Slashdot Mirror
Killzone 2 Back in Action
After a bout of radio silence, yesterday Sony unveiled Killzone 2 as it stands today. Those attending the event seem duly impressed. Eurogamer's Tom Bramwell points out that the level of cynicism has been set quite high, after the pre-rendered 2005 trailer prompted a lot of hard feelings among journalists. Just the same, Susan Arendt of Game|Life is of the opinion that the wait was worth it: "Most of the action we saw was basic run-and gun--working your way up and down, through the buildings of the city to reach various checkpoints. We saw a fight with a mini-boss that was relatively unremarkable, but it did at least end with a fairly satisfying 'boom.' The level culminated with the destruction of an arc weapon--basically an antenna that draws electricity from lightning and releases it to destroy troops ... Killzone 2 is loud, dirty, and violently elegant. If you have a PS3, you're going to want this game. If you don't have a PS3 you might have to figure out how you're going to get one." For more details, check out the Killzone 2 trailer Sony has released as well as the quick Q&A on the game at PS3 Fanboy.
Killzone (1) really, really sucked. It's beyond me how anyone could get excited for a sequel to such a shitty game.
I admit to being a Sony semi-fanboy, but what I saw in the Killzone 2 video was AMAZING. This is why Sony put the Cell processor into the PS3. The graphics are better than any shooter I've ever seen. Killzone 2 will sell millions of PS3s on its own when it ships, the game looks that good.
that Sony/PS3 get for everything it seems these days, and the millions of Xbots, bloggers and even proper news sites, that will gun down everything Sony does, or spind things in a negative way, the fact they all came away saying great things about Killzone 2, means that, for a rational gamer, without Sony hate blurring things, this is some seriously impressive stuff.
Review : It's generic, you just shoot shit and it's got loud sound.
Review conclusion : YOU MUST BUY THIS GAME! IT IS BEST GAME EVER!!!
Excuse me while I work out what the fuck is going on with these guys. Why would a generic, shoot 'em up be a must buy when it's being labeled as a generic shoot 'em up with no real originality or redeemable qualities at all?
Game journalism, because Mario didn't make sense either.
I like muppets.
I'm still not willing to take that as the actual graphics till I see someone playing it on a box attached to a HiDef Screen. Trailers, even ones with "gameplay" footage can be very misleading.
Still as an xbox owner I am rather impressed, and competition between the companies is a good thing.
You mad
is this sony's secret weapon to save the ps3?
If you don't have a PS3 you might have to figure out how you're going to get one.
Um, walk into a store, grab one of the shelf, proceed to checkout counter, pay?
More Twoson than Cupertino
The big question is: will these cutting-edge graphics still be cutting-edge on newer PS3s that, under Sony's cost-cutting measures, have had hardware components removed in favor of software emulation? Do any of the review sites have these versions of the console?
"We saw a fight with a mini-boss that was relatively unremarkable,"
Ya not a good first impression
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Ok so... that was one of the most nonsense reviews of a supposedly "AAA" title I've read in some time. The wait was worth it for a "fairly linear... basic run and gun... mini boss that was quite unremarkable..." ????? If that's all it takes PS3 owners to get super-excited about a game, then things are grim indeed.
It's a generic shooter with a fittingly generic name. Even the "favorable" review manages to make this painfully obvious.
I like basketball!!1!
Has it been rated yet? It would be quite interesting if this were rated AO.
What is the real difference between playing a game that has the sole purpose of killing a bunch of people a game that has the sole purpose of killing a bunch of people in a different country? Someone recently joked that Manhunt should have stated that the people were terrorists, and they'd have been okay on rating.
For my money, a game that attempts to realistically recreate the experience of war -should- be Adult Only, as real adults don't even fair all that well for the real experience. (Mental trauma is almost unavoidable when taking someone's life.)
It's too bad the ESRB doesn't have to stated exactly why they chose the rating they did, because we'd soon know if they chose AO out of spite or because it genuinely warranted it.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Whats with all the brown, killzone? I know there are an infinite number of shades of brown and grey, but certainly you could use some other colors. Some of us yearn for bright, exciting colours in videogames.
Its like everything in killzone is filtered through a poop-lens so everything gets a dirty brown tint.
"We've captured things like muzzle flashes, reloads, and how a weapon feels and reacts in your hand. We want it to be as realistic as possible."
Everything except for actual damage, presumably. Show me a level where someone gets shot in the foot and limps for the rest of the level, and I'll be impressed. How about head-shots that actually kill or incapacitate an enemy?
I'm also pig-sick of 'futuristic' shooters where the available weaponry for 90% of the game is a pistol, a shotgun and an assault rifle. Where's the gauss-rifles, the beam weapons, the wire-guns, the imagination?
But hey, why bother, when you can churn out another corridor run'n'gun game, but with more polygons. 'Cause that makes everything better, right?
I just watched the trailer, I was not impressed.
It just looks like another FPS.
If they are going to make FPSes on consoles, there needs to be a keyboard and mouse adapter, I'm tired of trying to play games like this with a controller.
I hooked my computer up to my HDTV, and I have my fill of FPSes that way. Theres no reason to buy a game like this when I have countless other FPSes that are amazing on my computer.
I remember when Killzone was touted as PS2's Halo-killer, but when I watched the intro and saw him fight in one of the levels, I found it to be another cookie-cutter shoot-em'-up with the same trench-based battles, running n' gunning, and post-apocalyptic scenario that every other shooter on the PS2 had. Best cheesy line? "What the f---'s a Shakespeare?" At this point I realized Killzone was ripping off Battlefield Earth, and anyone desperate to ripoff that storyline - whether it be the film or the novel the film was based upon - should consider a creative writing course at their local community college.
It seems like once Halo and Halo 2 (and now the upcoming Halo 3) came out, everybody and their grandmother wanted to release a FPS to cash in on the hype. It's a shameless attempt at earning "easy money" through derivative, overused game design and unimaginative storytelling. The most unfortunate problem with this is the fact that this is the state of the video game industry at present. Everyone wants to stick with what's safe, nobody wants to do anything unique or imaginative.
Don't even make me go into bitching about the title. "Killzone"? How about "Place where you blow stuff up real pretty?" Pardon the cynicism, I just can't stand how easy it is for people to get into this industry with such severe lack of imagination.
I might be in the minority here, but I'm not a huge gamer. I didn't grow up with Nintendo or Sega, I'm not a Counterstrike master, I prefer Bejewled to Tetris, I never played Duke Nukem or DOOM or Myst. That said, I've always found the Killzone games irresistably attractive due to their Saving Private Ryan-esque, post-apocalyptic, frantic atmosphere, the sweeping environments and orchestral score, the sound work, the surreal environments, and most importantly, the Helghast, who are so frighteningly sinister and menacing that I enjoy the game most when I'm inflicting the most painful death possible on them. The whole franchise is like an interactive sci-fi action movie. It's not groundbreaking, it's not revolutionary, it doesn't draw me in. It's something I can sit down and enjoy after a frustrating day at work, something I can fire up when friends are over and there's nothing on HBO.
Why isn't Sony catering to people like me? I don't give a shit about the next gaming revolution, I want a centralized, versatile media center with stuff I can play with, listen to, watch, and hack. If they just laid off the overly aggressive DRM, worked in tandem with the movie and music industry to implement a cheap, online distribution model, pumped out more games like Killzone and Assassin's Creed and brought down the price a little, I would be out the door right now and taking the weekend off.
These claims of Nintendo and Microsoft dominating the "casual userbase" are overstated, I think. I have no desire to play Resident Evil 4, neither does my grandmother. So are the arguments that game consoles shouldn't be used as media platforms. I'm sure there are countless people out there like me, and it's sad that Sony is skimping on so many little things. Everything is in place. The hardware is there, the market is there, the potential is there. Why can't Sony just go the extra mile?
Damn, I can't believe I'm seriously considering buying a PS3.
To sum up so far, Nintendo is just now catching up with 2002 in terms of online gaming, otherwise a GIGANTIC snooze fest.
That's pretty ironic since the X-Box seller at this point is pretty much Gears of War and the upcoming Halo 3.
Gears of War actually has quite innovative gameplay. It doesn't feel at all like a "typical shooter." As for Halo, it is less innovative than Gears in ways but it also has a legacy that far precedes Killzone, let alone notions of a "typical shooter."
I like basketball!!1!
I've never been a big fan of FPS games on consoles because their gameplay simply isn't suited for a gamepad controller, not in my hands anyways. So the first, and only, console FPS that really did something for me was Gears of War - which I hoped would spark a trend in Console FPS games. Well it sure doesn't look like Sony has picked up on that yet, because it sure seems like Killzone 2 will be doing every single mistake in terms of gameplay that puts me off the gameplay.
The poly count was up real nice, but there were some serious design problems apparent in that trailer. First is character design, or lack thereof - the captain in particular seems like he was just slapped with a generic Video Game Face - which looks as awkward and plasticy as, for example, the faces on the "extras" in the new Harry Potter game. Then there's the animation; it's stiff, awkward, mechanical and overdone; very fake-looking. The animation for me ruins the cinematic feel of the trailer more than anything else. The sets are really generic and even the futuristic bouncy flycars manage to seem boring.
And then, of course, there's the sound balance, which suffers in a lot of games. Developers, listen to me: your game needs professional, competent sound mixing. Otherwise all the money you spent recording dialogue and music is going to be wasted when the player has to turn on subtitles just to figure out what the hell is going on.