| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (178)

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I'm not sure why anyone is getting their hopes up about this game. I mean, the first one sucked so I think the logical conclusion would be that this probably won't be anything special either.

I mean, if it really is great, then excellent, another fine piece of gaming. However, if you don't get your hopes up, you won't be burned PS3 fans.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:42PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Isn't that what most of us do as gamers and as human beings? We hope our favorite sports team will be the one to go all the way, we hope Michael Phelps will win 13 gold medals at the olympics, we hope that a new CD from our favorite artist will be good based off one or two songs and we anticipate movies based off of previews.

I try not to get caught up in the hype to much because it might lead to dissapointment. I always try to judge the game for myself when I play it. With all that being said how could anyone (ps3,360 or wii) not get excited about a game like this. Again, you say the first one sucked but I would ask you why that is and if you actually played it. Go look at the metacritic reviews and you will see the definition of a love it or hate it type of game. Not to mention the media had already set it up for failure by naming it the Halo Killer.

I had never played the first game. I purchased it at gamestop about 6 months ago and played through it. I would certainly not say that it sucked by any means. I would put it right there in that 80-85 range with some flaws and bugs.

If people are excited and hyped just let them be. No need to act as if you are any better than them because of it.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:45PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have my hopes up because what I have seen and heard from those who have touched it is mostly good. So, whether the first one sucked or not, this game stands on its own. Though you choose not to be excited - there does seem to be something to look forward to with this title.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Is that how it works Joeshie? Well I liked part one. So that means I'll like this one too.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"I mean, the first one sucked so I think the logical conclusion would be that this probably won't be anything special either."

Um, have you heard of the GTA series? Ever play the first 2?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:16PM samfish said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Let's try and white out every single response to this thread.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:31PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's not going to work Samfish, I thought the concept was so good that I accidentally +1'd you
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"Um, have you heard of the GTA series? Ever play the first 2?"

That is exactly what I was about to say. It's stupid to say "oh well the first one sucked so this will too". That's the reasoning of a moron.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:37PM KinseySS said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Um, have you heard of the GTA series? Ever play the first 2?"

Hey I like the first 2 :P I never really got into the 3rd person ones my self. I miss playing the old topographic GTA's
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:48PM erh said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Really, why do people expect number 2 to be any better than number 1?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
So you are saying that based on Internet rumor, yet Joystiq (usually PS3 hating) are saying it's fantastic, having played it.

Hmm, I wonder who I should believe...

If Joystiq say it's great, then it's gonna be unbelievable...
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 6:28PM Levi said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Saying the first one sucked so the next one will too is the most retarded thing I've ever heard. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater. 1 and 2 were the best ones (2 being the last good one). I've heard from a few close friends that the first Gears of War wasn't anything special, but they are now addicted to 2. I've heard from plenty of people that Resistance isn't anything special, but still a pretty fun game (which are my views on the original Killzone), but that 2 is definitely an improvement on 1. I should really consult my library for this.

Mega Man sucked when compared to the second or third games in the series. Plenty of people think Turok 2 beats 1 hands down (I'm the only person who loves 1 the best...). Resident Evil 2 is highly regarded as the best of the "old style" RE's.

To address the other parts of your flame, everyone I know who has played the original KZ has liked it. They didn't say it's the best game in the world, nor do I think so, but the game has a ton of potential, and I thought it was fun. My biggest gripe with it was the level design was flawed here and there - but in general, I thought it was a whole hell of a lot more fun than the original Halo.

Last, KZ:L for the PSP was my favorite PSP game. Great production value, tight controls, varied objectives, very procedural gameplay. I think it was a different developer to be fair, but it is technically the second in the series, and doesn't suck.

You might have a better chance of not turning invisible if you worded your opinions in a manner that don't make you sound like you are flaming, FYI.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 7:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Exactly. Killzone 2 is going to suck because the previous game was a very average 70 on metacritic, just like Halo 1 was a total dud because Bungie's previous game was a 70 on metacritic
Reply

Posted: Dec 17th 2008 6:43PM XGM said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There are so many games that the first one sucked, but the second turned out to be really good.

So it seems your so called logic failed
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2009 8:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
K I usually don't like calling people stupid because it makes me sound biased, but this comment is indeed very ignorant, and who ever said it either was not having good day or is a complete retarded. Another example of improvment over time, ff7 compare to previous ff. the lord of the ring books compared to the previous jrr tolken books. motzart music he composed when he was 30 vs 12. If this idea is true that things will remain the same, then growth, evolution and the laws of thermal dynamics are all false. In other words either millions of previously consider geniuses are all retards or you are the retard. Which is more likely?
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2009 8:08PM Extinction said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually the first one didn't suck. It wasn't excellent, but it was still good. And Guerilla's games have been getting better and better
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh Killzone 2, how you give me hope for the PS3. 2009 should be a great year for the PS3.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:38PM Erluti said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Every year we say that, though... "Next year will be great for the PS3..."
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I must be in the minority, but I thought 2008 was a pretty good year for PS3 games...
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:07PM Negatron said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
LOL are you kidding yes/no?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I thought 2008 was a great year for the PS3, but 2009 is shaping up to be better.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:19PM Hyams said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
2008 has indeed been a good year for the PS3.

MGS4, LBP, Resistance 2, Motorstorm: PR, SOCOM: Confrontation, and Valkyria Chronicles as some cool exclusives, plus a bunch of multiplats like GTAIV, Dead Space, Fallout 3, Mirror's Edge, Price of Persia, and COD:WAW.

Honestly, if 2009 can top that, I'll be impressed. (And, amazingly, it's looking like it could well do that.)
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:30PM FredFredrickson said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Nothing like re-capping a week-old article to spark up another frothing-at-the-mouth, ad revenue boosting, flame fest.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:44PM FredFredrickson said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
A cranky little toddler? Lol wut.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:47PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
How dare they post a FAQ for a PS3 game. Starting a stupid flamewar over a game - shame on Joystiq. The immature children will start the flamewar not Joystiq. Isn't the purpose of a blog to bring in ad revenue by generating hits?

Your going to defend Epic for selling maps 1 month after the release of a broken game and criticize Joystiq for wanting to generate ad revenue? it's always about the money. You know this Marty in fact it's usually your mantra.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:50PM FredFredrickson said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Good grief you guys, I didn't say anything bad about the game. Put your goddamned guns away.

And by the way, go read my posts on the Gears 2 map pack thread - I didn't defend them at all. I actually said I wasn't going to defend them, because I felt that it was too early to put up for-pay DLC. Try reading my comments before you decide they are against whatever it is you're supporting.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:07PM Duke said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Wait, is Joystiq now accused of being pro-Sony biased? Man, I can't keep up with this.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:11PM Vcize said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Duke, it's obvious to see that Joystiq is biased towards whatever console each person does not support.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I thought Yoon did a great job and didn't come off as being tobias at all. Trust me, I would call him and Joystiq (for putting this up) out on it. :P
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:25PM Erluti said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe this article should have been about Braid?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:33PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Marty,

"The answer is "sometimes." For the most part, the game gets incredibly close. The CG trailer features more complex animation and particle effects."

-Joystiq

Watch the above video as well and the guy from GG even says that they feel they reached the bar that was set so high from that initial release.

From everything I have seen and read they have pretty much achieved that same level they were going for sans the particle effects and the framerate - from the most recent build. There have been improvements from that build in terms of color - not just gray and brown like fromt hat initial trailer.

Considering how high the bar was set with that initial CG trailer it's safe to say they acheived everything from the target render. Remember, the game has not yet been released so no one has seen the final build yet. At this point they are on track to achieving what they set out.

Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:34PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well this all sounds very promising. I think it's safe to say they hit their target render from E3.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:51PM FredFredrickson said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Why would you say that when it is clearly stated in the article above that while the game has great graphics, it's not the same as the target render?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:33PM Haggard said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I actually just watched the target render. It really is showing its age. They've certainly beat the gameplay shown in that video, and the graphics, effects and colours look a little better to me in the real thing.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 6:15PM FredFredrickson said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@el serpiente
I'd only feel empty inside if you stopped personally attacking me for expressing my opinion. So keep it up.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:41PM Vcize said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
No online co-op? Is this confirmed?

If so, mother f***er.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
just play the multiplayer, don't really need co-op for single anyway.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:47PM R Planteer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not even local co op. What is this, 2004? How do you not have any sort of co op in a super hyped FPS.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:49PM Dirty said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I know.... Thats one feature that really helps expand a game into a new realm of replayability and fun.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:19PM Seven Weasels Running on a Keybo said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yeah, the lack of co-op really ruined games like Bioshock, and uh, Super Mario Bros. Psh, hotseat mutliplayer.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 5:47PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I was actually talking about this with a friend before. Imagine how f***ing awesome it would've been to run through Bioshock a second time with co-op. Hopefully they add it in Bioshock 2.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 8:54PM Seven Weasels Running on a Keybo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe I'm just a horrible misanthrope but I don't see that being so awesome. I would have been bitching the whole time about ruining the story or fighting over ammo and adam with the other person and getting annoyed by the sound of them breathing...yeah, just horrible misanthrope.

An appropriate response would be : "But co-op is just an option. You don't even have to do it if you don't want to."

To which I would respond that, yeah... that's true but. Um. Shut up.
Reply

Posted: Dec 17th 2008 2:17AM Seven Weasels Running on a Keybo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
On second thought, I've come up with a legitimate point.

Bioshock is one of those games that gets huge points for aesthetic alone and part of that aesthetic is the isolation of being in a doomed underwater city essentially alone (albeit communicating with others via radio contact and a few strange NPCs).

My point being, there are games that are just meant to be single player because of the nature of the story or the world that is being presented.
Bioshock is, arguably, one of those games.

With that said, I highly doubt that there is some great reason for no co-op in KZ being as there are squads of other soldiers running around all over the place as it is, so it likely wouldn't be that tough to weave into a narrative.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 10:13PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Touche.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:43PM Berzerk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It seems to me like there are a lot of big games coming out in February.

- Demigod
- Dawn of War 2
- GTA IV DLC
- Killzone 2
- Sims 3
- Street Fighter 4

That's a portion of the non-crap (hopefully)...
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:51PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
DoW2 is definitely the title I'll be picking up then.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:55PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sims 3? They finally found time to make another game in between making all those expansion packs for Sims 2?
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:46PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
6-10 hours with no co-op? What a joke. After years of development, that's the best they can come up with? Sounds to me like the game's littered with a bunch of scripted AI tricks. This game is overhyped to the max. I look forward to the reviews to see how it turns out, but i can't be bothered dropping 60 dollars on such a short game.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:57PM Ranus Studios said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
God forbid you enjoy a game by yourself, sir.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 3:01PM samfish said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Playing with yourself for 6-10 hours is no fun.
...plus you get all chaffed and dry after that long.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Portabliss: Time Ducks (iOS)

Posted on Feb 7th 2012 9:00PM

Portabliss: Sticky Bees (iOS)

Posted on Feb 6th 2012 9:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW