game wasn't accessible. if it was then sales would be double what they are now. Hardcore titles like killzone never sell cod or halo numbers. It was GG decision to make a game that not everyone will get into, some loved it most hated it. That's just the way the world is, the big question is will they do the same for killzone 3, seeing how they drastically changed killzone 2.

It was a pretty, but standard FPS game.

I played it with my friend (PS3 owner). We both agreed it would be hard to make a more generic shooter.

The eye candy was really nice but IMHO it served as a necessary tech demo of what the PS3 was capable of and paved the way for later games which took advantage of the cell.

in no way shape of form can you compare halo and killzone, 1st party fps titles are where the comparasions end. To compare a game they have to be the same, gameplay, target audience, multiplayer set up, etc. and killzone has nothing similar to halo.

Halo plays like a classic fps, weapons and perks are pick-ups, halo is accessible, it has vehicles, and much larger maps, weapons are futuristic (lazers, etc) characters are extremely unrealistic (20 foot high jumps, full health regen, take a lot to kill) enemies are clerly aliens, nothing is realistic, very bright vibrant, multiplayer isn't classed based, and there is no emphsis on teamwork, tactics, stragey, etc.

Now take killzone, dark gritty, not accessible, classed based, warzone last 3x alongf as a halo match, high emphsis on teamwork, strategy, tactics, realistic at it's core, no over the top aliens, weapons grounded in reality, gameplay realistic, no vehicles. 

the games are near polar opposites. you can argue what Sony wanted, but Guerrilla sure didn't have halo anywhere in their heads when developing killzone 2. Same however can't be said for resistance.

but mabey your right and mabey that's why killzone didn't do well, people were expecting sony's halo (literally) and got something totally different, and if that's the case then it just wasn't very fair for killzone 2 imo

And that doesn't explain why other standard yet condiserably less pretty shooters are outselling it on a weekly basis, one of which is over 3 years old.

Remember that this topic is first and foremost about the game's sales, and not its quality.

Both Resistance games have coop/split-screen, maybe that has something to do with it?

Yeah that is a tough one to explain. Maybe its expectation weighed heavy on it.

Maybe people got to play a demo and thought the same as my friend and I.

Maybe people bought second hand. I bought my friends copy for him as a present for just 15 USD second hand.

These sales do not register.

Come to think of it that might be the main reason as there were several copies of KZ2 available second hand for the same price.

I think the main thing, as others have noted, is that KZ2:

1 - is the second title in a franchise thought to be weak, it also didn't make its debut on PS3 so was easy in a sense to ignore if you were of the view from KZ that it wouldn't be good. Resistance, etc. started on the PS3

2 - it was perhaps too different with regards to controls and how easy it was to 'pick up and get into' online. I liked this, but clearly we are seeing that the big numbers are for casual titles - for example I see MW2 as a casual title. Fun, easy to play, easy to feel good in, allows for people to genuinely get good, but really the focus is on short, fast rounds in small maps.

3 - it is an FPS on a console who has a competitor where FPS sell better. In the end all the exclusive FPS are there to satisfy a need to have such titles, much as 360 has exclusive titles in genres that sell better on other consoles. As such it always had a glass ceiling.


Mostly due to 3 I have no doubt there will be KZ3. In some ways such titles (in terms of point 3) are loss leaders for Sony/MS, and aren't subject to normal sales expectations in terms of being profitable or receiving a sequel.

With KZ2, due to good reviews and solid sales, I think the groundwork is there for KZ3 to sell better. But unless they ease back a little on some of the unique aspects (hopefully not too much) then I think it may always been seen as the 'difficult' FPS to get into vs say Resistance or titles like CoD and BF.

And I heared that KZ2 wasnt as expensive as many people thought it was somewhere between 20-30 Million:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3155511

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killzone_2 (over 20 Million Dollar under production)

Just to mention Crysis 1 cost just 20 Million Euro. I dont think that HD game development is as costly as some people say thats the reason why Developers are satisfied with HD games sales. 

And Sony games have to sell less to break even because they dont have to pay fees to themselfes. Kz2 was profitable. Like most HD games if a game like GT5 cost as much as Shenmue (60 Mln). I think most of the HD games are actually profitable. Kz2 offers also multiplayer maps and a lot of people have them because the multiplayer maps are as full as the normal maps . 

They are satisfied with the sales because KZ1 sold just 750k Kz2 tripled this the break even happened probably months ago. Maybe even in the first month. No company plans a game to sell 4 times or even 5 times as much as the precedessor so you can be sure they spend not too much money for it.

To Op

The Game sold 2.2 Million yet and will probably reach 2.5 Million LTD. Sales will pick up again. The market is flooded with FPS so it can happen that a game has a weak period.

For the casual audience:

1. Too dark, they don't like games where they can't see anything.

2. The game isn't as pick up and play as other titles.

3. No local multiplayer makes it a harder sell vs games which have this feature.

4. Much of this audience doesn't buy games too soon after each other and it came too soon after Call of Duty 5.

5. Casuals probably didn't rate the graphics as highly nor is it as important to them.

For the hardcore audience:

1. The multiplayer class system / online was a little borked, for example there was a limited number of spawn grenades, turrets etc so if you shared the same class as too many others you couldn't perform the role.

2. The controls were dissatisfying, I heard talk of latency but I dunno about the relationship there.

3. The storyline wasn't particularly brilliant and it had very unlikeable characters, this is generally enough to get a movie rated down for example.

4. Rated highly for graphics, which means gameplay wise its probably mid 80s like RFOM2.

5. The gameplay was a little off and lacked the class of gameplay design that other highly ranked shooters have, it made a lot of little errors which the reviewers wouldn't generally pick up on.

This is my assessment as to why the sales have pretty much died on this game.

Like a few said, real world hype > internet hype.


I've showed the game to a few friends. Pretty much all of them just couldn't get used to the controls. I personally have played/loved tons of shooters on both pc and console and I'll admit, the movement in KZ2 can be frustrating at times. It was a really poor design choice by GG. They could've made the game more tactical/"hardcore" by doing other things but instead they gimped the player's controls to the point where tons of people find it annoying.

Besides that, the graphics are doing nothing for the game. KZ2's hyped was mainly based on it's visuals, but in the end, people don't want a tech demo. They want a video game to play for fun. Games like MW2/Halo3 are known for having in-depth features that keep the game interesting for ages. When a game is known specifically for having amazing graphics, you can expect it to be dethroned and forgotten when the next graphical beast arrives. In this case, it was Uncharted 2, and many would agree that the campaign is so far ahead of KZ2's. And for the multiplayer fix, MW2 tops it with way more variety/features, along with splitscreen which is definitely awesome when you got some peeps over. It's expected that MW2/U2 have KZ2 beat.

Seriously though, I'm sure everyone remembers the masses of threads complaining about the controls/movement. Now imagine how casual gamers feel about it - you can expect them to drop the controller after a short while.

KZ2 does have it's good points but for me personally, there's not much in it to keep me hooked. In the beginning, the 16v16 really got my attention, then I realized how much of a clusterf*** it can be.