A clean, fair comparison of Halo 3 and Killzone 2.

That Halo 3 didn't have to compete with other FPSs that were actually more advanced in quality (please don't confuse quality for enjoyment) and tech.

If they were released at the same time, there would be far different stats. If we were to hold it up to current standards as designated by the late gen, it would be noted as inferior.

So it's not such a "clean, fair" comparison after all.

Pariah-

Because halo 3 got a free run. Shooters stopped existing during 2006-7 and then begun again in 2008 didn't they? And if Halo 3 launched in 2008 along with killzone 2 it'd be an even higher quality due to more dev time. Theres not a single PS3 shooter that outscores halo 3. At all. Anywhere. By your logic resistence should be a perfect 10.

I can't really comment, having not played Killzone 2, though I don't imagine it can get much better than Halo 3. I almost have 300 hours clocked in!enterawesome

WEll both have different feels. Halo is more arcady while KZ2 is more grounded. Also isint this topic really old?

[QUOTE="Solid_Tango"]Killzone 2 still a better overall game, anyone who played both games knows this :|smokingsbad

And if Halo 3 launched in 2008 along with killzone 2 it'd be an even higher quality due to more dev time. CreepyBacon

By your logic resistence should be a perfect 10.CreepyBacon

[QUOTE="VoodooHak"]

[QUOTE="Solid_Tango"]Killzone 2 still a better overall game, anyone who played both games knows this :|Solid_Tango

I did, but I still think Halo 3 is the better game. So there goes your theory.

20K gamerscore nowadays is pretty middle-of-the-road. If you noticed, I also have a PS3 and, as I mentioned, have played Killzone 2 plenty.

By the responses to your post, there are others that think similarly.

Things that Killzone 2 has going for it:

The graphical fidelity of the game is top notch. Even more impressive are the animations.

It also has a very interesting take on multiplayer.

However, the level structure and pacing of the action really don't elevate the game beyond a corridor shooter with some larger, set-piece areas. The difference is that the aesthetics of the Halo 3 levels feel more organic and make more narrative sense. Then again, this is subjective so opinions will vary.

What cannot vary is the fact that Halo 3 allows for 4 player online co-op through the campaign with a top-score metagame to play with your buddies....not to mention the different skulls that active multiple gameplay modifiers.

Speaking of modifiers, the adversarial play offers up an exhaustive set of option, allowing for custom game types. These custom game types can be saved and shared with the community within the interface of the game.

Theatre mode allows you to save and share in-game, full 3D movies and pics as well. Then you have Forge allowing even more variety.

Sorry, Halo 3 just offers so much more to do than in Killzone 2. The variety gives the game much longer legs which is why it's lasted as long as it has. Killzone 2, on the other hand, seems to be suffering the same pattern as other shooters: big push at the start, but dwindling popularity with time.

Your turn.

[QUOTE="CreepyBacon"]And if Halo 3 launched in 2008 along with killzone 2 it'd be an even higher quality due to more dev time. Pariah-

You also cannot prove Halo 3 would have score lower if released today.

His guess is as good as yours in this case.

If by clean fair comparison you mean clouded by your own self bias then yes you did a fantastic job.

Pre-orders:1.7 million consumers pre-ordered Halo 3 in the U.S. alone before launch. Killzone 2 - far, far away, actually.

Hype: Halo 3 easily had bigger hype. Killzone 2 - not so much in comparison.

Advertising: Halo 3 had the greatest commercials in gaming history Starry Night rocked! Killzone 2 - a poor slow motion trailer...

Sales: Halo 3 sold about 3 million in its first day. Killzone 2 doesn't come close to this. Halo 3 did 1.8 million in 8 hours, and in the region of 4.5 million in its first week of availability.Halo 3's 8-hour sales are allegedly superior to Killzone 2's lifetime sales! Killzone 2 only did 323,000 in February, 296,000 in March and 58,000 in April.

Reviews: Halo 3 - 9.5 (GameSpot), 93.37 (GameRankings), 94 (Metacritic). Killzone 2 - 9.0 (GameSpot), 90.33 (GameRankings), 91 (Metacritic). Halo 3 wins, no matter what!

Gamer reception: Halo 3 has 1 million daily players (unique, that is) 2 years after release. Killzone 2? Honestly feels dead months after and will probably be buried when Modern Warfare 2 is released.

Movie failure:A movie failed in sales because of Halo 3.[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11]. When was the last time Killzone 2 was so huge that a movie failed because of it?

Oh, and I'm not trying to irritate anyone - just telling you the truth...

u know u forgot to mentio the most important part of any game gameplay and visuals. as a gamer i could much less about sales. atleast killzone didn't lag online at launch

Airetam

No one here can do a fiar comparison of Halo 3 and Killzone 2. You'd have to be a nongamer to do so.

If by clean fair comparison you mean clouded by your own self bias then yes you did a fantastic job.

sumdumsim

[QUOTE="Airetam"]

u know u forgot to mentio the most important part of any game gameplay and visuals. as a gamer i could much less about sales. atleast killzone didn't lag online at launch

themyth01

I think it'd be fairer to compare it to ODST, closer release dates.Coffeemakes

If by clean fair comparison you mean clouded by your own self bias then yes you did a fantastic job.

sumdumsim

Fanboy or not, what the TC did do is post facts. Not opinions, nothing subjective. It is hard to argue against facts, because, they are facts.

Killzone 2 still a better overall game, anyone who played both games knows this :|Solid_Tango

Online co-op says this is not true. Local co-op says this is not true. I own both games and think both are vastly overrated, but if I had to choose, I would choose Halo 3 9 times out of 10.

Lets compare DOOM 1 review scores with Halo 3 and declare a winner,

You cant compare review scores of game set 2years apart. Reviewers scores change because each year the reviwer expectetions rises.

(unless the reviewer is reviewing a Wii game, where the standard still last-gen);)

That is why a sequel has to be better to get the same score. Technology and budget increases, new games are released, expectation rises, even GoW2 surpassed Halo3 in lots of counts.

ropumar

[QUOTE="Pariah-"][QUOTE="CreepyBacon"]And if Halo 3 launched in 2008 along with killzone 2 it'd be an even higher quality due to more dev time. Kickinurass

You also cannot prove Halo 3 would have score lower if released today.

His guess is as good as yours in this case.

My prediction is based on the observed progression of other shooters. He, on the other hand, is trying to predict Bungie's whims.

He can confirm that the game would come out, but not that it would be par for course over all other shooters simplt because it would come out later.