*** Killzone 2 Review Thread ***

Yeah, Maxim's opinion matters the most to me, IMO. They definitely know better.
 
How can you be skeptical at this point?

Every review is a rave.

Well, for one, I don't completely discount reviews all together or anything, but I've been burned by rave reviews on a game before. See Halo.

Secondly, the first Killzone was mediocre at best and it's not like the developers behind have ever really done anything all that good.

So yes, reviews aside, I'm still very skeptical of how good this is really going to end of being and probably will be until I actually sit down and play the game.

I admit I think the game does look great and overall looks like they got it right this time around, but I have made that mistake before. Once again, see Halo
 
Well, for one, I don't completely discount reviews all together or anything, but I've been burned by rave reviews on a game before. See Halo.

Secondly, the first Killzone was mediocre at best and it's not like the developers behind have ever really done anything all that good.

So yes, reviews aside, I'm still very skeptical of how good this is really going to end of being and probably will be until I actually sit down and play the game.

I admit I think the game does look great and overall looks like they got it right this time around, but I have made that mistake before. Once again, see Halo

The team that devloped Killzone and the team developing Killzone 2 are VERY different. It is still Guerilla Games, but the team is different. The same people are on, but the main difference is that the team working on Killzone 2 has a massive budget, top notch quality tools given to them by Sony, and a gigantic development team with many more people from Killzone's. Also remember that Killzone was their first attempt at developing a game, so there were bound to be flaws.

Killzone 1 suffered from the lack of power of the PS2 and lack of funding. Killzone 2 is not suffering from any of this, and Killzone Liberation was quite good.

Everybody who played the Beta loved it. All reputable reviewers are praising it. You can see for yourself the time and effort put into the game. There is NO way it can fail.

And Halo 3 IMO is a very good game, one which I intend to purchase for my 360 when I buy it in a few months. Perhaps not worth waiting 17 hours in line for, but a very solid game none-the-less.
 
Last edited:
The team that devloped Killzone and the team developing Killzone 2 are VERY different. It is still Guerilla Games, but the team is different. The same people are on, but the main difference is that the team working on Killzone 2 has a massive budget, top notch quality tools given to them by Sony, and a gigantic development team with many more people from Killzone's. Also remember that Killzone was their first attempt at developing a game, so there were bound to be flaws.

Killzone 1 suffered from the lack of power of the PS2 and lack of funding. Killzone 2 is not suffering from any of this, and Killzone Liberation was quite good.

Everybody who played the Beta loved it. All reputable reviewers are praising it. You can see for yourself the time and effort put into the game. There is NO way it can fail.

And Halo 3 IMO is a very good game, one which I intend to purchase for my 360 when I buy it in a few months. Perhaps not worth waiting 17 hours in line for, but a very solid game none-the-less.

I did not know that about the team change, I didn't think the company was big enough to have multiple teams honestly.

I wasn't just talking about Halo 3, I was talking about Halo in general, but I guess the first game if you want a direct reference. I heard ungodly good things about that game from players and critics alike and I found it to be ok at best.

I'm not trying to bash KZ2 or anything, but I'm still skeptical
 
Gamesradar just posted an article about "What the reviews will say".
It´s not a review, and it all comes down to how do you regard Gamesradar, but knowning Guerilla, i believe it to be more or less accurated.
They say they played the first 5 levels, and it´s a solid FPS, just not the masterpiece everyone is talking about.
The action in the levels they played wasn’t earth-shattering or even consistently exciting. But, with satisfying weapons, rewarding shooting mechanics and a rich atmosphere, we can still see this making a bang with PS3 owners.
They list the good and not so good things about it:

What the reviews will like
Graphics ****es will love it
Whether it’s the brooding oppression brought by the lightning-scorched sky, the impressive smoke and dust effects or the startling enemy animation; the game is sometimes jarringly bleak but always darkly beautiful… but it’s still a bit brown.

The cover system works brilliantly
It’s definitely the game’s most successful mechanic. Similar to the system used in PC shooter FEAR, it works by holding L2 while pressed up against objects in the environment and then peering over or around to shoot things with the analogue stick and R2. Hiding behind cover and popping up to bring the hurt to the Helghast reminds us of playing a particularly bleak version of Time Crisis. And it provides a welcome tactical and methodical edge to Killzone’s firefights.

The motion controls don’t feel forced
Yep, as hard as it is to believe that statement, the motion controls in the game work fairly well. They’re simple and feel pleasingly responsive, reminding us of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption’s excellent switch flipping sections.

It’s got a brilliant flamethrower
Better than the one in Halo 3 or Dead Space or any game we can think of actually, Guerrilla’s flame-grilling weapon extraordinaire is perfect for barbecuing baddies. It’s not only fun to see the Helghast burn like evil s’mores, but the gun’s rapid, incisive flames and impressive range makes it consistently engaging to fire.

The viewpoint is incredibly immersive
From the reload animations, the way your gun rests on obstacles - rather than passing through them - or the way your hands desperately cling onto the rungs of ladders, you always feel like you’re in the shoes of an actual person, rather than a disembodied gun.

What the reviews won´t like
The objectives
Blow up communication towers, plant explosive charges, defend Johnny Useless team-mate, Guerrilla have more brutally killed the box rather than thought outside it for most of the game’s objectives.

The level design
While levels are fairly linear in the way they’re laid out, usually offering clear, channelled progression, we still got lost quite a bit. Pressing up on the d-pad points you in the right direction, but, if level design were clearer, you’d naturally know where to go.

Your AI team-mates
Aside from enjoying running in front of your gun, getting shot and needing to be constantly revived, your team-mates constantly grate by dropping relentlessly tiresome F bombs

A lack of memorable set pieces
The first five levels feel like a bit of a slog at times, with many trench fights or pitched battles in city squares. The pacing just can’t match something like Half-Life 2 and, as a result, the action gets tedious at times.

It’s very ‘gamey’
Many battles with the Helghast end with you having to trigger some sort of event - like having to walk to a certain point to activate a new stream of enemies or a new setpiece. It’s all a bit entrenched in contrived game logic. That, and the story is a load of clichéd sci-fi pap.

http://www.gamesradar.com/f/killzone-2-what-the-reviews-will-say/a-2009010616181421045
 
Isildur´s Heir;16337034 said:
Gamesradar just posted an article about "What the reviews will say".
It´s not a review, and it all comes down to how do you regard Gamesradar, but knowning Guerilla, i believe it to be more or less accurated.
They say they played the first 5 levels, and it´s a solid FPS, just not the masterpiece everyone is talking about.
The action in the levels they played wasn’t earth-shattering or even consistently exciting. But, with satisfying weapons, rewarding shooting mechanics and a rich atmosphere, we can still see this making a bang with PS3 owners.
They list the good and not so good things about it:

What the reviews will like
Graphics ****es will love it
Whether it’s the brooding oppression brought by the lightning-scorched sky, the impressive smoke and dust effects or the startling enemy animation; the game is sometimes jarringly bleak but always darkly beautiful… but it’s still a bit brown.

The cover system works brilliantly
It’s definitely the game’s most successful mechanic. Similar to the system used in PC shooter FEAR, it works by holding L2 while pressed up against objects in the environment and then peering over or around to shoot things with the analogue stick and R2. Hiding behind cover and popping up to bring the hurt to the Helghast reminds us of playing a particularly bleak version of Time Crisis. And it provides a welcome tactical and methodical edge to Killzone’s firefights.

The motion controls don’t feel forced
Yep, as hard as it is to believe that statement, the motion controls in the game work fairly well. They’re simple and feel pleasingly responsive, reminding us of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption’s excellent switch flipping sections.

It’s got a brilliant flamethrower
Better than the one in Halo 3 or Dead Space or any game we can think of actually, Guerrilla’s flame-grilling weapon extraordinaire is perfect for barbecuing baddies. It’s not only fun to see the Helghast burn like evil s’mores, but the gun’s rapid, incisive flames and impressive range makes it consistently engaging to fire.

The viewpoint is incredibly immersive
From the reload animations, the way your gun rests on obstacles - rather than passing through them - or the way your hands desperately cling onto the rungs of ladders, you always feel like you’re in the shoes of an actual person, rather than a disembodied gun.

What the reviews won´t like
The objectives
Blow up communication towers, plant explosive charges, defend Johnny Useless team-mate, Guerrilla have more brutally killed the box rather than thought outside it for most of the game’s objectives.

The level design
While levels are fairly linear in the way they’re laid out, usually offering clear, channelled progression, we still got lost quite a bit. Pressing up on the d-pad points you in the right direction, but, if level design were clearer, you’d naturally know where to go.

Your AI team-mates
Aside from enjoying running in front of your gun, getting shot and needing to be constantly revived, your team-mates constantly grate by dropping relentlessly tiresome F bombs

A lack of memorable set pieces
The first five levels feel like a bit of a slog at times, with many trench fights or pitched battles in city squares. The pacing just can’t match something like Half-Life 2 and, as a result, the action gets tedious at times.

It’s very ‘gamey’
Many battles with the Helghast end with you having to trigger some sort of event - like having to walk to a certain point to activate a new stream of enemies or a new setpiece. It’s all a bit entrenched in contrived game logic. That, and the story is a load of clichéd sci-fi pap.

http://www.gamesradar.com/f/killzone-2-what-the-reviews-will-say/a-2009010616181421045

Gamesradar has always been anti-Killzone 2. Always, and it seems like they've tried to back-track and change their style. They've received a lot of criticism for it too, here's a something that may show you why:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14375076&postcount=15542

Read from this link and you will see why they have no credibility. "It's too gamey?" What the *** does that mean? No **** it feels gamey, maybe it's because, uh, it's a game?

They are only praising it now because they were called on their fanboyism and ridiculed.

I am not simply disregarding any criticizm of Killzone 2, but I disregard any source that doesn't even try to hide its fanboyism.
 
Gamesradar has always been anti-Killzone 2. Always, and it seems like they've tried to back-track and change their style. They've received a lot of criticism for it too, here's a something that may show you why:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14375076&postcount=15542

Read from this link and you will see why they have no credibility. "It's too gamey?" What the *** does that mean? No **** it feels gamey, maybe it's because, uh, it's a game?

They are only praising it now because they were called on their fanboyism and ridiculed.

I am not simply disregarding any criticizm of Killzone 2, but I disregard any source that doesn't even try to hide its fanboyism.
ok, i didn´t knew that, but, then again, they say it´s a solid FPS and praise the weapons, cover system and whatnot.
Even if they changed it because of being called fanboys, it might be truthful nontheless.
I find it weird how could Guerrilla, a so far mediocre developer, make a game that surpasses the best of it´s kind from the likes of Epic and Valve.
I believe it will be a very good game, much better than the first, but i find it hard to believe in the masterpiece everyone i talking about.
The article is more or less what i was expecting from Guerrilla...so, it might be accurated....
 
Isildur´s Heir;16337391 said:
ok, i didn´t knew that, but, then again, they say it´s a solid FPS and praise the weapons, cover system and whatnot.
Even if they changed it because of being called fanboys, it might be truthful nontheless.
I find it weird how could Guerrilla, a so far mediocre developer, make a game that surpasses the best of it´s kind from the likes of Epic and Valve.
I believe it will be a very good game, much better than the first, but i find it hard to believe in the masterpiece everyone i talking about.
The article is more or less what i was expecting from Guerrilla...so, it might be accurated....

Simple, they've had 5 years of developing time, wheelbarrows of money, top of the line equipment provided to them by Sony and a much larger team than they had for Shellshocked or both Killzone games. Essentially, most of the base team is still a part of Guerilla but there is also a lot more people working on it as well as outsourcing certain parts to specialists. For example, they outsourced the AI to a specialist, and by all accounts the enemy A.I. is outstanding.

I've already outlined this in one of my posts above. Every single person who has played the game has objectively said it is outstanding and the best console shooter out so far.

They complain about it being too linear, but then go and basically call Gears of War 2 the second coming of Christ (hard to get more linear than Gears of War 2). Hell, Bioshock was linear and that game was outstanding. It does not bother me at all.

The knifing thing they claimed in one of their articles is also pointless too, as it is impossible to do that in any of the harder settings nor is it possible past the first few levels doing that.

The rest of the "issues" they've cited are very minor. If this is all they can come up with, then the game is probably outstanding. It's interesting how other games like Gears and Halo aren't criticized for the same things too - hell in Gears of War half the time your teamates just hide in a corner.
 
Last edited:
They complain about it being too linear, but then go and basically call Gears of War 2 the second coming of Christ (hard to get more linear than Gears of War 2). Hell, Bioshock was linear and that game was outstanding. It does not bother me at all.
Not to mention, single player is just one small aspect of the game. CoD4 also had a very short linear campaign and it remains my favorite FPS. Multiplayer, I hear is where this truly shines (as was also the case for CoD4 for me), and I dont think any reviewers have gotten their hands on a final build of it, but what little bit was released before in the beta, has recieved tons of praise as well. Hopefully the demo released next week contains both single and multiplayer portions
 
There should be a bunch of new reviews tomorrow. The embargo is being lifted.
 
I'm excited to see what some of the big names say about it.

I am predicting the obvious, that Eurogamer(5pm GMT/Thursday) and Edge will give it 8's.:whatever:
 
Last edited:
Edge are a bunch of upthemselves idiots. They're the only reviewer that I don't take the opinion of on board.

I like GamesRadar though. :(
 
I usually prefer IGN bc their reviews most often tend to fall in line with my own opinions. Plus they are lengthy enough to give good insights to why they like or dislike a game. I hate reviews that rag on a game without backing it up
 
Eurogamer gave it a 9/10, Eurogamer Spain and Portugal both gave it a 10/10.

IGN US gave it a 9.4 and IGN AU gave it a 9/10.

Still so far no legitimate reviews under a 9.
 
Wow! Great reviews so far.
On a side note, great job on keeping this thread updated Phallic! :up:
 
9.4!?! F--king YES IGN!!! :D :D

This game has greatness confirmed!
 
Holy ****, it looks like all this hype wasn't just Sony score padding afterall.

Still skeptical, but I'm hoping this isn't Halo all over again
 
I have officially been KILLZOWNED by all of these awesome reviews lol, man I can't wait to play it!!!:D:up: We can form an SHH clan and call it "The Guardian's Slaves," what??? Wait, wait come on guys I was only kidding, no no please not the jewels AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH *gets pummeled by SHH crew*!!!:mad::oldrazz::D
 
Great news from IGN bc like I said, I tend to look at their reviews more than anyone else
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"