Killzone 2

why does your hype makes a game less good

play it and review it ... not review what you wanted, that is why nobody else but me will write on this
and why i didn't even want to read more than 2 lines of this article

^maybe you SHOULD read more than 2 lines before commenting on it dude.... ( not an article btw - it's a review )

Your review is problematic because it's vague, superficial, contradictory and gives the reader no reason to believe Killzone 2 was actually played. Almost everything written about, another could pro/con simply from playing the demo. If you want people to take a review seriously the reviewer need to give it some depth so readers believe you actually played the thing. I mean come on dude, multiplayer wasn't mentioned. Not once. So you either didn't play it (which is neglecting half the game) or chose not to write about. Both are poor decisions that add to the pile of reasons why your review isn't believable. If you think it's over-hyped, give examples of said hype and how K2 failed to fulfill it. You've given little or no insight to your thoughts or points, and the entire review comes off as a person contradicting themselves by acusing Killzone 2 of copying too much from Call of Duty and Gears of War, then complaining how it doesn't play like the former. The pro-Microsoft banter doesn't help and many of the criticisms written could be applied to almost every shooter in the last decade. Including every other title mentioned in this review.

^first of all thanks for the feedback..

Good review for a good game.  Try out some online matches next and maybe an update to the review can give any unbelievers their comeupance.

Good review, Seems to be exactly what videos of gameplay have shown me, as well as the demo.

In Jeff's words from his review, "While plenty of people will spend plenty of time dissecting Killzone 2 and trying to decide if it "lives up to the hype" or some such nonsense, all that really matters is the final, core transaction." You are one of those people. This is why this review is not very great. You review a game as it's own game, not by comparing it to other titles.

Chainblast, I agree with your comments and more for this review.  During my entire time reading this review, I never thought that he once put the game in and actually played the game start to finish.  You hit it on the head when you mentioned the fact that this review doesn't have any multiplayer discussion at all.  The reviewer didn't even say anything along the lines of "the servers weren't up so I couldn't play it" or "I just didn't play the multiplayer".  Instead, it's just absent from the review and doesn't help people who are trying to make an informed decision. 

Freki, you state that the "review is focused on the parts that I think people should know", yet you leave out a significant part (the multiplayer).  When you do this, you are short changing your readers and giving bad review.  I'm a person who wants to know exactly what I'm buying for my sixty dollars, and you're only telling me what I'm going to get for thirty of those dollars. You also state (at least in your comments after the review) that the game should stand on its own legs, and provide some sort of alternative to 360 exclusives.  May I ask what you would have them do to the game, in order to make it stand on its own?  That's a rhetorical question as I really don't need a response, but this is the problem that your review has.  You end up putting a lot of holes in your review, which makes your readers ask a lot of questions.  If you're going to comment on something on something that is in the game, such as in the case of the controls in Killzone 2, then you should explain the comment/argument of why you feel that way on a broad scale.  Doing this allows your reader to be able to understand why you feel that way about whatever it is you are discussing.

My issue with the review is because of a few reasons.  First off, it's because the comments that Chainblast made (maybe not so much the pro MS stuff), and then you have the poor grammar, punctuation, and spelling of the review as a whole.  Generally there were double periods, improper use of hyphens, incorrect spelling, and more.  In this day an age where you can copy and paste your article/comments/whatever into MS Word and have a system tell you what is incorrect, a review like this is just unacceptable.  Maybe I'm being too harsh, but I think I'm going to stay clear of this reviewer from now on.

well said, Gregonator

GregonatER*

I dont understand how this guy expects us to believe he actually played the game.  Everyone that has reviewed the game has said that the multiplayer is what makes this game everything Sony said it was gonna be.  Yet this guy gives it a 4 out of 5 without even mentioning the best part about the game?  Whoever wrote this review should just stick with playing games and stop wasting bandwith on the internet.  Really, leave the reviews to people who actually know how to make em.

Your opinion about KZ2 is incorrect. Please remove this review. This game only deserves 5 stars, at least.

I'm looking forward to playing KZ2. I played Gears but have not played Gears 2. I can say I loved the weapons in Gears 1. Playing around with the weapons was fun enough for me. The control felt a bit clunky, but that might have been because I played Uncharted (which felt more fluid with regards to movement and animation) before I ever played Gears 1. Anyway, my concern w/ KZ2 (based on the reviews) is that the story will be just horrible. I hope the weapons and environment are fun enough to keep me going like Gears did.

Well, besides what others have commented already, I would add that I find annoying this comparison with other games. This is a war game, and because of that you will find "similarities" with any other shooter since the beginning of times. Claiming that it is "copying" other titles is simply not true.

Second, you incur in the "argumentum ad Call of Duty", where you criticize a game for not being Call of Duty. See, on the game box there are things called letters and they say KILLZONE. It means that the game IS NOT Call of Duty. Stop comparing it. This game is light years ahead of COD in terms of realism and it has a far more interesting story.

I always played shooters on the PC and each shooter feels a little different. The idea that all games should be like COD is just as ridiculous as "all games should be like Quake". If you want to play COD then play COD and be happy.

Another thing is that people try to downplay the qualities of this game. FPS is not even my favorite type of game, but Killzone did things no other did, like the cover mechanics and the smart AI. So it is far more interesting to play it than the average FPS on the market. This is a step above everything else.

Holy Moly - so many fanboys unable to accept even the slightest critizism of the game... and yet no "hype" - give me a break!

Freki: you lost it. You are a 360 fanboy trying to dimish the awesomeness of this game. I played Gears of War, both of them, and Killzone can't be compared to that because it is not even the same genre. One is third person, the other is first person. Not the mention the graphics, AI, atmosphere, etc. I still think the title Gears of War is misleading because there's never the impression of war in those games, you are always shooting 4 other dudes. More important, the multiplayer in Gears of War IS A JOKE. (10 players and buggy? Counter-Strike is more exciting than that)

I played Call of Duty too, and after playing Killzone COD looks like a child's toy. The animations are a lot worse, the AI is incredibly stupid, the movement is unrealistic to the point where it looks like a cartoon (you can run while crouching, for example), the COD story is ridiculous, etc.

Killzone is a step above everything else.

^So now I'm a "360 fanboy".... lol 

^and you called me a "fanboy" :|

"In the game you will often find you forced to storm forward fireing from the "hip" because the aiming and cover-mechanic doesn't get you anywhere..."

Oh, say it isn't so! This is a WAR. It is supposed to be more difficult than that.

There's no such thing as "industry standard". All great games are great because they go beyond any "industry standard", and that's exactly the reason why Killzone is great.

^what is the point in having a cover mechanic if it doesn't work well with the scoped aim mechanic? 

It works fine with everything else. Stop making things up.

I played it and it is the best FPS to date.

^what have I made up thiago?

Freki, I salute your bravery for not trying to convince yourself it's the best game ever. It's not that brilliant. It's so fucking generic it makes my balls ache, the squadmates are incredible arseholes, the cover mechanic is the best solution in a first person game yet but still has issues, not nearly enough was made of the tech in the game and what should have been a totally immersive experience is marred by awkward design choices. Comparisons with other shooters are only fair, and although it's not as fast paced as Call of Duty and has a very different feel, it still borrows heavily from that game. I'm sick of all these fanboys and their hypocritical bullshit.

For the record: I completed the campaign in Killzone 2 yesterday, played a good whack of multiplayer, own every system and don't give a shit which box it goes in. It's better than Gears and Halo 3, but that's not really saying much.

Akuma, your avatar says everything about your "opinion". Again, I am still waiting for logical explanations about why this game is "not so good" or "haven't lived up to the hype". Anyone? Just give it a try, come on!

Generic this game is not. Starting by the controls, which is a controversial subject, is enough to prove how this game is different. The cover mechanics works well, mostly because the enemies also use cover.

Again, some people seem so worried about this game, they need to destroy it, but they can't formulate logically why the game is not as good as it seems.

Did anyone complain about the multiplayer limited to 10 players of GoW? Did anyone complain about the stupid AI in GoW, where your partner is suicidal? Did anybody complain about the fact that physics in that game is a joke, you can play football with Locust corpses on the ground just by steping on them? Did anyone complain that Gears of War is everything, but about "War"? Have you watched Saving Private Ryan? That's a WAR, and that's what you get on Killzone. In Gears you shoot 4 Locust at a time, and they come in waves of 2 from the holes.

That's just to name a few of the many drawbacks of 360 games. All 360 exclusives have flaws, but they are overlooked. Curiously the PS3 games are analysed under a microscope and any pixel out of place is reason enough to take points from it.

Why do you need to keep dragging Gears of War into it? As I've said, it's overrated as well. Games on Xbox get scrutinised just as much as those on PS3, infact, all AAA releases do, so please refrain from pretending otherwise.

As for some problems, although you didn't find them issues, I did: "It's so fucking generic it makes my balls ache, the squadmates are incredible arseholes, the cover mechanic is the best solution in a first person game yet but still has issues, not nearly enough was made of the tech in the game and what should have been a totally immersive experience is marred by awkward design choices."

I'm writing a review myself as to why it's a flawed but ultimately good game, you'll find my opinion in there.

Emphasis on "opinion", I'd appreciate it if you could recognise there is no such thing as objective factuality when it comes to media.

This is simply nitpicking.

Thanks for responding to my initial complaints about the review Freki.  For future reference though, if something isn't working in the game, mention it in your review.  If you mention it and say "I didn't play this portion, due to this reason", people won't jump down your throat for not mentioning it in full during your review.  =D

@PhantomShadowz - people are ever so free to "jump down my throat" - I was just writing what I felt after my first play trough and that isn't about to change because people may not like what I write..