The story is bad, the frame rate sucks, still 8,5.

A lot of you are way to into the entire me being a "fanboy" and Killzone 3 being a multiplayer only focused game. Forget about Killzone 3 for a second and look at the damn score. We're talking quality here and believe me - someone who sees and 8.5 will not go "hmm, I wonder if it's for the multiplayer or the singelplayer". You should always judge the complete experience. You can't say - Yeah but the singelplayer is so awesome so this is a very good game because of that. No, judge what's on the disc, if the story sucks then let the user know.

" A lot of you are way to into the entire me being a "fanboy" and Killzone 3 being a multiplayer only focused game. Forget about Killzone 3 for a second and look at the damn score. We're talking quality here and believe me - someone who sees and 8.5 will not go "hmm, I wonder if it's for the multiplayer or the singelplayer". You should always judge the complete experience. You can't say - Yeah but the singelplayer is so awesome so this is a very good game because of that. No, judge what's on the disc, if the story sucks then let the user know. "

Having never played a Killzone game, I can't talk about the quality of the franchise, whether we're talking about multiplayer, single player, or the story. 
 
But I can say two things about reviews: 
1) 10-point scales with decimals are mostly arbitrary and are always related to "other games;" Killzone 3 may get an 8.5 because it's a "little worse" than Call of Duty: Black Ops. The five-star scale, with no "half-stars," allows for a clearer placement of games, and allows for less room for interpretation. Either way, the score is still somewhat arbitrary, and the text is what the reviewer puts the most time into. 
2) Never trust GameSpot's scores. The text reviews are often all right, but their scores are always cushioned one way or the other.

Hmmm - they should have spent more time making more multiplayer maps and taking a gamble by releasing it in Q4.

" A lot of you are way to into the entire me being a "fanboy" and Killzone 3 being a multiplayer only focused game. Forget about Killzone 3 for a second and look at the damn score. We're talking quality here and believe me - someone who sees and 8.5 will not go "hmm, I wonder if it's for the multiplayer or the singelplayer". You should always judge the complete experience. You can't say - Yeah but the singelplayer is so awesome so this is a very good game because of that. No, judge what's on the disc, if the story sucks then let the user know. "

You should always write about what you get on the disc. At the end of the day this just proves that a ten scale system with decimals just doesn't work. 
 
@Little_Socrates said:

" Having never played a Killzone game, I can't talk about the quality of the franchise, whether we're talking about multiplayer, single player, or the story.  But I can say two things about reviews: 1) 10-point scales with decimals are mostly arbitrary and are always related to "other games;" Killzone 3 may get an 8.5 because it's a "little worse" than Call of Duty: Black Ops. The five-star scale, with no "half-stars," allows for a clearer placement of games, and allows for less room for interpretation. Either way, the score is still somewhat arbitrary, and the text is what the reviewer puts the most time into. 2) Never trust GameSpot's scores. The text reviews are often all right, but their scores are always cushioned one way or the other. "

" @extremeradical: when did it become OK for game makers to only do half a game though? idk, if a game has a single player element and parts of it "suck" i think Van Ord's review score should reflect that. and i find van ord to be a pretty good review guy. "

" You realize we are talking about Killzone here? The story of the series is horrendous from the very first entry. If you are playing Killzone for the story then you are, well, just plain stupid. If we were talking about an RPG then I could see where you are coming from, but this is a shooter. The point is to shoot things. A good story is a nice bonus, and really elevates a game from the 8 range to the 9 range, but I have fun with shooters even if the story sucks. I mean look at Modern Warfare 2. That game got near perfect marks and the story makes no sense whatsoever. Halo 2 had a horribly told story that barely was coherent but again got near perfect marks. Sorry to burst your bubble, but most games aren't about the story. They are about the gameplay. Like I said, a great story can really help pull things together, but it isn't required for an enjoyable game. "

 ...probably the most criticised thing about KZ2?.. so don't know how Guerrilla missed that?!

I don't remember any of Killzone 2's story, and I played it a year after it came out. So I see nothing has changed. It's still a fun shooter. The campaign missions themselves can be fun without needing a good story, and that's likely the case here.

" @extremeradical: when did it become OK for game makers to only do half a game though? idk, if a game has a single player element and parts of it "suck" i think Van Ord's review score should reflect that. and i find van ord to be a pretty good review guy. "

Well its not just about the story.  The story affects the progression of the single player.  Other games have crappy or thin stories but the game has a flow to it.  A great story enhances this but the super crappy story and unlikeable characters break up the flow of the single player which is why I would think this game deserves more of a 8.  The multiplayer is great but the single players seems to be a disaster.  So gameplay in the singleplayer suffers because of the story, at least thats the impression i got.

I dont see waht kind of story we were expecting from KZ3 (or KZ2 for that matter) i mean in KZ its simple, they go to helghan and hope they will end the war, simple as that its simple and realistic because        what else is their to ad? end the effing war on their planet seems to be the best metthod what else is needed? as for Killzone 3, well i'll just wait till someone makes a video review untill then i dont know what the story is so i cant comment on that.

"Wait, are you saying multiplayer-only games are half games? "

I think like with any review the story is just one piece of the puzzle.  The story can have all the impact in the world or could matter as much as putting multiplayer in dead space or bioshock.  If reviewers give it an 8.5 its because the game stands well on its own and regardless of story is fun to play.  I mean Mario Bros was just find the princess but how many hours were sunk into that game?

" @extremeradical said:

"Wait, are you saying multiplayer-only games are half games? "

I'm sure this doesn't apply to every game but. I always felt that something like Warhawk was a half-game.  "

" The real appeal is the multiplayer, so the story doesn't matter as much as it does for a game like Mass Effect. "

I haven't played a First Person Shooter that had a good single player campaign and quality multiplayer. The story in all shooters is usually jacked up lunkheads with big guns wanting to shoot shit and defend the galaxy from bad men, aliens and midgets with super soaker pistols. The story is usually always bad, but the gameplay is not. So yeah, I expected the KZ3 story to be the balls, but honestly it cannot get any worse than the Halo or Call of Duty campaigns. I thought Killzone 2 was a much more fun single player experience than any of those games.
 
Seems the reviewers all know this and rate shooters on multiplayer and gameplay instead of actual writing and storytelling as they would a different genre of games.

" @choffy21 said:

"Still, let's be honest: the last few Call of Duty stories have been pretty bad, but it's still gotten high scores. "

Not really. If anything, most people note their campaigns as being shorter than their preference. Black Op's story isn't particularly deep, but it's a thrilling experience with many interesting and memorable moments to discover.  "

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @choffy21 said:

"Still, let's be honest: the last few Call of Duty stories have been pretty bad, but it's still gotten high scores. "

Not really. If anything, most people note their campaigns as being shorter than their preference. Black Op's story isn't particularly deep, but it's a thrilling experience with many interesting and memorable moments to discover.  "

Don't confuse thrilling moments with having a good campaign story. Sure there have been plenty of "oh wow..." moments, but that doesn't mean that the events leading up to that moment were particularly, well, good. "

Of coarse the story will be very weak, but for Killzone it's all about the gameplay, atmosphere, and the technical graphics.

" @choffy21 said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @choffy21 said:

"Still, let's be honest: the last few Call of Duty stories have been pretty bad, but it's still gotten high scores. "

Not really. If anything, most people note their campaigns as being shorter than their preference. Black Op's story isn't particularly deep, but it's a thrilling experience with many interesting and memorable moments to discover.  "

Don't confuse thrilling moments with having a good campaign story. Sure there have been plenty of "oh wow..." moments, but that doesn't mean that the events leading up to that moment were particularly, well, good. "

Let's not forget, we're talking about video games here. A good story in a game is generally understood to be moments of engaging gameplay. I thought Modern Warfare 2 had some fantastic build up to the action sequences, certainly as good as anything else out there.  Maybe if it had some dialogue trees with space aliens you could sleep with. OMG 5 stars. "

Another case for not using scores when reviewing games.

"Just read some Killzone 3 reviews. A common thing is that people are simply saying that the story is very, very weak. They are literally saying that it sucks. So, I just want to hear from you guys if you have great examples of games that the reviewer clearly thinks is worse then the grade they give to the product. Obviously - people are there because of the story and if that sucks it's very wierd that  it get's 8,5 which let's be honest - is not far of perfection. Share your crazy reviews here. I don't know if we're allowed to post which site it is that wrote the review, if so, then go ahead! :)  "

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @choffy21 said:

" @sofacitysweetheart said:

" @choffy21 said:

"Still, let's be honest: the last few Call of Duty stories have been pretty bad, but it's still gotten high scores. "

Not really. If anything, most people note their campaigns as being shorter than their preference. Black Op's story isn't particularly deep, but it's a thrilling experience with many interesting and memorable moments to discover.  "

Don't confuse thrilling moments with having a good campaign story. Sure there have been plenty of "oh wow..." moments, but that doesn't mean that the events leading up to that moment were particularly, well, good. "

Let's not forget, we're talking about video games here. A good story in a game is generally understood to be moments of engaging gameplay. I thought Modern Warfare 2 had some fantastic build up to the action sequences, certainly as good as anything else out there.  Maybe if it had some dialogue trees with space aliens you could sleep with. OMG 5 stars. "

That's not an excuse, or at least it shouldn't be one. Writers have a lot more time to develop characters and a solid plot than a movie writer does, yet the stories often aren't that good.  And what about Red Dead Redemption, LIMBO, Heavy Rain, Grand Theft Auto IV, etc.? They have great experiences, not from exciting gameplay moments (though they do have those), but from engaging characters, great atmosphere, plot twists, etc. "

" @choffy21 said:

That's not an excuse, or at least it shouldn't be one. Writers have a lot more time to develop characters and a solid plot than a movie writer does, yet the stories often aren't that good.  And what about Red Dead Redemption, LIMBO, Heavy Rain, Grand Theft Auto IV, etc.? They have great experiences, not from exciting gameplay moments (though they do have those), but from engaging characters, great atmosphere, plot twists, etc. "

Now we're entering serious disagreement territory. I think Rockstar is capable of weaving only one good character and story thread per game. But OPINIONS. The amusing thing about games with strong characters and story elements is that they almost always feel like a homage to films and television. This is what struck me when playing some of Enslaved and certainly GTA:IV. A game is about moments of immersion, that is the story of a game. All the writers have to do is avoid ruining that. Maybe that's just my opinion I guess :/ "

Most game stories suck. Gameplay matters. 

KZ2's story was garbage too. As are most shooters'. Who cares?

I thought the story was good and the graphics looked really nice. It's just that it seemed to drag on forever and ever. I was ready to be done worked like crazy to beat the game and still didn't finish it. I guess I liked Killzone 2 better. But up until the end, I was enjoying the story.

Locking, it was necro-ed.