CGI-Quality said:
dcIKeeL said:
Xen said:
*boots Killzone 2 up*
catch-up? the PS3 to the 360? really? |
o c'mon xen, the graphics card? really?? Killzone is a fine shooter, among the best this gen. But it has nothing new in terms of gameplay, nothing innovative. I mean it was so hype and now that the dust has settled it has struggled to get over a million sold in the U.S. If it was so amazing, so great, why the lack of sales? It didnt lack hype, it was heavily marketed, it's a shooter, the most profitable hardcore genre this gen, it was greatly expected by sony fans and it was similar to COD, even having the same control scheme as an option. If it was so much better than every other shooter out there than why hasnt it translated into sales? Why hasnt the sony COD community (at least 4 million strong) embraced this game as they did COD?
I have no friends with 360's only ps3's and several of them are fanboys and they played killzone for 2 weeks and went right back to COD 4 AND 5 and even said they liked COD better after all.
|
Perhaps Killzone 2 isn't the same kind of game as COD? Maybe Killzone isn't excatly a HUGE franchise, considering it's prequel Killzone (PS2)? Maybe Killzone 2 was not as marketed as COD? It's subjective which game was "better". Personally, I don't see all the gaga over COD, but that's just me. I'm not that big of an BIG FPS to begin with, it takes a certain type to appeal to me: Crysis, F.E.A.R., UT, Half Life, Goldeneye, Killzone 2, Left 4 Dead....as some examples.
Regardless, we can do this all day, but Xen wasn't referring to sales, but the level of polish the game had, and how, IHO, there's not a similar experience on the 360. Considering the game hit a million in 8-10 days, I'd hardly consider that a "struggle". It may see 3mill WW at some point, it may not. It doesn't change the FACT that Killzone did for many what is was supposed to, be a great experience for Playstation 3 owners.
Frankly, I don't see the problem.
|
I was just like you, i didnt get what was so special about COD seeing my friends play it. It seemed so run of the mill. Ok "looking" gameplay, ok graphics, i just didnt get it. But my friends played it so much, endlessly and all of them owned it. So i finally gave it a shot although on the 360 since i preffered the system and even though i didnt get tp play it with my friends i found myself addicted within a day. It's like a drug. The multiplayer maps are designed for intense action. Some maps really make your heart beat faster hoping noone gets the frop on you while u run through this over pass, or this narrow stream etc. I know what Xen meant, but i used it's weak sales compared to other similar games to help state that popular opinion, even among ps3 users is that they prefer COD. The huge franchise argument is weak. If a game is good enough, it will make it's franchise huge. After all, isnt that what COD 4 did? Gears 1? Mass Effect? Bioshock? The latter to were not heavily marketed and were entirely new IPs yet they were very successful despite not being shooters. It is my opinion that COD is a better experience than Killzone 2, a better game overall. And killzone is only equal in my opinion to gears 1 and 2. If it did surpass gears, it's only by a small margin, nothing to tout over. And not to mention halo. I noe u probably dont enjoy the game and i agree it's an entirely different experience but it is certainly a great one. I mean, it's fast paced, reflex based, huge maps, and adding the new map packs with 1 or 2 maps that are completely cuztomizable. It has made halo more than just a regular shooter. People have official races on these user made maps, specifically made like an obstacle course in which players have to use their guns and grenades and abilities to pass through as quickly as possible. Isn't that a unique experience? Idk what Killzone 2 introduced that makes ps3 the standard setter. I mean overall, it was your standard shooter. A great one, but it adhered to the standards of it's time. Heavily polished? It better be, it was oin production 5 years strong. I think Killzone 2 is a gorgeous shooter that from the get go made graphics it's selling point and played by the rules, the rulebook was left intact.
Are you really gonna merit a whole game experience on graphics alone?? I mean, what does that say about ps2 games last gen? Sony had the stronger library by far but hjust because generally they were graphically inferior didn't deter from the strength of the library. This of course assuming you're using that logic.
