Killzone could be great (56k warning).

I know what you're gonna say right: "The first Killzone sucked, it only got 6.9/10, so why would this one be any better?". People don't realise that things are a little different this time around.

Well, here are my reasons why I think Killzone for the PS3 could be great:

1. Development Team

There are more than 120 developers in the Netherlands working on the game at the moment. The new Killzone PS3 will be fully translated in 20 different languages. 120 devs is a huge number to be working on the one game, and is a large increase from the original Killzone for PS2. Yes, quality over quantity, but how about you give the devs a chance before making assumptions that the game will suck. There are devs from the original Killzone, the Killzone on PSP which was AA on Gamespot, and many news devs brought in specifically when Sony bought Guerrilla Games.

2. Budget

It is believed that the budget currently surpasses £20 million ($40million), which is comparable to a small-budget Hollywood picture and is the most expensive multimedia project in Holland's history, though this has yet to be confirmed. It will have downloadable content like other contemporary games, possibly in the form of episodic content. Massive budget, and we can only hope that the money could produce a great game (and it very well could).

3. Development Time

It is believed that the game has been in development for over 2 and a half years which is much longer than the rushed Killzone for PS2 which Gamespot claims could have been good with a "few coats of paint". This time, that should not be an issue. The long development time can aid in getting rid of any glitches or bugs, as well as produce an overall solid FPS game. The technical limitations of the PS2 also stopped KZ on PS2 from being as good as it could have been but this issue does not seem apparent with the PS3 according to Guerrilla.

4. Fear of Halo

Sony knows that there was not one (good) exclusive FPS on the PS2. This is one thing critics and the gaming community in general agreed on. That, and the fact that online wasn't great and that there weren't enough 1st party games.

All of that is changing with the PS3. The online is getting better as time goes on, there are plenty of highly anticipated 1st party games coming to the PS3 (Uncharted, Killzone, Heavenly Sword, Lair, Ratchet, Jak, Killzone etc).

And Sony knows it needs to compete with Halo. And you can bet that's the reason Sony bought Guerrilla a while back and that's the reason the game has such a big budget, huge dev team and very long dev time.

That's it. Killzone could be great. Things are different this time around (Budget, 120 dev team, and long development time). I'm not arguing that this game will be great, but it has strong potential to be great, and people have to accept that instead of writing it off as "another FPS", because the shock could very well be too much to handle on release.

What do you guys think?

Excellent. Finally someone says that Killzone 2 could be great, instead of insisting ad nauseum that it will be. D0013ER

Yes, it has potential. It is no way assured success, but I do think the 120 dev team, $20 million budget and very long dev time could lead to a great game.

Halo is getting bigger and bigger, Sony knows that, and I'm guessing they'll do their best to cut into Halo's success.

There alot of develepers only because they need Coders for the PS3 . GeoW was made with 50 devs .

im hoping it will be,maybe this game will be a reason to rush and get a ps3OldParr

Yeah, hopefully it'll be Sony's Gears of War. 1 year after launch and the first major system seller comes.

I always thought it COULD be great, but we wont know. I want to see REAL Footage, and i want to actually see hands on impressions before my judgement, plus, if i get a chance, play it. Haziqonfire

Real footage coming at E3. I'm hoping it will be amazing, and do think it will be.

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, WHOA. WHOA

reason!?

actual arguments!?

sensibility!?

The-Very-Best, One does not simply make a good discussion in System wars>.>

THIS IS MADNESS!!!! :o :cry:

i dont know why people ever hyped that killzone trailer...
even though its cgi it doesnt even look as good as gears
and of course its miles behind crysis
the characters dont look as realistic as mass effect as well, they look really cartoony
sorry for the change of topic, anyway the reason i doubt killzone 2 will be any good is because of the sixaxis
that controller is junk for fps, terrible analogs and triggersringuzi

How do you know the Sixaxis is junk for FPS. Resistance was a launch game and it managed a solid AA score with many reviewers the controls were fluid.

There's no reason Killzone couldn't make unique use of the Sixaxis and produce an all around great FPS. And I think the CGI trailer looks better than Gears and about the same as Crysis, and am hoping the real game looks/plays like that.

THIS IS MADNESS!!!! :o :cry:

KingManifest

THIS IS CLICHE MOVIE ONE-LINERS!?!?!?!

Well they're obviously going to actually try this time, so I bet it will turn out better than the original.

I know what you're gonna say right: "The first Killzone sucked, it only got 6.9/10, so why would this one be any better?". People don't realise that things are a little different this time around.

Well, here are my reasons why I think Killzone for the PS3 could be great:

1. Development Team

There are more than 120 developers in the Netherlands working on the game at the moment. The new Killzone PS3 will be fully translated in 20 different languages. 120 devs is a huge number to be working on the one game, and is a large increase from the original Killzone for PS2. Yes, quality over quantity, but how about you give the devs a chance before making assumptions that the game will suck. There are devs from the original Killzone, the Killzone on PSP which was AA on Gamespot, and many news devs brought in specifically when Sony bought Guerrilla Games.

2. Budget

It is believed that the budget currently surpasses £20 million ($40million), which is comparable to a small-budget Hollywood picture and is the most expensive multimedia project in Holland's history, though this has yet to be confirmed. It will have downloadable content like other contemporary games, possibly in the form of episodic content. Massive budget, and we can only hope that the money could produce a great game (and it very well could).

3. Development Time

It is believed that the game has been in development for over 2 and a half years which is much longer than the rushed Killzone for PS2 which Gamespot claims could have been good with a "few coats of paint". This time, that should not be an issue. The long development time can aid in getting rid of any glitches or bugs, as well as produce an overall solid FPS game. The technical limitations of the PS2 also stopped KZ on PS2 from being as good as it could have been but this issue does not seem apparent with the PS3 according to Guerrilla.

4. Fear of Halo

Sony knows that there was not one (good) exclusive FPS on the PS2. This is one thing critics and the gaming community in general agreed on. That, and the fact that online wasn't great and that there weren't enough 1st party games.

All of that is changing with the PS3. The online is getting better as time goes on, there are plenty of highly anticipated 1st party games coming to the PS3 (Uncharted, Killzone, Heavenly Sword, Lair, Ratchet, Jak, Killzone etc).

And Sony knows it needs to compete with Halo. And you can bet that's the reason Sony bought Guerrilla a while back and that's the reason the game has such a big budget, huge dev team and very long dev time.

That's it. Killzone could be great. Things are different this time around (Budget, 120 dev team, and long development time). I'm not arguing that this game will be great, but it has strong potential to be great, and people have to accept that instead of writing it off as "another FPS", because the shock could very well be too much to handle on release.

What do you guys think?

the-very-best

I just hope it has a good Online mode, because games here at Gamespot seem to get slamed in the rateings, if they don't have a online mode.

$40million + in development alone? I do agree the game has potential to be great and that is all there is to it.

However, I still believe that the whole problem of KZ not being as good as it could have been on PS2 because of its hardware limitations is just a bunch of bollocks. If anything, I believe the hardware was horribly used.

That becomes mostly apparent when you actually play the game. They can say whatever they want, but some flaws in that game had nothing to do with the hardwares limitation.

it could be great..or it could be very boring much like the first one.

$40million + in development alone? I do agree the game has potential to be great and that is all there is to it.

However, I still believe that the whole problem of KZ not being as good as it could have been on PS2 because of its hardware limitations is just a bunch of bollocks. If anything, I believe the hardware was horribly used.

That becomes mostly apparent when you actually play the game. They can say whatever they want, but some flaws in that game had nothing to do with the hardwares limitation.

StealthSting

Yeah, I think a lot to do with the game being rushed. It really needed a few more months development time but then it wouldn't have been released in the holiday season.

The story wasn't too bad, and the MP was OK, but the game could have been an AA game at least if they just took more time with it.

That doesn't seem to be happening with the PS3 version, which can only mean good things.

Dude awsome post, the only thing is that the Budget is 20 million dollars not euros i THINK...But w/e its an awsome post i agree 100% with you

BTW, more coders =/= better coding. If you have 150 people writting the script for a play does that make it better? No, it makes the whole job of making a play rather confusing personally. Get me 10 good ones and I guarentee more will get done then 100 good ones.kittykatz5k

You don't know how many coders are working on the game, and neither do I.

All we know is that the dev team comprises of 120 people, which could just be a result of Sony buying GG and pumping money and people into the game to try and make it a great game.

Could be, yes. But I'm reserving my judgment for now, as I would advise the rest of you to do.

Excellent. Finally someone says that Killzone 2 could be great, instead of insisting ad nauseum that it will be. D0013ER

Any game could be great, though.

Guess we will find out at E3.... when is E3 anyway?

Yet, another amazing post made by The-Very-Best!

Kudos to you.

Guess we will find out at E3.... when is E3 anyway?

PimpiNbananas

[QUOTE="PimpiNbananas"]

Guess we will find out at E3.... when is E3 anyway?

Bluestorm-Kalas

http://e3.gamespot.com/?tag=promo;title

Any game could be great, though.

KAS3Y_JAM3Z

Yes, but this game has a hell of a lot of funding, plenty of devs and very long dev time so it's chances of being great are a little higher than most. I'm hyping AA though. I think it'll be a bit like Resistance. Solid, but not creative enough.

I just hope it has a good Online mode, because games here at Gamespot seem to get slamed in the rateings, if they don't have a online mode.

marvelfan

If it's as good as Resistance's online then it should do well in the MP department. From what I've heard Resistance has a great online, practically lag free due to the dedicated servers, which should happen for Killzone too.

I know what you're gonna say right: "The first Killzone sucked, it only got 6.9/10, so why would this one be any better?". People don't realise that things are a little different this time around.

Well, here are my reasons why I think Killzone for the PS3 could be great:

1. Development Team

There are more than 120 developers in the Netherlands working on the game at the moment. The new Killzone PS3 will be fully translated in 20 different languages. 120 devs is a huge number to be working on the one game, and is a large increase from the original Killzone for PS2. Yes, quality over quantity, but how about you give the devs a chance before making assumptions that the game will suck. There are devs from the original Killzone, the Killzone on PSP which was AA on Gamespot, and many news devs brought in specifically when Sony bought Guerrilla Games.

2. Budget

It is believed that the budget currently surpasses £20 million ($40million), which is comparable to a small-budget Hollywood picture and is the most expensive multimedia project in Holland's history, though this has yet to be confirmed. It will have downloadable content like other contemporary games, possibly in the form of episodic content. Massive budget, and we can only hope that the money could produce a great game (and it very well could).

3. Development Time

It is believed that the game has been in development for over 2 and a half years which is much longer than the rushed Killzone for PS2 which Gamespot claims could have been good with a "few coats of paint". This time, that should not be an issue. The long development time can aid in getting rid of any glitches or bugs, as well as produce an overall solid FPS game. The technical limitations of the PS2 also stopped KZ on PS2 from being as good as it could have been but this issue does not seem apparent with the PS3 according to Guerrilla.

4. Fear of Halo

Sony knows that there was not one (good) exclusive FPS on the PS2. This is one thing critics and the gaming community in general agreed on. That, and the fact that online wasn't great and that there weren't enough 1st party games.

All of that is changing with the PS3. The online is getting better as time goes on, there are plenty of highly anticipated 1st party games coming to the PS3 (Uncharted, Killzone, Heavenly Sword, Lair, Ratchet, Jak, Killzone etc).

And Sony knows it needs to compete with Halo. And you can bet that's the reason Sony bought Guerrilla a while back and that's the reason the game has such a big budget, huge dev team and very long dev time.

That's it. Killzone could be great. Things are different this time around (Budget, 120 dev team, and long development time). I'm not arguing that this game will be great, but it has strong potential to be great, and people have to accept that instead of writing it off as "another FPS", because the shock could very well be too much to handle on release.

What do you guys think?

the-very-best

Those are all reasons why it could look good, not be good, im sorry but its very likely this game will suck.

The problem with people these days is that they think, just because the first one wasn't as good...the 2nd one is an autoflop or something.

Thing many have to keep in mind is that, alot is different this time around....and the poster mentioned all this. If anything is should be ALOT better.

[QUOTE="KAS3Y_JAM3Z"]

Any game could be great, though.

the-very-best

Yes, but this game has a hell of a lot of funding, plenty of devs and very long dev time so it's chances of being great are a little higher than most. I'm hyping AA though. I think it'll be a bit like Resistance. Solid, but not creative enough.

I just hope it has a good Online mode, because games here at Gamespot seem to get slamed in the rateings, if they don't have a online mode.

marvelfan

If it's as good as Resistance's online then it should do well in the MP department. From what I've heard Resistance has a great online, practically lag free due to the dedicated servers, which should happen for Killzone too.

Resistance's online is awesome. Not quite as fun as GeoW IMO, but lag free with great matchmaking and waaay more options that most online games.

[QUOTE="the-very-best"]

I know what you're gonna say right: "The first Killzone sucked, it only got 6.9/10, so why would this one be any better?". People don't realise that things are a little different this time around.

Well, here are my reasons why I think Killzone for the PS3 could be great:

1. Development Team

There are more than 120 developers in the Netherlands working on the game at the moment. The new Killzone PS3 will be fully translated in 20 different languages. 120 devs is a huge number to be working on the one game, and is a large increase from the original Killzone for PS2. Yes, quality over quantity, but how about you give the devs a chance before making assumptions that the game will suck. There are devs from the original Killzone, the Killzone on PSP which was AA on Gamespot, and many news devs brought in specifically when Sony bought Guerrilla Games.

2. Budget

It is believed that the budget currently surpasses £20 million ($40million), which is comparable to a small-budget Hollywood picture and is the most expensive multimedia project in Holland's history, though this has yet to be confirmed. It will have downloadable content like other contemporary games, possibly in the form of episodic content. Massive budget, and we can only hope that the money could produce a great game (and it very well could).

3. Development Time

It is believed that the game has been in development for over 2 and a half years which is much longer than the rushed Killzone for PS2 which Gamespot claims could have been good with a "few coats of paint". This time, that should not be an issue. The long development time can aid in getting rid of any glitches or bugs, as well as produce an overall solid FPS game. The technical limitations of the PS2 also stopped KZ on PS2 from being as good as it could have been but this issue does not seem apparent with the PS3 according to Guerrilla.

4. Fear of Halo

Sony knows that there was not one (good) exclusive FPS on the PS2. This is one thing critics and the gaming community in general agreed on. That, and the fact that online wasn't great and that there weren't enough 1st party games.

All of that is changing with the PS3. The online is getting better as time goes on, there are plenty of highly anticipated 1st party games coming to the PS3 (Uncharted, Killzone, Heavenly Sword, Lair, Ratchet, Jak, Killzone etc).

And Sony knows it needs to compete with Halo. And you can bet that's the reason Sony bought Guerrilla a while back and that's the reason the game has such a big budget, huge dev team and very long dev time.

That's it. Killzone could be great. Things are different this time around (Budget, 120 dev team, and long development time). I'm not arguing that this game will be great, but it has strong potential to be great, and people have to accept that instead of writing it off as "another FPS", because the shock could very well be too much to handle on release.

What do you guys think?

michael098

Those are all reasons why it could look good, not be good, im sorry but its very likely this game will suck.

you know, he wasn't speaking about gfx, but the overall game.

The WHAT-IF game is an easy game to play.

Why don't we just wait until some real info comes out on the game... at least some gameplay video or screenshots. Right now, no amount of resources or budget will convince me.

It's nice that you're taking the cup-is-half-full approach, but there's the flipside of that too....the big dev team and huge budget could result in a game that's a waste of time and money. Both are equally likely to happen.

Stop posting those BS shots of killzone 2. It could be great but what you're showing is as good as us sheep showing red steel's "old screenshots".kittykatz5k

I agree. The screenshotes were not needed. Also, the game has only been in development since the E3 2006 when the Killzone movie was made. If it was in development for 2 years, we would have seen some game-play by now.