CVG reveiws killzone 2

[AndyFromMonday]

Ignore the fanboism in the comments section. You know how fanboys are. Give their "perfect game" a low score and they'll go apeshit on you.

 

[RAKais]

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.

Superb gameplay and awesome graphics are NOT enough for a 10/10 if that's what you are implying.

A game worthy 10/10 needs to actually bring something new, Killzone 2 is as much of a candidate for a 10/10 as Halo CE was.

It's all been done before, what a game worthy a 10/10 needs is something extravagant. It should bring something new to gaming, be original at the very least.

But hey, 87/100 is almost 90/100 and that could be seen as 9/10, which is a great score. You should also read the previous comments, as someone already mentioned, Call of Duty 4 was before this co-op mania started.

Erm.. no, Killzone is not as viable to get the same scores as Halo CE.

At the time of Halo CE. It had amazing graphics, amazing gameplay and it brough FPS firmly on the table for consoles.

Killzone 2 looks amazing but its just like getting an old bike and cleaning it till its so bright it hurts your eyes to look at it. Looks good, but rides the same.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

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.

So long story short, people demand and expect way too much.

 

[willard3]

I find it amusing that a lot of the people bitching that 8.7 is a "low" score are also the same people who complain that 7.0 is "too high" for an average game, because average games should get 5.0's, since that is exactly between 1 and 10. Right? Right???

Well, HERE COMES A NEWSFLASH, ESCAPIST READERS AND POSTERS. Most review scores out of 10 are treated like grades in school. An 8.7 is a B+. A 7.0 is a D (passing, but still pretty bad). Anything lower is a failing grade. This is why there are so many "high" scores.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

Haha fanboys.

"How can you give a game negative marks for not having co-op!!!!! You can only review that content that's there. It's like someone reviewing mario and then deducting points for it not having machine guns!!!
I just hope your score was based on what you played, and not on what you didn't play"

I think giving negative score for something that aint there but should is logic.

Sorry but those comments are pure gold!

This has given me a idea, I am going to create a still title, and ship it as that. They can't review what's not there.

 

[bue519]

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.

Whoa Whoa are we talking about the halo series?

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

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.

I heard that the only reason they didn't make a co-op was time, and that it may come out in a patch later on. But that was through word of mouth, though I'd be really interested to read the source you got that from.

Oh but reading is so last generation my friend, we watch. http://screwattack.com/HardNews/011409

;¬)

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

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.

I heard that the only reason they didn't make a co-op was time, and that it may come out in a patch later on. But that was through word of mouth, though I'd be really interested to read the source you got that from.

Oh but reading is so last generation my friend, we watch. http://screwattack.com/HardNews/011409

;¬)

And Screwattack know precisely jack shit.

They don't have anything because they want to make something unique and engaging, and didn't have the time.

Name one time when ScrewAttack have made up news.

And so far, Matzy has told me his source was from word of mouth, and mine is right here. I don't usually use them for news reports, but I have noticed that much of the news I have seen there I have seen everywhere else.

If you can prove it's bullshit, then we can go somewhere with this, otherwise it's just your opinion versus their report which have their news sources open for viewing, which leads me to believe they have more credibility than you.

But then we haven't talked much in the past, have we? For all I know you could be a trustworthy source of information...

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

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.

I heard that the only reason they didn't make a co-op was time, and that it may come out in a patch later on. But that was through word of mouth, though I'd be really interested to read the source you got that from.

Oh but reading is so last generation my friend, we watch. http://screwattack.com/HardNews/011409

;¬)

And Screwattack know precisely jack shit.

They don't have anything because they want to make something unique and engaging, and didn't have the time.

Name one time when ScrewAttack have made up news.

And so far, Matzy has told me his source was from word of mouth, and mine is right here. I don't usually use them for news reports, but I have noticed that much of the news I have seen there I have seen everywhere else.

And my news is direct from Steven ter Heides. He knows more about his own game.

Care to show me a link, or how you came about this information?

By the way it seems the link's source was the director of Guerilla games, why exactly would he lie about something like this?

 

[D_987]

To give it a whole point lower than Halo 3, an utterly bland, unoriginal game, the reviewers seem to be working entirely on personal opinion rather than approaching all the games from the same view, making the score system entirely pointless. The reviewer for Halo 3 blatantly is a Halo fanboy, unable to seperate his love for the game to give a good review. Whereas the reviewer for K2 is comparing it to perfection & not other games on the market. Having a point system which varies reviwer to reviewer is pointless as comparing scores then means nothing.

Spoken like a true fanboy...

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

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.

I heard that the only reason they didn't make a co-op was time, and that it may come out in a patch later on. But that was through word of mouth, though I'd be really interested to read the source you got that from.

Oh but reading is so last generation my friend, we watch. http://screwattack.com/HardNews/011409

;¬)

And Screwattack know precisely jack shit.

They don't have anything because they want to make something unique and engaging, and didn't have the time.

Name one time when ScrewAttack have made up news.

And so far, Matzy has told me his source was from word of mouth, and mine is right here. I don't usually use them for news reports, but I have noticed that much of the news I have seen there I have seen everywhere else.

And my news is direct from Steven ter Heides. He knows more about his own game.

Care to show me a link, or how you came about this information?

By the way it seems the link's source was the director of Guerilla games, why exactly would he lie about something like this?

IGN sponsored pre-release event. Saturday the 21st of February. Seems versus is.

Link? Can't find it for the life of me...

 

[D_987]

It's only fanboy nonsense when you can show how its wrong/illogical. If you compare the two reviews, it's somewhat worrying that both reviewers are working for the same magazine as one is very critical, whereas the other can't seperate his love for a series and being as objective as possible.
Having played both titles, I think that I can be pretty certain in saying the Killzone 2 does a lot more original things and is a considerably better title (in respect to other games around the release dates of each game).

Its not wrong - its subjective - if you wish to beleive Killzone 2 is the best FPS this gen then beleive that - I'm not stopping you. But claiming reviwers are biased against it because it didn't score a 10 is ridiculous - its a good game, but I disagree with your views.

Its fanboy nonsense when you make comments such as:

The reviewer for Halo 3 blatantly is a Halo fanboy

So because a reviewer does not conform to your ideal review, he is automatically a fanboy...you sound like a literate version of those posting on the x-play forums after their review of Killzone 2.