Is Halo really in the Killzone?

Recommended Videos

xMacx

New member
Nov 24, 2007
230
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
They aren't selling to a demographic that seems to shun thinking.
I used to enjoy this forum more prior to you posting 700 times a month.

Blanket statements and insults only breed more of the same, and the forum community will live up (or down) to the standards of the loudest - or in this case, most frequent - posters.


You seem smarter than that. Go make a good game or something.
 

Geo Da Sponge

New member
May 14, 2008
2,611
0
0
Fightgarr said:
While Killzone 2 may be a successful game, but to say that its a "Halo Killer" is irrelevant because they're on DIFFERENT PLATFORMS!
And ones coming out a year after the other! It's hardly as if Halo 3 is going to lose sales over it.

AceDiamond said:
Indigo_Dingo said:
Woe Is You said:
Indigo_Dingo said:
Thus, Halo is killed by Halo Wars.
By that logic Mario and Final Fantasy would already be dead with their huge pile of shitty/different spinoffs.
They aren't selling to a demographic that seems to shun thinking.
Hurr Hurr I are strategery hating retard because I lieks Halo.

No wait I've been playing RTS games since 1996. Try again.
I is retard also, dat is why I twos hates strategy and dat thinking thing. *Grunt*

Fire Daemon said:
Lots of text about Halo multiplayer.
Most of these problems I don't agree with, and those that I do agree with have pretty much all been fixed through editing the playlists and the DLC.

Indigo_Dingo said:
Be honest - ho many of those are different in any signifigant way?
Pretty much all of them.

Indigo_Dingo said:
Yes, but you're a massive 360 fanboy.
That's a good argument you have there. I've got a better one. Your posts are massively biased because you're a collosal 360 anti-fanboy.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
Eldritch Warlord said:
hippo24 said:
Well you see, from what Ive witnessed the characters are just slight variations (weapons) of their similar skinned counterparts.
This is a very realistic approach to the game because in reality people don't very that greatly in size or shape.
Halo on the other hand has lots of different species who are each very different.

A list i was referring to was something more of
---------------------------------------------------

Jackal (have 2 variations)

elite (Elite minor, elite major, elite ultra, elite ranger, stealth elite, special operations elite, spec ops commander, zealot counselor)

brute (War Chieftain, Brute Chieftain,
Brute Captain, Ultra Brute, Captain Major, Brute Captain,
Brute Honor Guard, Brute Bodyguard, Honor Guard, Elite Ranger, Elite Brute, Stalker, Stealth Elite, Brute Ultra, Brute Major, Brute Minor)

grunt (grunt minor, grunt major, heavy grunt, spec-ops grunt,grunt ultra)

Drones

hunter

Flood spore

Combat Form(elite, human, brute)

Pure form(3 variations)

Carrier form

site: http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
To be fair, not all of those are significantly different, but you also omit vehicles. Here's my list, I made up most of the labels:

Shield Jackal...(etc)


I leave out Flood controlled UNSC vehicles and a couple Covenant vehicles but not all of those are in every game so it balances out.
Be honest - ho many of those are different in any signifigant way?
You see many of them are not completely different. Most of the variations are just stamping a slightly different skin, weapon and adding a small amount of health. The reason I bring this up is because that's how the killzone characters look and seem to me.

This is not a bad direction for killzone to go, but that doesn't mean halo is the same.
 

Zetona

New member
Dec 20, 2008
846
0
0
I think that much of the hype started due to the incredibly good graphics engine. I won't deny that the technology is there, and from what I've seen the game looks great when some color is injected into the scenery. But otherwise, it's as gray as every other sci-fi shooter of the last several years. Maybe the later levels are a bit more colorful and interesting.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
Anarchemitis said:
Fightgarr said:
While Killzone 2 may be a successful game, but to say that its a "Halo Killer" is irrelevant because they're on DIFFERENT PLATFORMS!
Absolutely. it's like saying "which is better, Oranges or Apples?" Obviously Apples you can't compare them. One is a fruit Malus domestica in the rose family Rosaceae, and another is a Citrus bastard child of the pomelo and the tangerine.
While I would tend to agree with you,

What if there were an apple flavored orange, or vice versa.

Could the apple flavored orange not steal the apple users away from their apple tree?
 

Eldritch Warlord

New member
Jun 6, 2008
2,901
0
0
hippo24 said:
xMacx said:
Indigo_Dingo said:
They aren't selling to a demographic that seems to shun thinking.
I used to enjoy this forum more prior to you posting 700 times a month.

Blanket statements and insults only breed more of the same, and the forum community will live up (or down) to the standards of the loudest - or in this case, most frequent - posters.


You seem smarter than that. Go make a good game or something.
While I would tend to agree with you,

What if there were an apple flavored orange, or vice versa.

Could the apple flavored orange not steal the apple users away from their apple tree?
The apple users have already invested in apple trees. All the apple flavored orange does is give the orange users an excuse to say "hur hur u aples are teh sux!!!!11 we got teh same thing!!"

And how is that a response to Indigo's assumption that the entirety of the Halo demographic are idiots?
 

Vlane

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,996
0
0
Zetona said:
I think that much of the hype started due to the incredibly good graphics engine. I won't deny that the technology is there, and from what I've seen the game looks great when some color is injected into the scenery. But otherwise, it's as gray as every other sci-fi shooter of the last several years. Maybe the later levels are a bit more colorful and interesting.
I'm almost sure that the other levels are also grey and brown. It will be the same thing like in Killzone 1.
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
S
Eldritch Warlord said:
And how is that a response to Indigo's assumption that the entirety of the Halo demographic are idiots?
Because Im really "smart", and clicked the wrong quote button.
 

jdnoth

New member
Sep 3, 2008
203
0
0
It looks nice and all. But it falls short exactly where Halo falls short, in that it's just another FPS. The story is as bland as ever, with "You're a soldier. You kill the baddies" being the only motive for any of the characters continuing through their rather taxing quest. Futuristic team based street fighting with a medley of different weapons, big tough one-man-army marine types infiltrating enemy lines saving the world etc etc etc etc. It really says something about console gamers that in that there has been no real innovation in the First Person Shooters since Medal of Honour 1.

Will I buy it? Yes. Why? 1080p native resolution, 32 player online play, fairly involved single player campaign, original online gameplay, and some other things that my only fps game COD5 didn't do. But if I enjoy it as much as any of the games on The Orange Box I will be very, very surprised.

Halo and Killzone are both remarkably unoriginal.
 

Eldritch Warlord

New member
Jun 6, 2008
2,901
0
0
Fire Daemon said:
I had a large post planned out but I lost it some how so now you need to make do with this shitty little one, I hope your happy Adrian!

There has only ever been one Halo 3 killer and only ever will be one Halo 3 killer and that is CoD4. Although thats actually in correct, CoD4 wasn't able to kill Halo 3 either but it came the closest to doing it. the reason why coD4 came close to killing Halo was because CoD4 was what Halo 3 was supposed to be, both in Story and Multiplayer.

To prove this I need to take you back to Halo 2 and explain the expectations that it created. First of all lets look at the maps. Halo shipped with 12 maps and a sweet extra content disk gave it another 11 a year later. The first 12 maps where all great and widely liked. This wasn't because of the way that they were designed but because of the way that the different game types suited them. For example Coagulation was the Big Team Battle map, Lockout was the FFA map, Zanzibar was the medium team objective maps, Ascension was the TDM map etc. But there where also other maps that suited different game types. Headlong could be Big Team battle, large to medium objective game types, standard TDM, specialty TDM (Team Snipers and swat was pretty good on this map) and even a large Free For all. This map suited nearly every game type. Beaver Creek was great for small team objective maps, Team Death match and Free for All. It seemed that the Halo 2 map formula consisted of having each game type have its own special map while also sharing maps with other game types. These shared maps would play well for whatever game types they suited but the specialty maps would play the best with their intended game types. That means that there was always a great map for every game type while also having a wide variety. If you got bored of playing big team on Coagulation you could swap to Water Works and while it might not be as good as Coagulation you can still enjoy yourself. You could do the same in Objective maps. Get tired of one flag CTF on Zanzibar you can play 1 Flag CTF on Waterworks. That was what was so great with the maps. This quality of map is what I (and what I think a lot of other people) expected from Halo 3.

Halo 3 on the other hand, did not deliver. Halo 3 rolled out with 9 maps. Three of those where only good For Big Team and nothing else. Okay, maybe they are good at specialty game types like team snipers and rocket race but at game types like Assault, 1 Flap CTF and territories they felled flat. This wouldn't have been so bad if they where half decent at Big Team but they weren't. Sandtrap didn't offer enough vehicles with Fire power. The vehicles that Spawn in include Warthogs, A couple of Brute Choppers, mongooses and a Banshee. The Banshee is pointless because each side has a missile pod and spartan laser, so are the mongooses when the enemy has an average defense set up. There is no point to Big Team if you don't offer up some big vehicles. Valhalla wasn't that much better either. The man cannons and raised middle hill halved the map, instead of being base VS base it had become base VS hill or hill VS base. The vehicles included a Banshee at either base, a Warthog at either base and a couple of Mongooses. Again there was nothing interesting. The banshees where okay but where killed pretty quick by the Lasers and the Missile pods and they take forever to come back. Last Resort was a remake of Zanzibar, only made bigger. It stopped being about 1 sided objective maps and became a Big team map. But the problem here was that one side spawned in a building with turrets and the other spawned on the beach with vehicles. The Defense and attack design was still there except it stopped having things to attack and defend. It was a giant mess. Big Team was slightly fun on this map but it never felt right.

The other 6 maps where all a giant TDM and FFA mess. They tried to both be FFA and TDM but couldn't get any of them right. The best example is Snowbound (oh retched Snowbound, how I detest thee). Snowbound has two bases and one cave with a shotgun that is linked to both bases. The shotgun is a very powerful weapon especially with the shield doors that stop people from shooting at you from afar. The whole map becomes a rush for the shotgun in both game types. Whoever gets it and hides underground for the longest will win. Proof (red area means high number of kills, blue low, grey none) [http://www.bungie.net/online/HeatMaps.aspx?map=360&wep=0&kd=0]. This is not a fun map.

There are other maps like this,High Ground for example is really good for one sided objective games but can't play other game types well. This would be okay if there where other maps to pick up the slack and if it wouldn't play games it was not suited for but it there are no other maps and it does play game types it is not suited for. Team Death match is terrible for High ground but it doesn't stop it from being loaded up in matchmaking. The whole point of the map is that one team has an advantage over the other team in the form of the high ground and the turret but if they fail to maximize on that advantage then they lose. This should not be the case for TDM. In TDM each team should have equal footing and equipment.

So basically the maps in Halo 3 failed to deliver when compared to Halo 2. However the maps in CoD4 did deliver.

Each map in CoD4 can be played with each game type by moving around the spawns slightly. For example in Overgrown the two teams spawn at each end of the creek. In TDM one side is on the north bank and the other side spawns at the south bank diagonally opposite of each other. In S&D however the western team spawns on the southern side of the bank. Meaning that the attacking team has to make a choice between exposing themselves at the start to plant the bomb at B which is easier for them to defend later on or avoid exposing themselves so that they can plant the bomb at A but have a harder time of defending it later on. This moving of the spawns changes the game from being decided with player/team skill (TDM) to being decided by player/team tactics (S&D). Of course tactics and skill are important in both in TDM individual skill is more important while in S&D team tactics is more important.

In Cod4 there was originally 16 maps, most of these are played in all game types and all of them played well. Some are better than others but unlike in Halo 3 there was another map that made people think "Vote, this map sucks for Domination" or "Vote, this map sucks in Sabotage". There are some, Bog for example, but most of the maps where a hoot for all game types.

This is how CoD4 ended up being what Halo 3 should have been map wise and its taken a lot longer to say than I originally hoped for.

I think Bungie realised this and it shows in the most recent maps. Ghost Town is the best example here. It's TDM, FFA and Small Team objective map (with some forge tweaks).

Well that took a long time to say. Originally I was going to go on more about the game types, the leveling system and the campaign but nah, I'm to lazy.

EDIT: I just remembered that I gave myself a Halo themed avatar haven't I? That now makes this post and all the effort I put into this completely ignored because of course I'm a fanboy. Well if you did have the decency to read this post please forgive any typos and grammatical errors. I can not be bothered to proof read it.
Well, Halo 3 does have the veto option so I don't see where you get "Unlike in Halo 3 people can Vote this map sucks for this gametype."

You're primary lament seems to be the lack of tanks in large maps and the power of the Sp'laser (despite it being only slightly better than the homing rockets of Halo 2). In other words you dislike how much more balanced Halo 3 is.

No, hear me out. In most of Halo 2's maps there was no clear dividing line, no impassable barrier that cut the maps in two. With this design philosophy your team can control a very small number of strategic locations and thereby control the entire map. In Halo 3 most maps have a clear barrier between two distinct sides. In The Pit it's the middle wall, in Valhalla it's the hill, in Snowbound it's the ground (surface and interior sides), in in High Ground it's the wall, et cetera. In Ghost Town this division is less strict, the middle building blocks LOS from either base but it isn't a divider as the exterior path goes all the way around, put some commanding long-range weapons (a sniper or team of BR's) on two corners that can see each other and you very nearly have total map control.

Now CoD4 maps are much like Ghost Town or Midship or Headlong. No funneling, LOS blocking divider. Just a landscape with features on it.

Not to say you're wrong about anything. But you expected Halo 3 to be more Halo 2 and when it turned out to be a new angle on the tried and true formula you rejected it and found CoD4, a game more like Halo 2 than most casual observers would think.

There's more about weapon balance and such but the fundamental difference in map design seems to be your major grip.
 

I3uster

New member
Nov 16, 2008
409
0
0
It doesnt seem like halo, halo is basically doom, you can run and plow through everything, weapons have little recoil, freaked out enemys and vehicles, flashy style.
Killzone seems gritty and realistic, and also relies on cover, so what do they have in common, other than that both of em are FPS and the wet dreams of console fanboys on either side?
 

hippo24

New member
Apr 29, 2008
702
0
0
Watch this and tell me killzone hasn't at least tried to emulate COD

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43375.html
 

Vlane

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,996
0
0
hippo24 said:
Watch this and tell me killzone hasn't at least tried to emulate COD

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43375.html
I haven't played any CoD game so could you explain to me what you mean?
 

stompythebeast

Orbital Drop Shock Trooper
May 6, 2008
239
0
0
Good job, thanks for the educated opinion. But it was irrelevant to be honest. Although these two games are both considered FPS, they are totally different in game play mechanics and storyline. These two games are not supposed to be similar to each other, and if they were, then the devs for killzone failed miserably. I enjoyed the first, even with its horrible flaws, mainly because of its dark universe, and that the helgan looked damn cool.