Killzone 2 on IGN

[Dodo]

CLICK !!

-dodo

 

[Gargantou]

That article is retarded lol
"I will personally say that I can't remember seeing a more impressive lighting model than this. More realistic? Maybe. But more impressive? No."

I think this guy hasn't played/seen Alan Wake or Crysis!

 

[Dodo]

TRAILER !! (user video)

-dodo

 

[oidipusss]

Amazed:rolling:

 

[Majestic XII]

TRAILER !! (user video)

-dodo

The old pre-rendered one.

 

[Dodo]

oops ! must of linked it after it finished and started playing the next movie inline. I'll edit it.

-dodo

 

[Warbie]

Blimey, that looks excellent.

umm ... *hugs ps3*

That felt odd.

 

[Asknoone]

That looked pretty epic, and I love the gritty war-ridden city. Mind, if it's just the same move from bit to bit and shoot the enemies as in the first/Halo, I'm going to be letdown (though, not so much if they actually improve combat this time around). Also, what the **** is up with that ridiculous ship at the beginning. This is the future, and they have decided that instead of troops behind inside the drop ship, they are going to be on the top.

How ****ing dumb is that?

 

[Gorgon]

game spot got the official trailer, its ****ing sweet, graphics, and fighting style = 10/10

 

[Dodo]

HERE'S the HD version of the trailer ! As for the dropship's (AKA Intruder's) they could have put some safety lines on there !

-dodo

 

[Gargantou]

It looks pretty sweet, but it's nothing that's gonna make me buy a PS3 when I already have a high-end PC and a 360..

 

[Icarusintel]

The opening was once again fantastic, but we couldn't help but sit there and think, "When are we finally going to see some in-game footage?" The only thing was that we had been looking at in-game footage. As soon as our soldier hits the ground and his gun comes into view, very much like what we saw with the opening to Resistance, we couldn't help but think, "Holy hell, all of that was in-game?"

I read this before watching the video and went D:

Then I watched the video and went D:

By God they got damn close to the CG, much closer than I expected, and they still have a long time to work on it. I will buy Killzone 2. This is one of the reasons I got a PS3.

 

[Gargantou]

So one of the reasons you bought a PS3 was because it was getting a sequel to a very mediocre PS2 FPS?

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

http://kotaku.com/gaming/e307/killzone-2-e3-trailer-277084.php

My god, this trailer just looks sexy as hell. Another reason to buy PS3, damnit.. gonna burn a huge hole in my wallet.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/e307/killzone-2-impressions-277070.php

Just the look of combat is seeming incredible, even if it is the sequel to a not so great game - the fact that it even features enemies that react to gunshots is a step up from the average modern fps. Location based animation based on gunshot wounds = win and immersion. Also the environments and animations looks simply stellar. I can't help but get a chubby from the last 15 seconds of that trailer. FPS never looked so enthralling.

Sad to think it could all go to hell if they let the things that plagued the original game carry over, such as the horrendous save system or the little to no replay value.

 

[Asknoone]

So one of the reasons you bought a PS3 was because it was getting a sequel to a very mediocre PS2 FPS?

Hehe

 

[Gargantou]

Another reason to be PS3

Excuse me but how exactly do you "Be" a PS3? Do you dress up in a black box and go around making a shitload of fan-noises?

 

[Bad^Hat]

Looks pretty generic. But atleast it's generically pretty.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

In the Kotaku article they mention that a single level takes up 4gb, that reminds me why I want PS3, developer have the freedom of Blu-Ray disks.

Excuse me but how exactly do you "Be" a PS3? Do you dress up in a black box and go around making a shitload of fan-noises?

Haha I've been up all night gimmie a break. Though I do think I would benefit from Cell processing.

Looks pretty generic. But atleast it's generically pretty.

Yeah it does sort of seem a bit like every other futuristic war fps around, especially in the opening segment.. how many times are we going to see the Medal of Honor / Saving Private Ryan sequence?

 

[Gargantou]

In the Kotaku article they mention that a single level takes up 4gb, that reminds me why I want PS3, developer have the freedom of Blu-Ray disks.



Haha I've been up all night gimmie a break. Though I do think I would benefit from Cell processing.

Yeah, but you have to keep in mind, most devs dont even make full use of DVD-9s still...
Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if that was bullshit.. Keep in mind Sony are publishing it.. And we all know how Sony LOVES to hype.. Anyone remember PS2 da suparcomputar with da emotion engine?

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Yeah, but you have to keep in mind, most devs dont even make full use of DVD-9s still...
Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if that was bullshit.. Keep in mind Sony are publishing it.. And we all know how Sony LOVES to hype.. Anyone remember PS2 da suparcomputar with da emotion engine?

It's future proof, if you think about the amount of texture data that's going into modern FPS games it actually makes quite a bit of sense. The amount of data games take up has and will continue to go up exponentially. It becomes obvious on PC especially. Hell STALKER takes about 10 gigs of space unpacked on your PC.

I'm not one for fanboyism, and I think Sony suffers in the marketing and pricepoint arguments, but I still think it's an extremely impressive piece of hardware. And given the scope of modern game development could bring gaming forward in a lot of ways.

 

[Warbie]

I like the way bullets actually look like they're doing damage - nice and squelchy on impact. This was one of my main annoyances with HL2, never did it feel like I was shooting combine. Unsatisfying combat ftl.

 

[VirusType2]

Doesn't look like it's going to be a good game. I was actually rooting for Sony to have something this time, as I'm starting to pity them.

The game looks pretty bad, and I feel bad to say this, because I have friends that own Playstations (well, a couple of guys here on the forums), but I'm not going to pull any punches.

The entire game is black and white and low texture resolution. The only thing with color are the faces and the explosions. The explosions look pretty plain. The explosion from their buddies drop ship with the fire trail going down into the building was so bad... I've seen better stuff in Doom 3, and that game is years old. I'm sure people expected more from Playstation 3. The black smoke from the buildings is great, but big deal. The rest of the effects are a mixed bag of good and bad. The soldiers texture resolution looked low and colorless.

This looks absolutely crap compared to the old CGI Sony tried to put off as PS3 graphics last year.


So far, the 360 system is looking way more powerful graphically, just like I told you it would be before either of them even came out.


I feel sorry for playstation 3 owners. This marks the end of Sony's Playstation dominance. Their games so far look like 2 or 3 year old PC games, while the 360 games look on par or better than brand new PC games, and they run great.


You won't like what I'm saying if you are a Playstation fanboy, but I'm just telling it like I see it. Hey, at least you got a free game system with your Blu Ray player though. grats on that. I'll probably just pick up an HD DVD player when they are dirt cheap, like $175 or less.


I know there aren't any good games yet, but Is there any game on the PS3 with good graphics yet? How is the DiRT review? or did that not come out for PS3 yet?


I'd like to see and read about the differences between the three different versions of DiRT.

I've got DiRT for the PC, and it has the best graphics I've ever seen. I heard it is selling like crazy on the 360, but haven't heard anything about the PS3 version.

If you bought a PS3, you should get DiRT, as thats a great game if you like rally racing, and you've got to be desperate for something to play.

 

[Asknoone]

I seriously can't be the only one who thinks soldiers on top of a dropship is ****ing stupid.

I like the way bullets actually look like they're doing damage - nice and squelchy on impact. This was one of my main announces with HL2, never did it feel like I was shooting combine. Unsatisfying combat ftl.

That's because some games aren't mundane enough to have a narrow-minded view on what an FPS should be. :cheese:

Actually, I agree about the Killzone combat looking quite visceral. I'm all for a little more jazz in HL2 combat, but I want to see Killzone adopt the HL2 kind of gameplay philosophy, otherwise it'll just be generic, as someone said. And Warbs, you can't say you don't like that, because Resi 4 adopts it as well.

 

[VictimOfScience]

I am extremely impressed with this, the first time anyone has seen the game running in any form. Development still has a long way to go, but it is really looking good so far and it seems they know how well this game has to do for them. I can't wait for the HD version to be released on the PSN at 6pm EST today. Watching this on my HDTV will surely be quite amazing!!:thumbs:

I seriously can't be the only one who thinks soldiers on top of a dropship is ****ing stupid.

I can totally see your point, but it reminded me of the skiff in Return of the Jedi, so I like it.

 

[Bad^Hat]

If they didn't put them on top of the dropship, how would they freeze their nuts off?

You're not hardcore in the future unless you have frozen nuts.

 

[Anthraxxx]

Shhh! Don't crush the dreams of PS3 owners. You gotta leave them something to be hopeful about!!!

In fact, I hope Killzone 2 turns out to be a really good game. I wasn't too impressed with the first one though...

edit: they also need a reason to justify their purchase of a PS3, because the PS3 library just isn't tha tgreat yet...

 

[Warbie]

I have to disagree with you there, Virus - Killzone 2 looks very decent from that trailer, and certainly shits all over Doom 3, FEAR etc in visuals. Textures aren't that high res or incredibly detailed, but look at how much action is going on at the same time. I'll take a busy game that runs smoothly over the sparse and completely souless fps we've been spoon fed on the pc over the last 5 years. Resistance is much the same - lacking in detail, but full to the brim. A still shot of the game looks rubbish, watch it in motion at a constant 60 fps and it can be breath taking.

HL2 is very much an exception to the rule in pc fps in that it feels 'lived in' and doesn't look like a bunch of textures (and even that had very average combat)

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I seriously can't be the only one who thinks soldiers on top of a dropship is ****ing stupid.



That's because some games aren't mundane enough to have a narrow-minded view on what an FPS should be. :cheese:

I think it's for dramatic effect, as stupid and inconvenient as it would be in real life. But yeah that entire sequence just threw me way off. Also regarding the fact that HL2's combat is one if it's major annoyances is a legit claim, for much of the game they are throwing combine soldiers at you, so it might as well be fun to combat them. While other features certainly more than make up for this - it just remains one of my peeves with the game.

 

[Dodo]

Hah, i wish i could say more !!

-dodo

 

[Warbie]

That's because some games aren't mundane enough to have a narrow-minded view on what an FPS should be. :cheese:

You mean a first person shooter that actually does shooting well? That's just crazy talk

Forgive me for wanting a shooter that demands a little quick thinking and offers more fight than 8 year old holding a spatula

 

[MiccyNarc]

I'm a sucker for good graphics and I think killzone 2 has beautiful graphics. Even if it is all grey and drab, that's part of the effect. I kept on thinking I was watching a movie.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

You mean a first person shooter that actually does shooting well? That's just crazy talk

Forgive me for wanting a shooter that demmands a little quick thinking and offers more fight than 8 year old holding a spatula

I think it's sad that designers still think it's ok for a bullet impact to have absolutely no effect on a human being, it takes away from immersion. You're absolutely right Warbie.

 

[Asknoone]

I think it's for dramatic effect, as stupid and inconvenient as it would be in real life. But yeah that entire sequence just threw me way off.

I can list a number of things that would make something dramatic, but this looks more dumb than anything. Pulls me straight out.

You mean a first person shooter that actually does shooting well? That's just crazy talk

Forgive me for wanting a shooter that demmands a little quick thinking and offers more fight than 8 year old holding a spatula

Despite the many combat scenarios in HL2, the likes of that, and indeed Episode 1, are more about the first person perspective than the shooting. That much is obvious. I'm all for good shooting, but those two definitely feel more about the cinematic experience and the idea of gameplay from a First Person perspective. It isn't about visceral combat and combat alone, which is the sheer mundane direction most yawn-fest shooters go down. It's why Halo is so monotonously dull.

Unless developers embrace this idea of gameplay theory games will remain completely stagnant.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I completely agree with you about the dropship scene.

You make some great points about design philosophy and focus Samon, but dont you think that proper combat would have added to the cinematic feel? I do, I don't see how the fact that the two games offer entirely different approaches to FPS means that it's ok to skimp out on combat.

Even if the game isn't combat-centric, making the combat interesting adds to all those factors your praise Half-Life 2 for.

edit: I phrased that kind of silly, because compared to the average FPS Half-Life 2's combat is oodles more fun. But this is mostly due to environmental and physics interaction, not physically shooting at your enemies. More variety of execution, that's not to say though, that when you do resort to firing directly at your enemy that it shouldn't be as immersive as any other method of execution.

 

[Warbie]

It's why Halo is so monotonously dull.

Speak for yourself. Halo kept me on the edge of my seat for months on end. I like a shooter than needs fast reactions and super quick thinking to survive. HL2 is quite the opposite.

The fact is, the combat in HL2 could and should have been so much better - very average, almost a decade old and surpassed years before it came out. I do appreciate what Valve have done for fps and story telling, i'd now like them to raise the bar in the actual playing of the game.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Speak for yourself. Halo kept me on the edge of my seat for months on end. I like a shooter than needs fast reactions and super quick thinking to survive. HL2 is quite the opposite.

The fact is, the combat in HL2 could and should have been so much better - very average, almost a decade old and surpassed years before it came out. I do appreciate what Valve have done for fps and story telling, i'd now like them to raise the bar in the actual playing of the game.

In regards to Halo, I think the combat is about as monotonous as Half Life 2's, enemies don't even so much as flinch when being fired at most of the time.

It's funny because some older games really nailed this concept, see Goldeneye or Perfect Dark, or even Soldier of Fortune

(that's not to say these games were as immersive as HL2, but you get the point, good combat can really add to overall immersion)

I think Halo really captures the chaos of war, but definitely needs work as far as visceral gun bouts.

 

[Asknoone]

i'd now like them to raise the bar in the actual playing of the game.

HL2 already did that though.

Speak for yourself. Halo kept me on the edge of my seat for months on end. I like a shooter than needs fast reactions and super quick thinking to survive. HL2 is quite the opposite.

That would be because Halo is a combat orientated game. There is nothing (fact), more to Halo than combat. That in itself is a dull thing. Halo 2 was absolutely worse in this regard. All Bungie actually do is place enemies in front of the player throughout the entire game.

The fact is, the combat in HL2 could and should have been so much better - very average, almost a decade old and surpassed years before it came out.

I found the combat neither special nor bad. Your thinking is seemingly limited to the idea that an FP game is about combat. The dire and mundane shooters we've seen over the years, especially Halo, has apparently done little to convince you otherwise.

You make some great points about design philosophy and focus Samon, but dont you think that proper combat would have added to the cinematic feel? I do, I don't see how the fact that the two games offer entirely different approaches to FPS means that it's ok to skimp out on combat.

Sure. But if the combat isn't a primary focus, how far are you willing to go in order to truly level it up? The further you take your combat, the further you must change/adapt your game. I'm sure H2 would benefit from slightly more visceral combat but again, HL has always been rooted in the idea of the FPP.

edit: I phrased that kind of silly, because compared to the average FPS Half-Life 2's combat is oodles more fun. But this is mostly due to environmental and physics interaction, not physically shooting at your enemies. More variety of execution, that's not to say though, that when you do resort to firing directly at your enemy that it shouldn't be as immersive as any other method of execution.

I do agree that shooting Combine could pack more punch. Pretty sure Episode 2 has changed some of the hit dynamics.

 

[Warbie]

In regards to Halo, I think the combat is about as monotonous as Half Life 2's, enemies don't even so much as flinch when being fired at most of the time.

Sure, but there is sooo much more depth and challenge to the combat. Better hit animations would be very welcome.

I totally hear what you're saying about GE and PD etc. No fps has captured the feeling of actually shooting your target like these did - not even slightly close. Seeing as GE came out in 1997 this is pretty damn poor.

A combination of ragdolls and hit/death animations is surely the way to go. Combine that with what Mirror's Edge is attempting in regards to movement and giving the player more of a physical presence and we could get something very special.

Atmosphere, story etc etc are all well and good, but it's the gameplay of fps that is tired and needs addressing. fps could be so much better.

 

[IchI]

Gameplay wise we will have to see, but wow... Sony has really shocked me with this one. I really didn't expect this. I was bad mouthing the game and everything. I personally would say the quality of the visuals looks on par with Crysis, might not be as capable as Crysis in scale. But in terms of overall wow factor. It really is very very nice. I noticed that the fighting seemed... fairly generic. The big gatlin gun troopers also just seemed to run at the enemy. Hmmm, we will have to see what it plays like. But Gurilla definatly proved there point with the visuals.

 

[Sparta]

Speak for yourself. Halo kept me on the edge of my seat for months on end. I like a shooter than needs fast reactions and super quick thinking to survive. HL2 is quite the opposite.

The fact is, the combat in HL2 could and should have been so much better - very average, almost a decade old and surpassed years before it came out. I do appreciate what Valve have done for fps and story telling, i'd now like them to raise the bar in the actual playing of the game.

I find it funny that you're praising Halo's monotonous combat and having a go at Half-Life 2's combat. Neither game is perfect, and i'm betting the main reason you love Halo so much is because of how hard it is on Legendary.

If you think the combat wasn't great in Half-Life 2, you should give SMOD a try. Its awesomely awesome compared to vanilla Half-life 2. It's actually consistently challenging.

Now, shall we move along from this Halo/Half-Life nonsense and get back to the topic at hand?