Review: Killzone 2
It’s a first folks! It’ll be a first for the internet! I will be bombarded by Killzone fanatics, FPS fanatics and PS3 fanatics telling me I have no skill in first person shooters, am gay and that they had sex with my mother. Because I am apparently the only one throughout the entire internet who thinks this. Get ready for it. Are you ready? Brace yourself … Killzone 2 sucks … bad.
If there was ever a game to use as an example of, “Rent before you buy,” this is it. I’m going say before I start the review that this review is based more on personal opinion rather than a personal viewpoint if that makes sense. I try to give a game an equal pro and con when reviewing and take my experience out of the element to hopefully give a more equal review when people read it. In other words, I don’t sweeten it up because I like it … I try to review as fair as I can.
But I can’t do that for this game merely because my personal experience is why I stopped playing it and sold it on eBay. It was either that, or I was going to shatter the disc. I was going to lose either way, so I might as well get some of my money back for it.
My actual review is after the jump but if you just want to read this blurb then read this: It took about four days to make me think it … but seven day for me to know 100% that this game was a complete waste of $60.
Okay, I lied … I have more to say before I start … the hype for this game was GREATLY exaggerated. I don’t know why this game got such great reviews and talked about how multiplayer was this great, in-depth, revolutionary system that was going to rock the socks off all the gamers. Truth is, they only said that because this is a big-name title … like Mario, Halo, Zelda. If this exact multiplayer style was tacked onto a lesser-known game … it would have gotten “meh” comments. The reviews this game got are equivalent to teenage girls screaming over the Backstreet boys. They think it’s great … but in all reality, it’s crap.
The first impressions give the game a great look to it – and that’s because the game is great looking. Everything looks polished in a rather grim environment. The way the characters move is pretty neat to see because as you move everything kind of blurs, but when you stop it is nice, clear and sharp. Some people say the graphics aren’t all that great, but they are noticeable … so I give Killzone 2 credit for that.
But that’s about all I can give credit for – after about the third level, the game felt more like a chore rather than an enjoyable experience. The tough AI with the tough environments made the game frustrating pretty early. It’s not that the environments were rough to deal with, but your opportunity to shoot the enemies without getting shot at was small, and the enemies were so well guarded by the environment that you had to be extra careful that you didn’t overshoot by a smidge. On top of that, eventually the enemies came after you. It’s nice to know that they had the ability to take a lot of gunfire, but the concept of you running at them and killing them would be stupid, because you’d be dead within seconds.
And despite the fact that you were able to heal your partners in the midst of battle, they wouldn’t heal you. So when they are about to die, you feel obligated to heal them … but when you fall in battle they don’t help you out at all – infact they’re still yelling out orders to you. I understand that they gun for realism and they try this by making you feel obligated to heal your teammates … but when they don’t heal you … it doesn’t feel very real.
The controls eventually became a hassle to me. Mainly the method of aiming was such a pain because it’s hard to pinpoint your crosshair on your enemies. Stack on top of that the fact that when they move you have to reaim again, plus when you shoot – even short bursts – your crosshair drops off it’s target because of recoil and you have to reaim yet again. So I felt like I had to fire one bullet at a time to maintain my accuracy.
I would also find it frustrating that even when I threw grenades into rooms and shot at the enemies in the room, I was still met with gunfire/death when I entered in because I didn’t get them all … despite the fact that I had thrown two grenades in the room prior to unloading clips into the enemies. Then, when you’re last and only hope is to use your melee attacks to shoot that close soldier, you’re hitting your melee button and not even knowing if you’re hitting the enemy. It’s all very “I hope I get them” instead of having a form of assurance that you’re killing them if that makes sense. It was a scenario like this that made me lose my temper because I couldn’t help but feel like the odds were stacked against me in unfair ways … how can soldiers survive numerous gunfire, grenades and melee attacks? Common sense would tell you that it’s not possible … but one theme you’ll notice throughout my review is a lack of common sense in this game.
I’ll also point out that during that time, my “Bloodspatter Indicator” which is supposed to tell me which direction I’m getting hit was also telling me that I was getting hit from behind. Problem was that I was the only one in the room. So either I’m getting hit by gunfire that can magically go through walls … or the game was mistaken which helped really set the tone for me that this games methods were unfair. A tone that became clear during its online multiplayer.
The game would maintain a rather high level of difficulty throughout the game, but would peak – obviously – at the end. It’s an “all or nothing” level where your team is running into the heart of your enemies’ territory. What you’re dealt with is a infinite amount of enemies that will continuously be there for you to shoot down. The game won’t mention the fact that half of the level involves you running towards your goal instead of gunning your way there. Sure, you’ll hear the Helghast say they’re running out of reserves, giving you the false impression that soon they’ll all be dead and you can move on … but they’ll just keep coming. Not only is that pretty stupid, but it also means that you have to bolt towards your goal and hope you don’t die. if you would have gunned your way through, you would eventually be surrounded and killed.
The frustrations grow because near the very end of the game you’re in a room with two floors and you have enemies coming from almost all directions … and with little cover and enemies shooting missiles at you – your chance for survival isn’t really based on skill, but luck. Oh, and during this time you have to keep healing your other partner … but again, he won’t help you. You die, you die … He “dies”, you revive him. Very fair. Again, common sense would tell us that he would help you if you fall in battle … but it doesn’t and he doesn’t.
Once you did clear the game, you do have a feeling of accomplishment, but that’s only because you were able to survive against huge odds at a difficult and fast pace. I especially had a feeling of accomplishment because that last level took about 2 hours for me to complete … and half of that was gunning down the infinite army that I thought would eventually clear out.
So the single player mode was difficult, but tolerable. I had originally planned on going through it again and getting all the unlockables but that was all squashed by the famous/”in-depth” multiplayer.
Here is where I get really bitter … the in-depth multiplayer isn’t in-depth at all. You level up by going through matches and getting kills. Again, this method pits you against your team and your enemies in order to get the most points. The classes that are unlocked seem like they’d be a great idea, but they are squashed by their ineffectiveness or uselessnes. Take the medic for example … he can heal fallen soldiers … but you have 10 seconds to revive them and on top of that, it’s only beneficial if all of the opposing forces have been eliminated. Revive them in the middle of a battle and they’ll just die again. So you have to kill your opponents, switch to the revival tool and aim at your fallen comrade in 10 seconds or you can’t revive them. And when you have people saying over headset, “Medics, don’t revive me,” then that tells us that the system must not be all that great if people would rather respawn than be revived. Yikes. The medics other option is a health pack, which medics just throw on the ground … no indicators or anything that they’re dropped so you better hope that anyone who needs healing sees it because unless you throw it right at someone … it’ll most likely lay there and eventually disappear.
Engineers are nice because they can build turrets that can automatically fire at enemies. That’d be great and effective and all, but they’re easy to destroy and can block passages. On top of that, the game only allows a total of our turrets per team. So if you have six engineers, not everyone will be able to drop a turret … only four would. This is why out of nowhere, I’d have an option to drop a turret, then I wouldn’t. So when you’re aiming for that ribbon that you get by having your turrets kill five people – hope that no one else on your 32-man crew is an engineer or else you’re really limited.
Tacticians can drop spawn points. Nice feature there, and it’s easy to get your secondary ability, which is air support. But like turrets, they’re easy to drop and don’t seem to be very effective with. I ended up saying, “why?” when thinking about using this class because when you’re still trying to level up, it doesn’t help when the class’s chances of getting points rest solely on you gunning your opponents down.
Assault is more of a tank/missile carrier. They say that they have more armor, hence more life … but I didn’t notice it. And your main weapon is the terrible accuracy grenade launcher, or the 3 missile/launcher weapons. Those also took up 25% of the screen. And best hope you aim well, because if you don’t … the downtime of you reloading a missile will get you killed. While that’s expected the class seems very bulky and inefficient. And again, I never noticed the extra armor.
At this point, I said – next rank and if it doesn’t change my opinion … I’m done … and that’s the Saboteur. My other complaint was that enemies wouldn’t pop up on screen … and that’s because they’re in saboteur mode. They are disguised as your allies and won’t show up on radar … and that’s to give you a clue that they’re not your ally. Okay, I could buy that … but shortly after getting the rank, I tried it on a few matches and found that people would pick up on that easily and would know you’re the enemy many times before you could get your crosshairs on them. This leads me to believe that many people shoot even their allies once - this way if they are saboteurs then they’ll lose their disguise. While in this class, I did better … but not enough to change my game.
I never got to the Scout badge because I called it quits after the Saboteur Badge but I would assume it’s the same way to an extent. You could hide, but you’d still somehow get caught … and your powerful sniper rifle probably wouldn’t kill your enemy despite the fact that you are easily sniped by Scouts no problem. I assume that because with every new class I unlocked I expected the game to get more interesting and easier … but it didn’t.
So here’s where my main gripe comes in. The multiplayer seems way too confusing but for the most part, unfair. I don’t know why I have to shoot someone three times, close range with a shotgun to kill them, but I get killed in one hit with the same weapon from someone across the room. I’ve also been killed by someone who had their shotgun aimed 90 degress away from me. I’m also amazed that as people zigzag when they’re moving they are still able to hit me with 100% accuracy, but they can also still hit me with 100% accuracy when I zigzag as well. Grenades come out of nowhere to kill me … enemies show up out of nowhere and I still get sniped from people with the very generic weapons that you start out with … weapons that don’t have a great zoom to begin with.
As a small experiment, I popped in Resistance 2 Competitive – didn’t play for nearly three weeks so I’d be rusty, but I immediately did better in that game than I did after a weeks worth of daily multiplayer in Killzone. I had played numerous games to prevent from the idea that maybe I was just playing with a batch of noob characters but each competitive game I played I did much better in Killzone 2, bar-none. So, either all of the expert FPSers don’t play Resistance 2 … or Killzone 2 is truly unbalanced.
So all around, the multiplayer wasn’t fun. It was more of a chore. A good concept with ribbons, badges and such, but poorly executed. I put about 15 hours alone into the multiplayer and I’d say 13 of it was me bullshitting my way through it so I could get these later badges. The different classes don’t make the game much more enjoyable and it’s not like these classes are ESSENTIAL to the game. Someone with all the badges and the highest rank could very easily still play as a soldier. Comparing it to Resistance 2 cooperative … you NEED a Spec Op and you NEED a medic. In Killzone 2 … you don’t NEED any of those classes. So saying it’s really in-depth and just isn’t true.
I wanted to like Killzone 2 … but I don’t. I hate the game. I think it was done terribly. Multiplayer is terrible, Single Player could be better. I’m shocked that this game took three years to make. Makes me think that this game was 2.5 years graphics and .5 years everything else. A textbook example of why you rent before you by … because I could have saved $50 by not wasting my time, money and anger on this terrible excuse for a great FPS. There is a comment from GamePro on the back of the game that states:
One of the best next generation shooters we’ve played.
Well, then clearly the last First Person shooter GamePro has played was CounterStrike back in 2000. Because I can name about four other older FPS games that are better: CounterStrike, Unreal Tournament, GoldenEye and Resistance 2. Yep, even games with multiplayer dating back to 1997 are more enjoyable than this trash. Had they played these older games, they could base from experience that the multiplayer and the game is nothing more than a throwaway game that was thrown into super-status just because of the hype. Good job, Killzone 2 Marketing Team.
And on that note, let’s wrap up the review.
Graphics (10 pts.)
The graphics are the only thing this game really has going for it. The graphics are stunning and the way everything kinda’ blurs when you move is a nice, realistic touch. The debri that flies out in the heat of battle is a nice change of pace because – like in real life – it will make it difficult to see your opponent, and vice-versa. In-game cutscenes show that the game really didn’t get facial expressions done right, but that’s okay. You can’t expect perfection from this “near perfect game”. 7/10
Music & Sound Effects (10 pts.)
The music isn’t noticeable, and the sound effects are generic. The main theme reminds me of the chant of Damien from South Park … so I’m not sure if that’s something to brag about. Nothing memorable here, though. 5/10
Gameplay & Controls (25 pts.)
The controls are rather frustrating, and so is the aiming. Initially Guerilla wasn’t going to change the control issue – a rather elitist move despite reports that many people were having issues – but they have decided that they are going to fix it. The difficulty is high up there even on normal mode … ideal for experienced FPSers but difficult and frustrating to people who don’t do FPS as their main/secondary job. The game stopped being fun at around the third level and then became a chore. Hoping this would change as I got more used to the controls I kept playing … but the game never really became enjoyable again. 5/25
Story and Presentation (20 pts.)
Like Resistance 2 … the story was pretty forgettable. Had a hard time connecting with the characters … but they did a good job of me not liking some of the characters, which was intended. The ending was actually pretty cool – won’t spoil it for anyone though. The presentation is kinda’ bland. Your Single Player and Skirmish (offline multiplayer) is immediately available to you, but online multiplayer requires you to sign in before you can do anything … as opposed to the options being available to you first, and then the game connects based off your preferences. 10/20
Fun Factor (25 pts.)
The game was fun for the demo and for the first two levels. After that, I felt like I had to play to give the game a full, decent chance. I’m sad to say that I wasted a days worth of playing this game. I sold the game on eBay so I essentially got my money back … but I’ll never get that week back where I could have done something more interesting – like staring at my living room carpet. 3/25
Replayability (10 pts.)
If cheap multiplayer is what you like, then you have a gem of a game. I put up with it for 15 hours after clearing the single player. There were only around four games out of 100 that I didn’t have a bad Kill/Death ratio. Much of that I believe was due to the game’s cheap methods. Again, why can one guy one-shot me with a shotgun from far away, but I have to shoot someone three times with a shotgun up-close? No reason. BUT, despite the fact that the multiplayer is terrible, not entertaining and cheap … it is there for those who like to deal with unfair multiplayer bullshit. 3/10
Total points is 33 pts., giving this game 2/5 invaders.
Lengthy rant! Me like!
“…where I could have done something more interesting – like staring at my living room carpet”…LOL
I don’t know much about this game since I only briefly played the demo…but it sounds like it has numerous issues in 1-player and multiplayer modes..have you looked on other blogs, Youtube, etc. to see if more gamers share your opinions? User reviews on Gamespot, IGN, Amazon, etc. seem to be much more balanced than what the big websites claim (mainly because their scores aren’t bought).
Also, let me just say that the “build-up” and “hype” for this game has been completely lost on me. I sorta remember hearing about Killzone on the PS2 back in the day, but it didn’t revolutionize shooters or anything. And then when the PS3 announcement came I recall hearing people going gaga over Killzone 2 footage…only to later discover it wasn’t actual gameplay but a computer render that looked much better than the real game. Basically, beyond those two instances, I never heard anything about Killzone games.
Perhaps all of these game review magazines & sites are so desperate to give the PS3 a “must-have, exclusive” title they will give it far more credit than it’s due? (And if a game has serious issues like GTA4 and it manages to get 9s and 10s across the board, you can almost bet their coverage and ratings were sold to publishers w/o hesistation).
March 11, 2009 at 4:45 am
It wasn’t a rant … it was a review!
Well, reviews from other people are still giving it more credit than I think it deserves. I don’t think it deserves anything greater than a 5.0 on a 10-point scale and I can safely say that the graphics alone saved this game from getting a 1/5 on my site. But another thing is that I’ve read that people will blast a game when they don’t even own it. So, 360 fanboys will criticize PS3 competition and PS3 fanboys will criticize 360 competition. And I’ve actually caught this on a few forums and Amazon when doing a “Killzone 2 sucks” google search.
I had never heard about Killzone before this game – but a lot of articles I read said that this was a very good game – a good Halo challenger and that the multiplayer was unbelievable.
And it is … it’s unbelievable that anyone would endure it for more than five hours before giving up and shattering the disc in frustration. *rimshot*
March 11, 2009 at 12:05 pm
1 out of 100000 gamers would agree with your review of KillZone 2…
March 16, 2009 at 5:02 pm
You’re probably right. I’m curious though … are you one of those 1 in 100,000?
March 16, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Oh please.
“Waahhh! I can’t figure out the controls so I get spanked in online! This game is horrible!!”
I agree about the story being forgettable, even if the ending was pretty decent.
Right, critique.
You, “Invader Dem”, are a biased, un-professional wannabe journalist who can fuck right off.
Ditch the dim-witted attempts at humour, take some Prozac and start over.
And what the fuck is up with the point system? It’s bollocks. A 100-point system which eventually gets converted into a 5-point system anyway?
Wanker.
April 5, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Man, fuck you.
This game is anything abut a 2/5.
April 5, 2009 at 4:46 pm
No name site… FAIL
It’s reviews… FAIL
Way to achieve mass amount of visitors… WIN
YOUR SITE SUCKS BTW
April 5, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Hey, it also seems u suck at the game, am i right newb?
April 5, 2009 at 5:45 pm
If this game it’s a 2 of 5 then how you will be reviewing other FPS? I’ll think your average’s something between 0.5 to 1 of 5? LoL
How would you do a review for a game like… Haze? You’ll need to use negative numbers to be accurate…
BTW, nice intro you made there:
“It’s a first folks! It’ll be a first for the internet! I will be bombarded by Killzone fanatics, FPS fanatics and PS3 fanatics telling me I have no skill in first person shooters, am gay and that they had sex with my mother. Because I am apparently the only one throughout the entire internet who thinks this. Get ready for it. Are you ready? Brace yourself … Killzone 2 sucks … bad.”
So, so, professional!
Seriously, are you trying to help people with their purchase or just show us your bad taste and bias? Not even a 9 out of 10 for graphics knowing that this it’s the best looking game so far this gen? Are you kidding me?
Go play your Gaylo3 all you want and please stop reviewing games because you really suck at it. The only thing you do it’s whine and whine… Not even a single well stablished point. You just rated the game with a 2 because you didn’t liked the controller settings? Give a break!
April 5, 2009 at 5:55 pm
This is how your “review” reads…
“Wahh wahh wahhh, I suck at Killzone 2, wahh wahh wahh”
April 5, 2009 at 6:05 pm
wow dude, you fucking suck at video games
April 5, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Dude, you suck at shooters, face that fact ok? I have NO PROBLEM fighting people online, seeing how you complain about the controls shows that you can’t aim worth a ****… It’s not the game’s problem, it’s yours, you just suck, OK? The sooner you realize that, the better off you’ll be. Do you see anyone else complain about that problem? How you “miraculously” get killed 100% of the time with a shotgun, and you somehow “miss”… It shows you suck at the game, no one else is complaining, only you.
April 5, 2009 at 6:18 pm
I appreciate all the sideways arguments to my reviews and the blatant insults to me … keep them coming! I also appreciate the critiques on my biased, unprofessional writing when 1) people who comment probably only read the one review and 2) this is a personal blog so it’s not meant to be professional.
Don’t think you’re going to hurt my feelings though or “put me in check” when you tell me that maybe I just suck at the game or I just suck at shooters. Because I’m probably the 1 in 10 reviewers on the internet who says that Killzone sucks, I’m not shocked by these comments.
But, I didn’t review the game negatively because I suck at the game. I rated it low because it was a boring and bland game that was more frustrating than fun – in both multiplayer and singleplayer. The game just stopped being fun after the first few levels and never became fun afterwards.
I will say that a lot of people are coming here from the N4G game site and it seems that people think I submitted the story, when I actually didn’t. It looks like someone picked up my article and posted it under their account.
April 5, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Omg this is just bad, this just sounds like horrible trash reivew……Sounds like you just suck hard and blame the game.
OneI love the online lets get that straight, Two Shotgun takes about 2 shots upclose (1 if in the head) and you not gonna be even able to hit someone long range, thats called a sniper what killed you buddy because if you really had played the game you’d notice that the accuracy at a range is simply appauling on even the assault rifle let alone the shotgun their is no way in hell someones gonna kill you at a range, and maybe you should try a new gun if you can’t do it with three shots
P.S. It always Helps to hit the target instead of shooting at the wall
April 5, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Hmmm, if I wanted to get hits on a Killzone 2 review at this late stage in time, how would I do it?
OH I KNOW I would present an openly hostile flamebait review
April 5, 2009 at 8:00 pm
This review was posted on March 11, the game came out on February 27. This review was done two weeks after the game came out. Nice try, though.
April 5, 2009 at 8:07 pm
You call it bland and boring because it was frustrating more than fun. That means you weren’t very good at the game. Nothing wrong with that. But what about all those who beat the single player on Elite, or do exceptionally well on Multiplayer? Are you implying we are cheaters? To several others, it wasn’t all that frustrating. To you, you found it frustrating. Now, you have the right to your own opinion, but don’t go off slandering other people’s opinions like Gamepro’s just because you think your opinion is the only right one.
April 5, 2009 at 8:34 pm
lol, that was the funniest review ever, and the reviewer must be the n00best gamer ever.
Well, he did what he could to get some hits, I can understand that
April 5, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Yet you didn’t argue the substance of the point, merely the specifics of the date.
April 5, 2009 at 11:47 pm
My arguments towards the game don’t change what people think – they perceive my review as a bashing just because I sucked at the multiplayer. So I don’t even bother to argue with anyone. Just like it’s my opinion that the game sucked, it’s their opinion that my review sucked.
You implied that I did this intentionally to get hits for a game that’s been out for awhile, which just isn’t true. I did this two weeks after the game came out and someone on N4G grabbed my article and posted it on the site. I wasn’t involved whatsoever with it getting on N4G.
April 6, 2009 at 12:16 am
You gave this game a 7 out of 10 for graphics? Are you serious? What would you give geow2 a 6? What about halo 3 a Negative 2? Well have fun not enjoying a great game.
April 6, 2009 at 1:15 am
Oh my god. This is the worst disinformation I have ever witnessed. This is disinformation at it’s very worst. This article is complete 100% BS. Listen folks, I am a huge gamer and a HUGE fan of fps. I have played them all from Goldeneye, Doom, and Wolfentstein all the way up to Half-Life series, Halo series, Counterstrike, Team Fortress 2, Bioshock, Call Of Duty series, Unreal Tournament Series, Battlefield Series, Resistance 1 & 2, Crysis & Crysis Warhead, and on and on.. Killzone 2 is the best and most perfectly balanced expertly crafted remarkably polished fps experience on the market! This reviewer’s claims about the shotgun, etc… and all the comments regarding the multiplayer being “cheap” are downright false and this puts into question the integrity of this person and their motives for writing the article. The ENTIRE GAMING PRESS other than this obscure hate-speech ranter agree that although the story in Killzone 2 in the campaign is a bit lacking with the emphasis being on action that the Multiplayer is among the best EVER MADE! This game is miles better than any FPS on the market is the absolute truth of the matter and anyone who tells you different 9 times out of 10 have never even played the game (obviously some 360 fanboys on this forum). If they have played the game it was only for a brief moment and they already had pre-conceived bias toward it as the console war is ridiculous with people rallying behind their choice in video game console. I have a 360, WII and PS3 and play PC games frequently so believe me when I say Killzone 2 has the best FPS multiplayer in existence and it wont be bested for a looong time… Probably until Killzone 3 comes out! COD4 was my former favorite fps and I played it religiously every day for over a year but when Killzone 2 came around (to my complete suprise) it blew everything out of the universe and it makes all other fps games seem completely inferior. I am telling you this game is balanced PERFECTLY and this article was obviously either written by a biased fanboy or a complete MORON. It makes me sick to see people who know nothing about games garnering attention for their misinformation campaigns intended to spread lies through the gaming community. Do yourself a favor everyone and realize that all the systems have their strengths and their awesome games and Killzone 2 is one awesome game that is a crime to miss for anyone who cinsiders themselves a true gamer! If you consider yourself a fan of fps gaming and would like to play the most badass fps in existence look no further than Guerilla Games from Amsterdam’s brilliant shooter Killzone 2. It brings a whole new meaning to words like FUN and ADDICTIVE. If you are reading this article you are either probably p!ssed like me or you are a fanboy who hates everything Sony for your own disgruntled penis-envy BS reasons. For those of you who are disgruntled fanboys I just want you to know that I have faith you will come around and want to be a real gamer some day, not a fanboy. Thanks for reading and God bless! GAMERS UNITE
April 6, 2009 at 1:41 am
Well……………….to have a bad kdr u probably suck. It’s not the game’s fault that it’s not easy like the fps games u’r probably accustomed to. Multiplayer cheap and bland huh? Why would the game cheat for the other person and not you? Does it KNOW who you are and cheat for the other person? The different classes and what not are not in depth? You can’t play them properly then and suck.
Your review = EPIC fail
April 6, 2009 at 4:24 am
ok . i read your review , and here is my points and i hope yout take them serious
.
1. although you said that the graphics saved the game somehow ,but you didnt give it even a decent score . killzone2 is been praised as one of the best this gen. graphic-wise game . you gave the graphics 7/10 . so what are the games in this gen. that have better graphics than killzone2 ? . this game deserve at least 8 or 9 . but anyways in my opinoin it is the best grpaihc-wise game this gen.
2. music u were right about it , nothing you can remmeber after finishing the game .
3. you spoke how the game is bland . i invited more than 5 friends to play this game . most of them who played games fromm bioshock ,half life , halo … and everyone was impressed maybe not all of them liked it as the best game . but all of them they were imerssed and all of them said that the game captured the feeling of an war . so saying that this game is bland gameply-wise or atmosphere , is just a bad critique from your side .
my opnioin about this review is that its a really bad one , maybe this is how you feel , yes killzone2 didnt do anything special or maybe isnt the best game around ,in the end its a matter of taste and opinoin , but saying that this game sucks is really …hmmm how to say it … stupid , imo.
not trying to make your opinoin less important , but this review isnt really a fair review
.
April 6, 2009 at 5:55 am
I’m not going to say the obvious (how wrong you are) because everybody else did it already. However here are some points to help you.
There is a factor involved in online gaming called LATENCY. You may have heard of it as PING. This basically measures the time it takes for the game to reach the server you play on and it depends on your internet connection and the place you live at. It is measured in ms (milliseconds). Here is an example: user “badass” and user “donthurtme” are connected in a killzone server located in Amsterdam. “Badass” lives in Germany while “donthurtme” lives in Spain. Apparently “Badass” lives closer to Amsterdam than “donthurtme” and internet-wise his ISP can connect him to the server more straighforward (using less interconnection points) than “donthurtme”‘s ISP located in Spain. So if “Badass”‘s latency is 80 ms (takes 80 ms to get there), “donthurtme”‘s latency is 120 ms, 40 ms more to get there. This means that if “donthurtme” and “Badass” find themselves face to face, “Badass” will have set his sights and start firing on “donthurtme” faster than he could see resulting in killing him. That’s what you get and it makes it feel unfair. It’s not a game issue its a connection issue. That’s why the game asks you where you live so you can connect to your region (US or EU) where the latency will be lower. However it still depends on your ISP and the place you live at.
You base the review solely on the grief it gave you.
The single player is not that difficult especially in the first difficulty level. I am not a hardcore player (super reflexes and determined to finish my games on the hardest setting), however I finished the game twice on the “trooper” difficulty which most will agree is fairly easy and now I’m playing it over again on “elite” which is challenging and even more fun. This game is not the “run and gun” type fps. It requires cover and a tiny bit of strategy, thats why you can’t stand for long and kill enemies as if you are John Rambo, or empty a clip on an enemy hitting them with every bullet as if the weapon has no recoil. It’s realistic.
April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm
to add to my last post ^^^^ i was just taking the piss because i donno if you are a fanboy of 360 and want to stop 2 people from buying the game because there are only 2 people who will believe your story and thats you and who ever u live with.
i have this game its no where near what u said. im not a fanboy i play games from time to time and what you say is like me say that helo is the shittest game ever. does that make sense to you? no it doesnt.
AND REVIEW IS NOT A POiNT OF VIEW FROM A PERSON ITS WHAT A GAME IS. GET IT? IF YOU DONT THEN I DONT KNOW WHAT TO SAY.
April 26, 2009 at 7:34 pm