1up Killzone 2 hands on. anyone else worried?

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News-147726.aspx

I must say I am a little worried about the gameplay aspect of this game.

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

Just read the preview, those have to be the dumbest excuses I've ever seen, it is borderline insanity 1up has approached. The level design had "concrete, concrete, and more concrete", has to be one of the silliest things to bash a game for, especially when the site gave geow 1 a 10/10. Then again, I thought they forced maybe half of those negative things.. Just to hate on Killzone 2. They were the ones that always gave a low blow to killzone 2 for no reason "e3 2007-the game doesn't look near as good as gears of war" to now this..

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

Forensic-Klown

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.ThaGreatness007

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

AAA!

stephant_6

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.Zeliard9

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

Maybe I don't look at enough previews, but it does seem to me that almost everyone that I do read is positive, even when the game turns out to be crap. Honestly, I don't even really pay attention to what previewers say, I just use them for a look at the game.

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.Zeliard9

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

[QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

aliasfreak

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

Everyone hates those respawning enemy's even CoD4 but lots of games do it. You have to understand you have to suppress the enemy in warfare not stand in the back and wait till your teammate's get killed and your #$%@!& around in the back trying to align a shot. In a level were you have to be up high yes I understand you have to pick off enemy's but this level was open no high spots. He is nit picking bottom line.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.numba1234

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.Zeliard9

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

If they are good for them, I have not been to that site in a year so maybe they are trying to win back hardcore gamers I dont know but when I was posting in that site back then they were not reliable.

[QUOTE="aliasfreak"][QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

ThaGreatness007

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

Everyone hates those respawning enemy's even CoD4 but lots of games do it. You have to understand you have to suppress the enemy in warfare not stand in the back and wait till your teammate's get killed and your #$%@!& around in the back trying to align a shot. In a level were you have to be up high yes I understand you have to pick off enemy's but this level was open no high spots. He is nit picking bottom line.

I don't care what other games do it, I don't like respawning enemies. Throw a lot of enemies at me, I don't care. But don't make them endless. I feel like I'm not making any progress when they are endless.

[QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.DarthKalo

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

Maybe they should have started previewing and reviewing with Halo3.

[QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.DarthKalo

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

i think they are. this is a "next - gen" title other than visuals i want them to bring something original to the table. not just CoD4 on steroids (which is not bad )

This game should be called CowsOwned 2.Millennium_King

lol nice :)

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"][QUOTE="aliasfreak"][QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

aliasfreak

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

Everyone hates those respawning enemy's even CoD4 but lots of games do it. You have to understand you have to suppress the enemy in warfare not stand in the back and wait till your teammate's get killed and your #$%@!& around in the back trying to align a shot. In a level were you have to be up high yes I understand you have to pick off enemy's but this level was open no high spots. He is nit picking bottom line.

I don't care what other games do it, I don't like respawning enemies. Throw a lot of enemies at me, I don't care. But don't make them endless. I feel like I'm not making any progress when they are endless.

I understand but you progress by moving forward not in the back while your squad is getting killed in a level like the demo agreed?

I have a feeling KZ2 will feature very standard, run-of-the-mill FPS gameplay. I really believe its main draw was supposed to showcase how the power of the PS3 could take visual presentation to the next level. However, there are already a ton of games out that have done this.

KZ2 could have been spectacular had it been ready in time for the PS3's launch (or shortly thereafter). However by 2009 it will be "just another shooter" in a genre that has already achieved extremely high standards this generation.

I could be completely wrong, but thats just my gut feeling right now.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.numba1234

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

Some people actually did complain about Crysis' art design, by saying that the "island paradise" environment wasn't too dissimilar from some other games, especially its predecessor Far Cry. The biggest difference is probably that Crysis incorporates a much more diverse color palette than Killzone 2.

The writer's use of the word "drab" to describe the environments makes me think he doesn't like Killzone 2's monochromatic art styl e, which a lot of people have taken issue with. The main color tone of the game is already "gray", so filling the level with concrete and rubble doesn't do much to remedy that for people who have a problem with it.

I think Killzone 2 is graphically magnificent, personally, with some wonderful lighting and animation. It's the actual gameplay that should be worrisome to people. Lack of freedom of movement, linear and forced gameplay designs, endlessly respawning enemies, lack of enemy diversity, etc. CoD4 had similar weaknesses, but it rested mainly on the strength of its multiplayer, which worked since Infinity Ward have long been a strong multiplayer dev house. Guerilla, not so much.

[QUOTE="aliasfreak"][QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"][QUOTE="aliasfreak"][QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

ThaGreatness007

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

Everyone hates those respawning enemy's even CoD4 but lots of games do it. You have to understand you have to suppress the enemy in warfare not stand in the back and wait till your teammate's get killed and your #$%@!& around in the back trying to align a shot. In a level were you have to be up high yes I understand you have to pick off enemy's but this level was open no high spots. He is nit picking bottom line.

I don't care what other games do it, I don't like respawning enemies. Throw a lot of enemies at me, I don't care. But don't make them endless. I feel like I'm not making any progress when they are endless.

I understand but you progress by moving forward not in the back while your squad is getting killed in a level like the demo agreed?

I'm not sure what you are talking about with the reference to the squad since I didn't see that mentioned anywhere in the demo preview (maybe I missed it), but assuming that you mean it isn't good to simply sit back and let your squad do the work, that would seem to be up to the player. You can either sit back and let the squad do the work, or you can get off your butt and help. Not the developer's fault if people choose the lazy method.

Again, this is all assuming I understand what you are referring to correctly.

[QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

aliasfreak

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

What about it? why are you trusting someone elses opinion so much? What about yours? do you like the look of the gameplay and it moves and handles? if so, GOOD! who cares what he states, since other claim the game plays and looks stunning. like i said, the game ISN'T finished...so much more to improve.

So they don't seem impressed, so the game sucks?

Horrible logic (even tho you didn't state it like that)

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.numba1234

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

Theres actually a lot more variety in Crysis, especially when the world becomes ice.

[QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.Zeliard9

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

Some people actually did complain about Crysis' art design, by saying that the "island paradise" environment wasn't too dissimilar from some other games, especially its predecessor Far Cry. The biggest difference is probably that Crysis incorporates a much more diverse color palette than Killzone 2.

The writer's use of the word "drab" to describe the environments makes me think he doesn't like Killzone 2's monochromatic art styl e, which a lot of people have taken issue with. The main color tone of the game is already "gray", so filling the level with concrete and rubble doesn't do much to remedy that for people who have a problem with it.

I think Killzone 2 is graphically magnificent, personally, with some wonderful lighting and animation. It's the actual gameplay that should be worrisome to people. Lack of freedom of movement, linear and forced gameplay designs, endlessly respawning enemies, lack of enemy diversity, etc. CoD4 had similar weaknesses, but it rested mainly on the strength of its multiplayer, which worked since Infinity Ward have long been a strong multiplayer dev house. Guerilla, not so much.

Also, Killzone 1 and Killzone Liberation only redeeming points was its multiplayer. Guerrilla is known for its multiplayer aspects aswell, because both games had pretty good multiplayer modes. I wouldn't worry about that..

Nope. There's 9 months till release. I have a healthy hype level and am still anticipating this greatly.

Marvel at the sig

[QUOTE="aliasfreak"][QUOTE="Forensic-Klown"]

Not at all, they say the game has reached a techical achievement, but its up to the compelling story and stuff that sets it apart from other shooters, too really be something big. the game isn't out yet, they ONLY played the demo.

You have NOTHING to worry about.

Forensic-Klown

What about level design and gameplay? Yeah, it reached a technical achievement, but they really didn't seem that impressed with these very important aspects.

Personally, I hope they improve. I really hope they do away with those respawning enemies. That is one thing that I really hate in games. Anyway, I like the look of the game and was hoping it would turn out well. I guess we can just cross our fingers and wait.

What about it? why are you trusting someone elses opinion so much? What about yours? do you like the look of the gameplay and it moves and handles? if so, GOOD! who cares what he states, since other claim the game plays and looks stunning. like i said, the game ISN'T finished...so much more to improve.

So they don't seem impressed, so the game sucks?

Horrible logic (even tho you didn't state it like that)

I never said the game sucks. If a professional has issues with the game, I do consider it. To simply bury my head in the sand about the bad things previewers say about games wouldn't be much smarter than basing my opinion solely on what they say. Like I said, I hope it does improve (said it in a previous post). This in no way influences my final decision on the game since I hold judgement until I hear reviews and play a demo, it is simply slightly disheartening to hear.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"][QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="ThaGreatness007"]1up is a joke cant beleive the nit-picking he stated but if his going to do that in a preview he should preview everygame that way.numba1234

1UP tends to write critical previews. They're one of the very few that do, along with others like Edge and Eurogamer. That's one of the good things about them.

"Sign: Killzone 2's designs show a tremendous attention to detail, but what we saw struggled to stand out. The drab environments filled with concrete, rubble, and more concrete looked like a stage from any number of similar games. The guns might not have been modern real-world weapons -- but, for all intents and purposes, they could've been. "
Please correct me if I'm wrong.. This is basically saying: Crysis is "Tree, after tree, after tree, with more trees, which looked like a stage from any number of similar games"... This is by far the most ridicioulous article I've ever read..

Some people actually did complain about Crysis' art design, by saying that the "island paradise" environment wasn't too dissimilar from some other games, especially its predecessor Far Cry. The biggest difference is probably that Crysis incorporates a much more diverse color palette than Killzone 2.

The writer's use of the word "drab" to describe the environments makes me think he doesn't like Killzone 2's monochromatic art styl e, which a lot of people have taken issue with. The main color tone of the game is already "gray", so filling the level with concrete and rubble doesn't do much to remedy that for people who have a problem with it.

I think Killzone 2 is graphically magnificent, personally, with some wonderful lighting and animation. It's the actual gameplay that should be worrisome to people. Lack of freedom of movement, linear and forced gameplay designs, endlessly respawning enemies, lack of enemy diversity, etc. CoD4 had similar weaknesses, but it rested mainly on the strength of its multiplayer, which worked since Infinity Ward have long been a strong multiplayer dev house. Guerilla, not so much.

Also, Killzone 1 and Killzone Liberation only redeeming points was its multiplayer. Guerrilla is known for its multiplayer aspects aswell, because both games had pretty good multiplayer modes. I wouldn't worry about that..

What shooter doesn't suffer from some of those complaints, huh?

the whole grey arguement is worser than the PS3 has no games BS. Its a design chose, color doensn't have much to do with the hardware of its limitations. GG is trying to set a mood, and its own looks. What warzone with rubble, concrede dust, ever looked colorfull?

the official trailer shows some nice colors anyhow, nothing TOO much.

Plus have we seen more enviroements to even judge?

Gears had grey's too, why? because its a war torn shooter...makes sense.

Huh? Because it is "gray" makes it suddeny bad art design. It seems like a petty, and stupid attack, for a pretty excellent presentation. Should there be pink in the game, but then it copies another game. Only GEOW1 can have a black and white ****graphical design, even though killzone 2 is completely different arts tyle but use the same colors it is looked down upon..

Also, Killzone 1 and Killzone Liberation only redeeming points was its multiplayer. Guerrilla is known for its multiplayer aspects aswell, because both games had pretty good multiplayer modes. I wouldn't worry about that..

numba1234

Gears of war wasn't black and white. Anyway I personally dont have a problem with the grey look they are going for, but I do think they could use a few tricks to make things pop more visually.

[

What shooter doesn't suffer from some of those complaints, huh?

the whole grey arguement is worser than the PS3 has no games BS. Its a design chose, color doensn't have much to do with the hardware of its limitations. GG is trying to set a mood, and its own looks. What warzone with rubble, concrede dust, ever looked colorfull?

the official shows some nice colors anyhow, nothing TOO much.

Plus have we seen more enviroements to even judge?

Gears had grey's too, why? because its a war torn shooter...makes sense.

Forensic-Klown

Exactly. I had no problem with the look of Gears because they were going for the destroyed beauty, or some description like that. As long as it fits the situation, I'm fine with it. Maybe now cows will understand that concept (not calling you one, just making a general statement).

Here is what I mean when I say there needs to be some pop. Gears obviously doesn't have the most varied colour palete, but they do a few things that I think KZ2 is missing. If you notice the character models in the KZ2 shot are rather blended into the enviroment where as the Gears character models sorta pop out a bit with different colours than the enviroment and that adds a bit more life to them. Also the enviroment in Gears has a few things that add contrast to the rather dark enviroment like the green plants and red sign along with the blueish building.

Here is what I mean when I say there needs to be some pop. Gears obviously doesn't have the most varied colour palete, but they do a few things that I think KZ2 is missing. If you notice the character models in the KZ2 shot are rather blended into the enviroment where as the Gears character models sorta pop out a bit with different colours than the enviroment and that adds a bit more life to them. Also the enviroment in Gears has a few things that add contrast to the rather dark enviroment like the green plants and red sign along with the blueish building.

justforlotr2004

KZ2 looks better than Gears 2 much less gears.

Its always good to pick out the worst pictures of Killzone 2 and old build pictures at that.

KZ2 looks better than Gears 2 much less gears.

AC-360

Those two images perfectly show the artistic direction that both Killzone 2 and Gears 2 should (and hopefully will) head in. I think they both look very striking when they mix in color with their usual look.

[QUOTE="justforlotr2004"]

Here is what I mean when I say there needs to be some pop. Gears obviously doesn't have the most varied colour palete, but they do a few things that I think KZ2 is missing. If you notice the character models in the KZ2 shot are rather blended into the enviroment where as the Gears character models sorta pop out a bit with different colours than the enviroment and that adds a bit more life to them. Also the enviroment in Gears has a few things that add contrast to the rather dark enviroment like the green plants and red sign along with the blueish building.

AC-360

KZ2 looks better than Gears 2 much less gears.

I didnt pick bad pics, I just grabed random ones that I happend to click on. Those shots dont do anything to change my mind. The Lense flare is nice, I already mentioned that as a good visual effect in another thread. Without the lense flare though there isnt any pop in the visuals. As for the second pic you chose is even worse than the one I did. It shows how much the enviroment is starving for some contrast. If they were to add some aspects like the sky in a few spots throughout the levels then the game would have a much more alive feel and would pop more.

No way, theres just way to much time before its release to start worring about one preview.

1up now sucks because they gave an opinion that most cows do not agree with?

.....nice.....and....when/if they give it AAAE status then it is a "fact" the game deserves it?

yea gota love SW..

still the best looking console game i've seen to date IMO.Nolan16

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News-147726.aspx

I must say I am a little worried about the gameplay aspect of this game.

unknowndrk

PS3 games fail left and right, what made you think the sequel to Killzone 1 would succeed ? I predict a huge flop, the game feels basic, and graphics are mediocre actually, they feel small and levels are rather empty, they are nothing like they are hyped to be, just like Haze case

1up now sucks because they gave an opinion that most cows do not agree with?

.....nice.....and....when/if they give it AAAE status then it is a "fact" the game deserves it?

yea gota love SW..

masiisam

NOW sucks? They've sucked for awhile now.

[QUOTE="Nolan16"]still the best looking console game i've seen to date IMO.MojondeVACA

Must have missed the part where he said "I've seen"

[QUOTE="AC-360"]

Its always good to pick out the worst pictures of Killzone 2 and old build pictures at that.

KZ2 looks better than Gears 2 much less gears.

Zeliard9

Those two images perfectly show the artistic direction that both Killzone 2 and Gears 2 should (and hopefully will) head in. I think they both look very striking when they mix in color with their usual look.

I think with so many letdowns this machine is plagued with, I doubt alot of people are worried if another game flops for the PS3. It has become the norm for awhile now. You could just hope so much for the best but if you only get the worst then that glimmer of hope just shrinks. And you just gotta be out of your mind and delusional to continue to hope that one day this machine will unleash its hidden potential.