Which was better, Halo:CE on Xbox or Killzone 1 on the PS2?

Killzone isn't even playable. Terrible frame rate, terrible controls, full of glitches, completely devoid of art direction. I'm not a huge Halo fan but it wins this by the largest margin imaginable.famicommander

Yeah this isn't really a competition. Halo kept the Xbox alive and moved hardware while Killzone was just kind of crappy overall. I remember playing Killzone once with my brother in multiplayer and it was kind of a joke compared to Halo's infinitely replayable 16 player deathmatches.

Ill take Goldeneye (Previous Gen) over Killzone, let alone Halo.

Ill take Goldeneye (Previous Gen) over Killzone, let alone Halo.

LJChronx

When I first played Killzone before repeatedly getting killed by glitches, I thought it could have made a good game. I couldn't get passed the 3rd stage though. I kept falling through the floor and getting stuck in walls, crates, etc. Sold it back to gamestop a few days later. Halo worked and still works today. Just it being playable already makes it the winner. Overall though, I really enjoyed Halo a lot more than the 30 minutes I got from Killzone.

Is this a serious question? For real? Halo was the standard-bearer in FPS that generation. This isn't even a competition.

I enjoyed both games.

But I would say Halo because it doesn't have the dropped frame rates and bugs. It's just an overall smoother playing game.

Only thing Killzone has over Halo is the offline splitscreen botzone.

Which was the better PS2? Do you think Killzone 1 on PS2 was really the Halo killer? Or do you consider Halo:CE to be the superior game?StatusShuffle

Is this a serious question? For real? Halo was the standard-bearer in FPS that generation. This isn't even a competition.

Emerald_Warrior

I actually prefered Killzone, It was a lot of fun online while Halo CE had no official online play. I really liked the feel of the guns and the pistols (much like in Halo CE) were badass!

Not even a real question Halo CE destroys Killzone.

Is this a serious question? For real? Halo was the standard-bearer in FPS that generation. This isn't even a competition.

Emerald_Warrior

Is this a serious question? For real? Halo was the standard-bearer in FPS that generation. This isn't even a competition.

Emerald_Warrior

This. I don't think anyone belives Killzone was a memorable, good FPS, at least not on par with Halo.

Campaign I am going with Killzone. Multiplayer is easily Halo. I enjoyed both for each of those aspects.

Honestly though, to say the PS2 only had one decent FPS is not a correct statement even in opinion, now if you said that the PS2 only had one good exclusive fps, then yeah, that might work as an opinion... lol. If gamers preferred the Space Marine theme (Space Navy?... er wait lol) then Halo was the way to go.

What about Red Faction and Unreal Tournament for the PS2... those are just off the top of my head.

By the way, I owned both consoles, and I still do. I dont know why people always have to compare everything with a "this is better", no "this is better", approach. Bottom line is, either can be picked up fairly cheap at this point, so why not just get a few games and play both? Each console just like every console of in each generation has its ups and downs.

Never played KillZone but from the vids I saw it looked like a futuristic take on CoD with some very grainy and washed-out colors and notable framerate drops.

I enjoyed CE tho (but on the PC, not Xbox).