I understand the whole topic and drama of two years ago but why the hype. I thought the first one on ps2 was terrible, then they show a tech demo video. Yeah i understand that it can be done based on what Call of Duty 4 showed off, but really after seeing Crysis...not that i am saying Crysis owns how can anyone really take Killzone seriously. Even if it matches e3 2005 and it does crush Halo 3 in terms of scope everyone including Fanboys(which i hate) know that Halo 3 sales will be to big to compete thanks to its well i would say fanbase. I got the 360 and i don't really think its all that nor the Ps3 at the moment but i won't knock pS3 cause i have yet to own it. I just mean in regards to seeing Crysis i can't really say any FPS is gonna match its look, not to say it will be good. Halo 3 is a console fps at most and i will enjoy it for the fun, but i know firsthand PC fps games own all console, i just prefer messing around with that genre on my consoles. Now i would love to see a game like Ico or Shadow of the Colusses for the PS3 this e3. I really think those two games are amazing. I'm not knocking Killzone either just saying does anyone else get what i mean. I know fanboys won't cause well there idiots.
I understand the anticipation, as I'm kinda curious as to how it will turn out myself. What I don't understand is the people that claim it will somehow be the best FPS ever based simply on it's budget.
the first one was INDEED better than Halo 2 in terms of story-telling GRAPHICS, THE gameplay well although limited due to the Ps2's weak hardware, it showed a lot of promise!
Log in to comment