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

Yeah sales = quality, Squilliam is right. Look, Wii Sports is the best game ever, that's the proof.



Around the Network

I disagree. I found KZ campaign boring and the characters uninteresting. I don't like the multiplayer at all, the guns have some weight to them but I don't find them enjoyable to use.

MW2 is one of my top shooters this gen, KZ2 is and average shooter with pretty graphics, physics and animation but I just didn't think the gameplay was there.



IMO MW2 > K2 multiplayer.

I still rather play K2 multiplayer. I like the whole space, aliens, futuristic shit.



Mvp4eVa said:

Call Of Duty 4 > Killzone 2 > Modern Warfare 2.

This is so right it bring's a tear to my eye :')



                            

dharh said:
coolestguyever said:
dharh said:
coolestguyever said:
What's with all the Modern Warfare 2 hate in this thread anyways?

Okay I get its kind of a noob game (noob tube, rocket launchers, etc) and campers run rampant but you can't blame IW for that; you can only blame the people playing.

IW did there best to make good maps, tons of new killstreak bonuses, some new guns, new attachments for guns, new camos, titles/emblems, prestige rewards, etc. I admit its sort of Modern Warfare 1.5 but it is a lot improved over CoD4.

I most certainly can and will blame IW for the campers. Two simple fixes would make camping useless, but i'm beginning to wonder if they are going to do it. 

Just for interests sake what are the 2 fixes? You can't just say there are 2 and then not name them. Lol

 

I'll try and think of some ideas, I have none now.

Dynamic spawn points and limited invulnerability after spawn. The dynamic spawn point is the obvious better fix as the limited invulnerability is kinda lame and old school. A third option is to create a spawn point that cannot be accessed by the enemy, but since the maps are already made this would require remaking the maps.

 

@nightsurge,

Dunno why anyone would even think of this as a possible solution. The reverse however, moving the spawnpoint (not the spawn camper), is a perfectly viable solution.

He wasn't talking about "spawn" campers.  That's an easy fix.  Even in CoD you don't see much spawn camping because the spawns are all over the place and move every time enemy players get too close.

He was talking about campers in general.  Like camping with claymores and a sniper, camping with c4 and heart beat sensors, etc.  Just plain sitting around waiting for others to come accross your traps rather than moving around finding other players.  Nothing can be done about that.



Around the Network
Carl2291 said:
Mvp4eVa said:

Call Of Duty 4 > Killzone 2 > Modern Warfare 2.

This is so right it bring's a tear to my eye :')

Lol I agree.  CoD4 just feels so much better and more skill based.  They made MW2 way too "run-and-gun" and all about no scoping.  All the weapons are way too easy to get kills with, too.



mario64 said:
Yeah sales = quality, Squilliam is right. Look, Wii Sports is the best game ever, that's the proof.

No but if two games target relatively the same market, similar critical reviews and hype (MW1 not 2) then sales are a good tie breaker especially if one sells far better than the other. But in this case I don't need sales as a tie breaker because from objective standards Modern Warfare 2 is a better game.

You can say that you prefer the weighted controls vs the quicker controls of Call of Duty, but its inarguable objectively that 60FPS whether for weighted or quicker controls is better than 30FPS. Its also inarguable that lower latency is objectively better than higher latency.



Tease.

I completely agree with the KZ2 part. I however, completely disagree with MW2 statements. I played Spec-Ops on MW2 (on 360) and it was SO BORING. The AI was flawed like crazy and gameplay just felt like shit. Played through most of the scenarios and I can say that 90% of them were pure shit! I also see someone here say KZ sacrifices gameplay for graphics and that MW2 sacrifices graphics for gameplay?? I then wonder why KZ2 runs 12 vs 12 (is it? or 16 vs 16?) and MW2 only run 6 vs 6. REALLY??!?!?! 6 vs 6??? That is a laughing matter for a 2009 game, which also is praised all over as the definite online FPS. I must say, I find KZ2 way more deep than MW2 could ever be. Pure run and gun noob fest is not deep. Maybe MW2's maps are a bit better, but they are still a BIG STEP DOWN from old IW standards. I also think that the dynamic flow of KZ2's gameplay modes is much better than just playing a game of TDM or Capture the Object, Headquarters or whatever.

KZ2 is a much better game. I don't care about opinions of the masses.. I see someone here say that when 2 games cater to almost the same demography, sales can help us find out which is the better game?? Well, I guess you feel the same way with music, movies and other forms of entertainment?? That's why you (or your kids) listen to Britney Spears and all those other MTV artists and recognize their incredible talent right? That's also why you (or your kids) are following Hannah Montana and High School Musical and recognize the talent behind these shows/movies right? Because sales = quality, right???

and lol ye, MW2 has much better and more stable latency than KZ2 right?!?! Don't make me laugh so hard please.....



I find the controls and gameplay of Killzone too slow and clunky. Also the graphics are overrated. Technically they are a great accomplishment but some of the texture work is very bland and since it's really pushing the power of the PS3 it's probe to a lot of frame rate dips. And I hate Rico.

So for me at least MW2 is better to look at, has much better frame rate and the controls are much more precise.



I have spent pretty much as much time playing MW2 since it came out, as I have since KZ2 came out. That being said, I think I am done with MW2 now and probably won't go back to it for a long long time. I will still keep playing KZ2 though.