Killzone 3

[MrTires]

Originally Posted by StereoMike

Yup, mine was downloaded when I got up this morning.

That is good news because I forgot about it last night.

[Bageara]

Just played the SP demo, really really good. The graphics are stunning!

Seems to to be brighter not as dull and gloomy as KZ2 the flashes and explosions add a lot of colour too, RICO not to annoying, controls still weighty but not laggy, GG obviously went out to fix these things since they were common complaints.(not for me though)

Great fun!

[garlad]

Originally Posted by Bageara

Just played the SP demo, really really good. The graphics are stunning!

Seems to to be brighter not as dull and gloomy as KZ2 the flashes and explosions add a lot of colour too, RICO not to annoying, controls still weighty but not laggy, GG obviously went out to fix these things since they were common complaints.(not for me though)

Great fun!

class! might be more up my street than MP.. I just get DESTROYED online! Impossible!!

[truth411]

Originally Posted by Bageara

Just played the SP demo, really really good. The graphics are stunning!

Seems to to be brighter not as dull and gloomy as KZ2 the flashes and explosions add a lot of colour too, RICO not to annoying, controls still weighty but not laggy, GG obviously went out to fix these things since they were common complaints.(not for me though)

Great fun!

I agree. I'm New to this site, the SP demo is nice. Personaly I liked Killzone 2 shooting mechanics better, but it is what it is . I played on Veteren, and it seems KZ3 is more forgiving to those who like to run n gun. I like KZ3 but it don't seem as stratigic as KZ2, That said the detials in the visuals are amazing. The weapons look great (best I've seen) and every single bullet the Hellgast shoot has a smoke trail that slowly fades away. The water looks amazing, and I suspect KZ3 might have the best Volumetric smoke ever...

[Darkhawk9587]

I played this last night and then KZ2 today and noticed a big difference. To me, KZ3 seems like a lot of other mainstay shooters. Not that that's a bad thing, I just don't know if I'll be getting this right away now.

[Bageara]

Originally Posted by truth411

I agree. I'm New to this site, the SP demo is nice. Personaly I liked Killzone 2 shooting mechanics better, but it is what it is . I played on Veteren, and it seems KZ3 is more forgiving to those who like to run n gun. I like KZ3 but it don't seem as stratigic as KZ2, That said the detials in the visuals are amazing. The weapons look great (best I've seen) and every single bullet the Hellgast shoot has a smoke trail that slowly fades away. The water looks amazing, and I suspect KZ3 might have the best Volumetric smoke ever...

Welcome to the forums yeah the attention to detail in this game is awesome

Originally Posted by Darkhawk9587

I played this last night and then KZ2 today and noticed a big difference. To me, KZ3 seems like a lot of other mainstay shooters. Not that that's a bad thing, I just don't know if I'll be getting this right away now.

Yeah thats it where the KZ2 hardcore loved the things the mainstream gamers hated like very heavy controls, loads of recoil, no aim assist, able to take considerable damage etc GG have tried to meet everyone in the middle hoping to keep the KZ2 fans but attract the COD and BFBC players too and who can blame them for doing so and i think they have made a good job of it, unfortunately quite a few KZ2 Vets dont agree

[Snake_XRS]

I just played the open beta for the first time, but it seems like the game's control scheme felt more like Killzone 2 before the precision shooting patch. Why are people saying it feels like COD? For me there was still that delay of when you input to move to when the character actually does.

[Bageara]

Killzone 3 Demo Making The Latest Reviews Seem Unreliable

Just thought this had a valid point

After playing the single player demo and reading some of the latest reviews, it seems Guerrilla Games latest shooter may have been unfairly nit-picked to the point of ridiculousness by some of the more popular gaming networks.

From the gameplay of this demo it is truly hard to believe any respectable gaming journalist would actually undercut this experience with negative propaganda based on some self righteous quest to be different. These reviews might be going beyond the point of an opinion. They can appear to become over-exaggerated banter with no respect for the herculean development efforts put forth by Guerrilla Games.

From complaints that the cut-scenes go black causing too much delay between the action, the dialogue being considered flat and boring with no real need to listen, to being called a ‘miserable experience’, and not offering anything new to the genre which I must add is a complete double-standard, this demo begs to differ in a big way. In fact this demo which more than likely doesn’t scratch the surface of the full experience makes an embarrassing mess of the holes found in some the latest reviews.

Nevertheless, this only a demo.

To our gaming journalist brother and sisters who tirelessly and HONESTLY place the interest and concerns of gamers before their very own, I salute you.

http://game-insider.com/2011/02/09/k...look-real-bad/

[Rike255]

Originally Posted by Bageara

Killzone 3 Demo Making The Latest Reviews Seem Unreliable

Just thought this had a valid point

http://game-insider.com/2011/02/09/k...look-real-bad/

Lol, that article sums up my opinion of pretty much all reviewers in general (not just KZ3) almost eerily well.

[BlackMamba]

I don't know Bagaera... the guy just comes off as angry that a game he had high hopes for didn't garner the 9.5/10 elite status he was hoping it would. If I had my choice of trusting a group of reviewers who each seem to echo the same sentiments or a Killzone fanboy (who hasn't even played the full game), I'd go with the former Also, how does this dude know what the "interests and concerns of gamers" are? That statement is telling and perhaps underscores his own biases. Is it really in our best interest to have a hugely-hyped game get straight 9.5-10/10s and then disappoint? The guy is delusional.

And, to be completely honest, all the reviewers did was criticize the single-player campaign, which if Killzone 2 is any guide, is pretty accurate in my mind. I lost interest in KZ2's solo mode after 5-6 missions and never missed it, but absolutely LOVED KZ2's multiplayer. If reviewers are looking at the game as a whole, it should be no surprise that it's averaging somewhere in the 8.5-9/10 range.

[StereoMike]

I hate reviews. From now on, I quit posting a link to any reviews. I wish Blu-ray.com would ban them, they don't bring anything, too much contradiction, and most of them are biased.

[Bageara]

Originally Posted by BlackMamba

I don't know Bagaera... the guy just comes off as angry that a game he had high hopes for didn't garner the 9.5/10 elite status he was hoping it would. If I had my choice of trusting a group of reviewers who each seem to echo the same sentiments or a Killzone fanboy (as much as I loved Killzone 2), I'd go with the former

And, to be completely honest, all the reviewers did was criticize the single-player campaign, which if Killzone 2 is any guide, is pretty accurate in my mind. I lost interest in KZ2's solo mode after 5-6 missions and never missed it, but absolutely LOVED KZ2's multiplayer. If reviewers are looking at the game as a whole, it should be no surprise that it's averaging somewhere in the 8.5-9/10 range.

I dont sense any anger there and I agree with him. Some reviewers made KZ3 sound like a run of the mill shooter but my experience of the private beta, open beta and SP demo KZ3 comes across as pretty damn special, of course this just my opinion

[BlackMamba]

Basically, I don't buy into the "let's give every massively hyped game a 9.5/10 so the fanboys will be happy" mentality

[BlackMamba]

Originally Posted by Bageara

I dont sense any anger there and I agree with him. Some reviewers made KZ3 sound like a run of the mill shooter but my experience of the private beta, open beta and SP demo KZ3 comes across as pretty damn special, of course this just my opinion

There's anger there (maybe we can term it "frustration", but either way, it's pretty evident to me throughout his writing). I don't think any reviewer is proclaiming it a run-of-the-mill shooter. It seems to me that this is simply a case of lower-than-expected scores and fans are bitter (we all have a tendency to expect 90+ scores from our Most Wanted games because of the way we are conditioned growing up with A's [top students] being those who score 90 or above). I have not seen anyone strongly criticize the game as a whole. It's still scoring quite well and certainly better than your average shooter.

And, trust me, I've gotten mad over the same thing, so I know what it sounds like when someone else says it.

[Bageara]

Originally Posted by BlackMamba

Basically, I don't buy into the "let's give every massively hyped game a 9.5/10 so the fanboys will be happy" mentality

This rule only applies to 360 exclusives, P33 exclusives get 0.5-1.0 knocked off its actual score. Sorry i know you will disagree but im a big believer in the conspiracy theory, IMO US gaming journalism IS biased

[BlackMamba]

Originally Posted by Bageara

This rule only applies to 360 exclusives, P33 exclusives get 0.5-1.0 knocked off its actual score. Sorry i know you will disagree but im a big believer in the conspiracy theory, IMO US gaming journalism IS biased

I actually don't totally disagree, but I do feel like that's a thing of the past. I was much more inclined to believe this theory a couple years ago. I am, admittedly, a Sony/Playstation sympathizer. Catch me anywhere but on these (and other Playstation) boards and I'm all about anything Playstation. But, I can speak more candidly here because I'm not adding to the troll-baiting that goes on in multi-gaming boards.

[AikonEnt]

Originally Posted by Bageara

This rule only applies to 360 exclusives, P33 exclusives get 0.5-1.0 knocked off its actual score. Sorry i know you will disagree but im a big believer in the conspiracy theory, IMO US gaming journalism IS biased

Well I agree . If this had been multi-plat it would have scored more, if this had been a 360 exclusive it would have scored more, if this had COD at the beginning of the name it would have scored more. Now I'm not saying it should get 10/10 (as far as I'm concerned no game should because every game can be improved, yes even U2 ) but the average scores should be higher than they are.

[BlackMamba]

Originally Posted by AikonEnt

but the average scores should be higher than they are.

but, why? I think the bigger question is why do massively-hyped games need to achieve the magical 90% threshold to justify their existence to the gaming masses? There obviously is a yearning desire for this sort of validation amongst fans (as evidenced early on in the PS3 life cycle with Uncharted and R&C's brief flirtations at the 89.8% mark and the huge push by PS3 gamers to get those games over the hump in order to validate them to the rest of the gaming community), but why sacrifice integrity and honesty for this?

[Snicket]

I think this issue needs its own topic.

IMHO...internet reviews in general are a load of hot steaming crap. Same goes for movies online as well, if people know they can say outlandish and untrue things about a game, people will flock to the site and the traffic will rise, so there always is an alternate motive for bad reviews.

Secondly, Video game reviews in general are amateurs. How many have a degree in journalism? How many have real world experience in games, like in game development? How many know how to look at a game past its cover and are able to describe how the game does or does not work? And I'm not talking about the mechanics of the thing, but how it really "works" much in the same way that a movie "works". Until we can do a critical analysis of games, reviews are always going to go skin deep, nothing more.

IGN is a classic example. A website with very high traffic and is known by almost all gamers. And they act like they are in the locker room of a Jr. High School. I'm sure their Monday morning meetings are a brainstorm of all the "lol catz" pictures they can use for their headline stories. They basically have the gaming worlds attention, then they use it as a platform for their juvenile endeavors.

Lets take ourselves more seriously ok gamers? Games are supposed to be fun, exactly true, but we can show more class than having Dane Cook dish out awful God Of War jokes on the VGA awards. If we want the world to take games more seriously, we need to take ourselves and our art more seriously. This means simply ignoring online sites that launch game reviews just to nitpick, or say nonsense just to cause the sites traffic to rise.


Ok, so that was a mega rant, if you made it all the way through, I applaud you, and give you 1 smiley.

[tarvis]

Shrug. I have a profession without a degree. And you don't need to have worked in a field to have an opinion about it. I'm not a professional chef but I know when something doesn't taste good to me.

Originally Posted by Bageara

Yep you can kill dudes faster

Hooray.