Kaz_Son's forum posts

Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

[QUOTE="Kaz_Son"][QUOTE="HavocV3"]

Franchise, you say?

Ouch.

Mediocrity confirmed. 

HavocV3

:roll: A PS2 game? Really? Is that the best you can come up with? If that's all you've got then I rest my case. You had to go all the way back to the PS2 (over 9 years ago) to dig out a score to bash KZSF. Pretty pathetic especially when you consider the Killzone 2 is a 91 on metacritic. You fail good sir.

-Are you claiming that Killzone isn't a part of the >Killzone franchise<? 

-Are you going to keep calling Crysis a shitty >franchise< when the first game also has a 91 on MC?

You keep making up new rules for your little game.  But you keep losing. 

That must be depressing. 

 

 

 

 

Stop trolling dude. Crysis 1 and Warhead were great games. The series went downhill with Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 is mediocre, no way around that. Killzone 1 was mediocre like I said in my earlier post but every other KZ has been AA-AAA since then, the same can't be said about Crysis hence why I call it a mediocre franchise. What's so hard to understand about my post?
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

[QUOTE="Demonjoe93"]

[QUOTE="HavocV3"]

Franchise, you say?

Ouch.

Mediocrity confirmed. 

HavocV3

1. Since when was a 70 mediocre?

2. That was the first game in the series, and it came out almost nine years ago.

Why are you asking me this question?

The guy claimed that 76 was mediocre(shitty, actually)  By his logic 70 has to be mediocre or worse.

I don't actually believe any of this...I'm just playing a little game here. 

Killzone 1 was mediocre but it was over 9 years ago on the PS2. Killzone Liberation, KZ2, and KZ3 have released since then and have all gotten AA-AAA scores on metacritic. Crysis 3 released this year with a 76 on metacrtic (6.6 user score). Both situations aren't similar at all, stop trying to spin things. Crysis is a mediocre franchise as of late. It hasn't been great since Crysis Warhead.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

[QUOTE="Kaz_Son"][QUOTE="HavocV3"]

Scores were already irrelevant to the premise of the thread.

Try to keep up. 

HavocV3

Nah, some people in this thread are trying to make it look like Killzone is a mediocre franchise when it clearly isn't compared to shitty games like Crysis 3 that gets mentioned a whole lot in this forum. Scores are justifiable in this thread.

Franchise, you say?

Ouch.

Mediocrity confirmed. 

:roll: A PS2 game? Really? Is that the best you can come up with? If that's all you've got then I rest my case. You had to go all the way back to the PS2 (over 9 years ago) to dig out a score to bash KZSF. Pretty pathetic especially when you consider the Killzone 2 is a 91 on metacritic. You fail good sir.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

[QUOTE="Kaz_Son"][QUOTE="HavocV3"]

(2011) Crysis 2 PC - 86.

(2011) Killzone 3- 84.

Just to compare the games that happened to release in the same year. 

HavocV3

Irrelevant. Crysis 3 is still hot garbage.

Scores were already irrelevant to the premise of the thread.

Try to keep up. 

Nah, some people in this thread are trying to make it look like Killzone is a mediocre franchise when it clearly isn't compared to shitty games like Crysis 3 that gets mentioned a whole lot in this forum. Scores are justifiable in this thread.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

[QUOTE="ramonnl"]crysis 3: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/crysis-3 - 76, 6.2 (pc) killzone 3: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/killzone-3 - 84, 7.9 (ps3) Just to compare scores...HavocV3

(2011) Crysis 2 PC - 86.

(2011) Killzone 3- 84.

Just to compare the games that happened to release in the same year. 

Irrelevant. Crysis 3 is still hot garbage.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts
[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"][QUOTE="Kaz_Son"][QUOTE="ramonnl"] So you're saying that titanfall will look better than killzone:sf when released? Are you sure that you wanna take that bet?

I think that guy is an idiot, don't bother with him. Titanfall looks and plays just like COD. The graphics are rubbish too by today's standards.

Hmm, who's the idiot here?? So you are seriously going to stand here and say that a game that is basically done and a launch title at that will still look better than a game that has almost a year ahead of it to be improved visually and technically??? How about a wager on which scores higher here at GS??? I will bet you that Titanfall will score a full 1.0 higher than KZSF and the loser leaves Gamespot forever!!!!

I'm talking about graphics. I don't give a shit what it scores here on Gamespot. Reviews are garbage these days and can be easily bought. You're an idiot if you think Titanfall will match or beat KZ;SF's graphics at launch.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts
[QUOTE="ramonnl"]crysis 3: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/crysis-3 - 76, 6.2 (pc) killzone 3: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/killzone-3 - 84, 7.9 (ps3) Just to compare scores...

Exactly like I thought. Crysis is a garbage franchise these days. When are hermits gonna stop hyping that mediocre franchise?
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts
[QUOTE="ShoTTyMcNaDeS"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

Visually? Yes. It has large maps, but the lighting, texture-work, and physics are poor to virtually non-existant.

ramonnl
But in this instance we are comparing a game that is 2-3 months at best from going to the factory to be mass produced for the PS4 launch and another game that has another 8+ months of dev time ahead of it. What we have here is Cow hypocrisy at its very best!

So you're saying that titanfall will look better than killzone:sf when released? Are you sure that you wanna take that bet?

I think that guy is an idiot, don't bother with him. Titanfall looks and plays just like COD. The graphics are rubbish too by today's standards.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts
lol even crysis 2 looks better and it can't touch the all mighty and superior crysis 3 :cool: i can hear them cry now :lol:Tessellation
Crysis 2 looks like shit next to this, troll harder. Now if you said Crysis 3 I would have agreed but Crysis 2 vanilla doesn't hold up to this. I don't know why this game gets hate on System Wars. KZ2 is a 91 on metacritic and Killzone 3 is an 84 but from the hate this franchise gets you'd think both games 60% on MC. Looks like a lot of jealous PC fanboys and lemmings hating on this game for no reason. Crysis is a mediocre franchise but gets praised to heaven and back despite the fact that the last time Crysis was good was back with Crysis Warhead. Games like COD get released year after year with minor enhancements and get less than half the hate Killzone does. I will never understand fanboys.
Avatar image for Kaz_Son
Kaz_Son

1389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Kaz_Son
Member since 2013 • 1389 Posts

yeah, I always make decisions about graphics based on off screen video on a compressed youtube video

lostrib
yea the OP is an idiot. He thinks that shitty video represents the game's graphics. Even Crysis 3 will look bad in compressed offscreen YouTube videos.