CVG reveiws killzone 2

[Jumplion]

I've been playing Killzone 2 for a while, and I'm loving it so far.

An annoying thing I've seen with alot of these games on the PS3, every time there's this huge exclusive game for the PS3 (MGS4, LittleBigPlanet, Resistance 2, Uncharted, Killzone 2, blah-de-blah-blah, pretty much EVERY FUCKING PS3 game), there's always everyone who says "I don't get it" or "it looks stupid" or "i'm not interested in it" or "it's not special" or "who care about another [insert genre here]" etc....

Quite frankly, it's annoying -_-; People need to play the games to see for themselves, this seems to be the case with so many PS3 exclusives.

But now I'm just ranting to fulfill my inner fanboy, care on!

 

[Rational-Delirium]

That makes no sense. What platform the game is released on should not effect score, only the overal quality of the game itself and how it compares to others in its genre matters. 87% is a good score, no more needs to be said.

The only time platform should be a factor in review is if the game is multi-platform and if it varies in quality.

That wasn't my point. I'm saying that if a game can be considered the best in any league, then it should probibly have a score better than 8.7. Keep in mind Call of Duty 4 is a multiplat and is considered by many to be one of the best fps ever made, so I wasn't referring to exclusives only.

And keep in mind I haven't played Killzone2, so I have as much credibility as a seedless watermelon has seeds (which is to say I don't have much, and don't know how good Killzone2 actually is). I'm only adding my own 2cents.

 

[PirateKing]

I've been playing it for a while and it's definitely a good game. Amazing graphics. It's just kind of a shooter though. I had a lot more fun with the Resistance series.

 

[SteveDave]

This is some pretty good shit. Almost like what would happen if you made fun of Kurt Cobain on youtube.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Funny comments:

"Marked down for no co-op? What the ****!? Did Halo 3 have co-op? NO"

Hahahaha!

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Um... since when is 8.7 a bad score?

Personally I'd give it about an 8.5, mostly due to the shit tastic story, annoying squad AI and lack of variety in the levels.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Um... since when is 8.7 a bad score?

Personally I'd give it about an 8.5, mostly due to the shit tastic story, annoying squad AI and lack of variety in the levels.

All of those things make it sounds as an 8.0 game.

True enough I suppose. Though I don't actually give scores in any of my own reviews on the site.

 

[Tony Grande]

I honestly think that Playstation fans have a feeling of being wronged after comparing reviews to the easy give away 100% scores... In my opinion a game can never reach a full 100% in a review because the reviewer has to be somewhat objective in an opinion of a game. Sounds contradictory, but a reviewer cannot be anything other than subjective and still bear in mind that someone out there might feel that a certain aspect of a game shouldn't be there while another feels it should.

About Killzone 2, I think it's the exact score it deserves... Again my opinion (So fucking annoying that you have to emphasize this every single time) Edit: Maybe not necessary right here but in a general sense.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

I think alot of PS3 "Fanboys" are annoyed that Halo gets a universal 10/10 BEST GAME EVAR! ALWAYS! NO QUESTIONS! for free, where as Sony Titles are always scrutinized to the nth degree. I suppose it's a fair criticism, but Sony is also usually late to the party, with Killzone 2 feeling a hell of a lot like an Ultra Polished Sci-Fi Version of Call of Duty 4 rather than the great heir to a beloved series (Halo 3) or as a strikingly original product that will reshape the way we see gaming.

 

[Tony Grande]

I suppose it's a fair criticism, but Sony is also usually late to the party.

Could you explain why Sony is usually late?

I agree with it being an upgraded version of, in this case, Call of Duty 4. But isn't every FPS in a way an upgrade. With always few innovations, the genre is always trying to perfect each others innovations! There have of course been great improvements, but mostly on the Multiplayer part.

I thought I read that Killzone 2 now has ongoing servers where you don't have to return to the lobby if the game mode ends. How is that working out?

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

I think giving negative score for something that aint there but should is logic. Sorry but those comments are pure gold!

Really? I never once saw a review site take points off Bioshock or Call of Duty 4 because they didn't have co-op. You shouldn't deduct points for what isn't there.

Exactly. CoD4 didn't get slated for not having co-op, something no one can deny would have made it an even more enjoyable game.
That's where a lot of K2 reviews are going off the track and instead mark it down for not being perfect (as in not having everything including the kitchen sink) instead of giving it a score in comparison to what's on the market at the moment.
With almost all the reviews saying that the graphics are stunning, and the gameplay both on and offline is superb, surely a game with that kind of praise should be getting a good score all around.
It doesn't seem to make much sense to drop a game's score by a fair amount because of essentially nit-picking, not particularly good reviewing in my opinion.

The majority of CoD 4 couldn't have had co-op. Maybe if it had cutscenes, but it didn't.

Considering there was a set piece at the beginning and end of nearly every mission, they would have had to weave a second player into the action of the set pieces, which would have probably made that game take as long as KZ2 to come to us, and maybe not as immersive as it was.

And I know you didn't say it, but Bioshock couldn't have either, it wouldn't have made sense.

KZ2 was pretty much built for co-op. Perhaps they shouldn't have deducted points considering it was hardware issues that prevented them from including co-op, but either way it was originally meant to include co-op and perhaps the gameplay reflected that.