Killzone 2: More Than Another Run-of-The-Mill Shooter

[QUOTE="jakarai"]

There last game was AA. They have become a much bigger studio(3x the original size since the first Killzone) and have Sony funding them this time. I have high hopes for this game after hearing the impressions of beta testers.

MarloStanfield

Their last game was on the PSP and received one of its highest scores from this site. Hiring a bunch of new employees of undetermined capablity does not make them suck any less

You're partly true. It doesn't make that particular game suck any less. I quoted you in another thread to explain the GG situation. I'm not sure if you read it because you didn't respond, so I'll paste it here:

----------

Look at it like this...A basketball team sucks one year and doesn't make the playoffs. After a few years of good drafting, trading, and salary managment they develop into a talented team and make the playoffs (in many cases go to the championship). This happens. New talent and management can bring great things .

GG is virtually a different company since Sony's acquisition. Of course you have the 15-20 employees who were there originally, plus new hires and transfers. The studio is about 100+ now, well, that's at least how many individuals contributed to development (their amount is up in the air). Not only that, but Sony is actually putting money into KZ this time around.

GG's have always had cool concepts, but they couldn't execute last gen because of varing reasons. All signs point to KZ2 being a great game.

Take into account that this is a 1st party Sony game. They generally don't bull$h!t when it comes down to that. Also take into account of the positive previews and impressions by journalists (and beta testers alike). And before you say it. Yes. Games do get negative previews...case in point: Too Human .

But honestly, franchises can definitely turn around for the better. Look at Devil May Cry 3 after part 2. There are countless other examples.

[QUOTE="DAZZER7"][QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

1.) Because KZ2 does offer many "unique twists". And the c|ass system is "deep". There's no way you can downplay that fact. Just because it is similar to other games in the genre (TF2) doesn't mean it's not deep :|.

Treal, all I'm saying is it's nothing new. Overall the game is NOT anything revolutionary but I'm also saying that is not bad thing. I'm not bashing and I actually said it is improving upon well established ideas. I'm not bashing mate so settle down!

2.) No one called it innovative. But it does offer many unique twists to amazing exisitng mechanics and features. It also has new features never before seen in a shooter like dynamic matches, valor points clan system, and first person cover.

I do think a first person cover system has been done before but I can't recall where. Like I said above, there is nothing wrong using well established ideas. I loved COD4 and there was nothing new in that game. Yet it was one of my favourite games ever, so much so that I got 1000G and I'm a hermit more than anything else. The game just did everything so well in my opinion but it was nothing new. I imagine KZ2 being something similar, no?

3.) People use this tired old question in a negative sense: "What's so innovative about *insert game*". Cows, Lemmings, and Hermits frequently do it. This is SW and it is used in such a way to downplay a specific title. If you can't see that then I don't know how else to explain it to you.

I am going to have a pop at you here and this is the reason why. I am fed up of cows and lemmings alike taking anything slightly negative about their game to heart. I was originally trying to get at the posters who were hyping this game as something very new and revolutionary. Yeah sure, they may not have actually used the word 'innovative' but they were implying the same. I was justified in trying to make the point they were wrong and I stand by that. There are 2 many people hyping this game for it's graphics and for it being something spectacularly new.

For me, and this is my opinion it will neither be the graphics king nor something new but I'm willing to bet (considering the time and effort GG have put in) that it will end up being a damn good shooter just like COD4 was or Gears is or even Resistance 2. I'm hyping it a 8.5 - 9.0.

Treal I am perfectly able to point out negatives without being labelled a hater. I absolutely take issue with you implying that I am indirectly trying to have an indirect snipe at the game. I'm not, it's the people hyping this game for the wrong reasons lol. I'm sure you can appreciate that, no? Just nod 'yes' mate and we'll leave it at that ;)

TREAL_Since

1.) All of that was really for nothing. So we both agree that KZ2 won't be revolutionary! Yay! You keep saying "innovative" and "revolutionary". Name these people. I never said it will be nor have I seen more than 2 people say such a thing (not even Killzowned has said KZ2 will be revlutionary from my knowledge :lol: ). No one ever implied KZ2 was revolutionary. Let that argument go please, its' not sticking.

2.) As a shooter fan there is plenty reason to be excited for KZ2. As a multiplat gamer and a fan of shooter KZ2 offeres so much.

3.) COD4 was very new and unique. The perk system can even be touted as innovative game design for a FPS. Do you not know what it means for a game to be unique? Games like Halo 3, Gears 2, Reisistance 2, COD4, and KZ2 are all unique. That's pretty much fact.

4.) The point of this thread is to show KZ2 is not a run of the mill shooter. That doesn't mean it's revolutionary or innovative, but the point stands.

P.S. Why is it that everytime I get into a debate about something, the other person constantly says my name to enhance their argument :lol: I find it flattering though ;). You may have not noticed it by others, but you added to the list. Thank you :).

Treal mate :P I often refer to people by their name, it's the way I speak not your name so much but it is a memorable name, I'll give you that. I think we're agreeing here except I stand by the fact some people have overhyped this game for the wrong reasons but we'll leave it at that.

KZ2 will be run-of-the-mill but quite possibly a AAA one!

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"][QUOTE="DAZZER7"]DAZZER7

1.) All of that was really for nothing. So we both agree that KZ2 won't be revolutionary! Yay! You keep saying "innovative" and "revolutionary". Name these people. I never said it will be nor have I seen more than 2 people say such a thing (not even Killzowned has said KZ2 will be revlutionary from my knowledge :lol: ). No one ever implied KZ2 was revolutionary. Let that argument go please, its' not sticking.

2.) As a shooter fan there is plenty reason to be excited for KZ2. As a multiplat gamer and a fan of shooter KZ2 offeres so much.

3.) COD4 was very new and unique. The perk system can even be touted as innovative game design for a FPS. Do you not know what it means for a game to be unique? Games like Halo 3, Gears 2, Reisistance 2, COD4, and KZ2 are all unique. That's pretty much fact.

4.) The point of this thread is to show KZ2 is not a run of the mill shooter. That doesn't mean it's revolutionary or innovative, but the point stands.

P.S. Why is it that everytime I get into a debate about something, the other person constantly says my name to enhance their argument :lol: I find it flattering though ;). You may have not noticed it by others, but you added to the list. Thank you :).

Treal mate :P I often refer to people by their name, it's the way I speak not your name so much but it is a memorable name, I'll give you that. I think we're agreeing here except I stand by the fact some people have overhyped this game for the wrong reasons but we'll leave it at that.

KZ2 will be run-of-the-mill but quite possibly a AAA one!

Finally we agree mostly! Finding common grounds in a debate is rare in SW :P.

killzone2 looks really boring imho.

it will get 8.5 here on gamespot and a 9 on ign.

ALTAIR360