Lol, your points make no sense.
They actually do. You're saying K2 is a CoD knock-off (as you've said, campaign wise) in what vein exactly? Please, be more specific. CoD didnt invent the linear campaign FPS. K2 is a linear campaign FPS like any other.
If Black is a CoD knock off, that means that Killzone 2 was a CoD knock off, along with Black.
lol Wut? I said CoD is a Black knock off as an example of a linear campaign FPS i.e. you shoot enemies through linear corridors. CoD didnt invent that thus your reasoning for K2 to be a CoD knock-off is a straight up falacy.
You're really grasping at straws here, trying to excuse one but not the other.
No. Learn to read before making idiotic remarks.
I haven't played Black, so I don't know whether that is or not, but what you're saying points to that.
I presented Black as an example of a linear FPS campaign, nothing more. You still have to explain why exactly K2 is a CoD knock-off. Do they play the same/have the same gameplay/gunplay? No. Is it because its a linear FPS campaign where you shoot stuff through linear corridors? Again, CoD didnt invent that. So, in conclusion, be more specific.
Why the hard-on for Killzone 2?
I really dont have an "hard-on" for K2. I'm not really a big fan of the series but actually do find it enjoyable at the very least and think it's generaly over-hated. People have their opinions, I have mine.
It wasn't a good game by any means, so I don't know what you're defending.
So, you're one of those who think his opinion is fact. noted. 91 on meta says otherwise. You can keep your irrelevant opinion for yourself.
"this is the basic definition of Call of Duty campaigns. You are put in a linear environment, slogged along by a boring story filled with bland characters to push buttons or kill things in order to advance to the next scripted sequence, while along the way, you kill a few generic enemies by taking cover with regenerating health tactics."
So, CoD invented that? K. You know sh*t wtf you're talking about. Regenerating health was done before (The Getaway), and linear environments were also done way before CoD... hell, the overly praised by hermits Half-life 1 or MoH:AA were linear as hell and definitely "slogged along by a boring story filled with bland characters to push buttons or kill things in order to advance to the next scripted sequence"
I said this earlier. Is it not true? What part isn't true?
This false notion that "linear = bad" is what opened the course for the bland open world games we see today.
Again, I was not trying to focus on completely on MP. SP was really what I was critiquing. However, I did see that Killzone 3 added killstreaks to the MP. ;)
By the way, Nioh is kind of a Dark Souls rip off, but here's the difference: Dark Souls is a good game. Nioh is both deeper and shallower in some ways, but the basic gameplay structure is much the same.
Nope. Combat is only similar in the vein of "lock-on" into enemies (that zelda already did before Souls). The stance system and Chi system change drastically the way it's played. I know, cause I'm actually playing it right now. Are there some similarities? Sure. But it's a complete different experience (gameplay wise) to me. There are many "souls knock-offs" out there but Nioh is definitely the one that actually tried something different with it's combat.
However, Dark Souls is good, Nioh is good. Call of Duty is crap, Killzone 2 is crap.
Cool opinion. Doesnt make it a fact though...
See where I'm going with this?
Nowhere...?
But, just for sake of argument, Nioh has a world that isn't unified, has a stance style attacking system, has no PVP, has only 2 person co-op, has a completely different loot and upgrade system.
Whereas, Killzone 2 has a cover system. I can't really think of much else that's different regarding the SP.
Gameplay/gunplay, ya kno, the actual core of a game... It's diferent from any other FPS out there.
Those lists are quite different, aren't they?
No
Log in to comment