controls stink.

I said I do.

ME.

At what point in my previous posts did I mention my opinion is what everyone else thinks?

Max King of the Wild said: Infamy - i have provided sources everytime ive been asked unlike everyone else. i only stat what i know. and the facts dont lie.

Your sources are mostly you making stuff up out of thin air

GTA4 being multiplat doesn't mean much when you know the amount of people working on it plus the time they took to make it, it all equals man hours. Just because one employee works on something for both versions doesn't mean you pay for it twice and a game only increases by about 10% for being multiplat, not double.

Only by around 30 full time staff, that's 25% bigger, not 100% bigger

The photos of NYC and videos of rain are irrelevant. KZ2 had far better animations which means more time to make them which means more time to make them. Each game has strengths which take time to make, you can't make a correlation between a game costing twice as much as another just because of some features.

GG was coming off Killzone 1 and Killzone: Liberation which is just as relevant as your point (read: irrelevant)

Completely irrelevant

Easy, they didn't make them all at once. I've said this already. What relevance do games released back in 2004 have to do with Killzone 2?

What's that word I was looking for.... umm... oh yeah.... IRRELEVANT!!!

Pretty much all of it is, you've even admitted a lot of it was, go back and read the thread

You are pulling that out of your ass again, you have no idea what Take Two employees get paid and assuming they get bigger salaries because they work on a bigger game is just ridiculous. In case you hadn't noticed, Take Two is going bust.

 

A. working on 2 games raises costs no matter what. ports are also more than 10% according to twesterm who is a game developer. apparently 360 to ps3 is alot more complicated than ps2 to xbox... whod of thunk the port cost would go up when completely different tech is being used in the 2 systems.(was it even a port).

B. by more tthan 30. i wouldnt be surprised if it was closer to 100 when development first started. remember GG wasnt always at 120 and when KZ2 first went into development KZL was in the works. obviously the who studio couldnt be working on KZ2 or else KZL wouldnt have made it out.

your right... hiring a bunch of professional photographers, paying for 100,000 high quality photos worth of film rolls, having those photographers develop 100,000 photos, and printing them on 8 by 11 high quality paper has nothing to do with a game budget /sarcasm. Reality check that wouldnt be cheap. it doesnt matter how GG devs used their time because R* used theres on the massive city instead of animations. those photographers were just extra. look at it this way. on one side you have 120 employees all making a game on the other side you have 150 employees making a game in the same amount of time... it doesnt matter what either are doung but the one team with 150 employees spent extra money on more people to take 100,000 photos.

GTASA is very relevant it plays a major role on budgets. Companies dont just work on a game and its done when its done the lay out a budget plan first and they get this by many things but one of the things is forcasting sales... only way to do that is looking at trends of the series...


again! completely relevant. you said kz2 started before kz was finished it proves your hypocrisy and really brings questions to your motives... saying GTA4 started after gtasa finished... why when it only works for you is that the case?

im pretty sure you were saying kz2 was in development before other projects were done was done.... "This game has clearly been in development since early 2005 at a bare minimum, that gives you a 4 year development timeline. The fact they were working on KZ:Liberation is completely irrelevant, when a game is in it's final stages of development you don't have your artists sitting around twiddling their thumbs, you start ramping up the next project and have all your resources working all the time, it's not rocket science." oh... its because you did.

TT is in bad shape but that has nothing to do with R*N the developers of gta series. if you dont think TT would treat their bread and butter like gods your more ignorant than i thought. i believe polyphony developers get paid more than other sony studios. so if we get in an agruement on GT5s budget id suggest you use 150k per dev per year instead of 100k

vipers areguement was 'but investors are reporting it' without linking a source. your saying 'but gta4 was massive' NO FUCKING DUH! they arent comparable

You are just putting words in my mouth now, I never said they started Killzone 2 before Killzone 1
I've repeatedly stated that they started prior to E3 2005 where they released the tech demo, nothing else

I can't be bothered arguing with you any more, you are a moron. Not only do you twist facts to only be true in your mind, you either don't read my points, completely ignore them, or are just being a dick.

im sorry you feel that way but i do read and investigate all your points.... how else would i get the 100,000 photos from gta4... obviously by researching why the game cost so much. your the one that is too thick headed to look in a different point of view. i dont know if thats because bandwagon killzone hate is so strong or that you genuinely just dont have much common sense. also, i know for a fact people were stating that kz2, kz, kzl, and shell shock were all in development at the same time. whether or not im confusing you with someone else might be the case here but its no need for name calling. and again you should see how people overestimating dev time would be a major point of mine and how it would make people overestime kz2 budget. now everything i have stated in this thread are facts and are alternatives to think about when estimating kz2s budget. these things i bring up would indeed drastically low costs but people are too stuborn to take them into consideration because they rather listen to a surfer girl rumor and troll kz2 budget than think logically.