I'm excited for it WITHOUT having to see any screenshots or videos, not only because there's a HUGE budget and dev team, but because:
-they have an ambitious target render they know they have to come close to, lest the media backlash begin.
-a previous game to help them know what works and what doesn't (gameplay-related, or otherwise) under their belt (so to speak),
-they have the newest advancements in understanding the PS3's hardware (practically a given for such a big title),
-And the uninterrupted time that those 2 years of silence allowed them to work on it (I know they've probably been working on it longer, but as far as the media retraction for it goes) without having to work on demos and what not.
this may be wat the original killzone was originally aspiring to be.
I mean the first KILLZONE wasn't as bad as everyone thinks. It scored a 7.5 on IGN (one of the few sites I trust for reviews) with these closing comments:
Closing Comments
You're reading about a straightforward shooter limited by technology. All the hype built up to a decent game presented in an intriguing universe and with a stunning sense of art direction. Ironically though, it's the audio and visual qualities (however faulted they may sometimes be) that save the actual underwhelming gameplay of this one from utter mediocrity.
Now even though playing Killzone is to be bombarded by bugs and glitches and technological inadequacies, the whole experience is definitely worth playing. Before you purchase it expecting Halo to spontaneously combust, just remember the profound words of our ratings guide and its 7.0 descriptor, "Killzone is a good game that has some obvious flaws."
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/561/561669p1.html
Log in to comment