Killzone 2 sells more than 1M copies worldwide

lol, I picked it up day one so i guess i got lucky when i got that trophy since i was in the top teir the first weekend but felloff big time after that.

yeah the ads in Toronto were great! I loved sitting next to the Helghast starring at me in the bus booth

I didn't see much advertising at all in Northern California. No billboards, bus ads, or anything like that. I saw the bullet time commercial maybe twice, both in the middle of the night. For Gears 2, I didn't see any billboards either, but the TV ads were everywhere, on multiple channels and playing all day. Maybe regional differences in advertising, but from what I saw I'd say that they hardly marketed Killzone 2 at all around here.

This isn't directed to arrgh's comment, but the comments generally. It's sad that people automatically label a game a "failure" or whatever just because some other game outperforms it sales-wise. Relatively speaking, not a lot of games hit the 1 million mark, and doing it in 7 weeks is actually pretty good. Especially when you consider that the prior games in the series probably didn't help the sales of Killzone 2.

sc00by_yoo,

"Water had better effect honestly ? seriously ? can you prove this fact ?" The Xbox 360 port has full world water reflections, the PS3 version does not. Considering you spend a fair amount of time on a boat at some point in the game then yes, yes it does have impact on the overall visual presentation. Google it if you don't believe me. I didn't say I thought the PS3 port of GTA IV looked better, I said I preferred how the PS3 renders that game in particular; it can only be described as looking more "cinematic". There is a difference. I also state that textures aren't as sharp, text is blurrier, and trees are absolutely fugly in the PS3 port of GTA IV, yet you seemed to outright ignore those points.

"Dude take out emotions and look at the argument logically, the MANY is not true." Except it still is. Completely ignoring things like resolution, AA, or texture filtering, most multiplatform games have higher and/or more consistent framerates compared to their PS3 brethren. Yes, the gap between both systems in multiplatform parity has closed incredibly in a short amount of time, but it still exists. Let's take FEAR 2, as an example. Completely ignoring the lack of ambient occlusion lighting and lack of AA, the PS3 port of the game has an incredibly inconsistent framerate compared to its 360 counterpart. The game was announced in 2007 and came out just two months ago. You'll also find a choppier framerate in the PS3 port of Bioshock when compared to the year older 360 port. Hell, Cosmos himself gave provided a link to an article to back up his position. If you haven't read it, I suggest you do so.

"Your screen shots prove nothing because you dont understand the sort of resolutions our eyes can pick up .. When you go outside of the range of our visual field then it really doesn't make much difference, do you understand this ? This is what I was trying to prove with the screenshots. You obviously didnt get it your reply again proves it." No, I understand a far off mountain isn't going to look any clearer or sharper in any meaningful way. Have I claimed as much? No. What you're not picking up on is that it does have an impact on what is within our visual range (which happens to be pretty much everything on the damn screen).

"This is why you have to use halo2 as an example because the higher the res gets the less the impact it has on us, because once it is outside of our field of vision it stops making any difference. (Both of those screen shots looked terrible btw -- visually appalling more like)." I used Halo 2 as an example for a few reasons. 1) I'm admittedly too lazy to sit here and take the time needed to take comparison shots in Crysis, Dead Space, and UT3. 2) The differences in distance, lighting, and image quality enhancements beyond the resolution are nonexistent between the two images. 3) It shows the impact of doubling a game's pixel count. And yes, by PC standards, Halo 2 is considered bottom rung at the very best.

"It becomes nothing more than a boasting exercise, sniper rifle long range shot ? I cant even be bothered to get into that it would only serve to hurt your ego.." Ego? You apparently haven't played Crysis Wars much, have you? In Battleground, there is a bridge that spans the length of the map in the middle. The opposing team will normally send one or two players to scale a ladder, cloak, and snipe our players off at their leisure. When someone cloaks, they aren't completely invisible as there is a slight distortion where they're at (think of the Predator); they're incredibly hard to see unless in motion. Now, imagine trying to take out such a sniper 1/8 of the map away from their position (where you might actually avoid their line of sight long enough to kill them before they kill you), keeping in mind such a player would already be hard enough to see as is. Do you now see how having a sharper picture could effect the outcome? We lost the game, by the way, because the opposing team was able to capture our VTOL and they had much, much better coordination with their heavy armor than we did.

Here's an honest, unrelated question: why are you having framerate issues with Bioshock? A Geforce 8800 Ultra is able to run the game around 40 FPS with 4xAA and 16x AF at 1920x1200. Your GTX 280 has almost twice as many shaders (240 vs 128), so there's no reason you shouldn't have an even better gaming experience and far higher framerates unless you A) have a hardware problem or B) are being bottlenecked by your CPU (which could very well be the case). Crysis I can understand since resolution often determines whether or not certain quality settings will cause you to have a pretty but unplayable slideshow. Bioshock? That's a little cause for concern.

Are there better co-op opportunities on console games? I'm not going to deny that at all; with PC gaming, you're either playing by yourself, playing someone else via LAN, or playing on-line. You're obviously big into co-op gameplay with your friends so, for you, buying multiplatform games for your PS3 makes sense. I'm not. Whether or not a game even has a co-op option or multiplayer (unless it's UT3 or Quake Wars, since they're both bot matches otherwise), has absolutely no sway on my purchases whatsoever. None. I'm probably one of the few people who will admit to buying the Halo and Resistance games for their single player campaigns, with the mulitplayer options as a nice bonus.

"Despite many first-party exclusive games being superior on the PS3, I feel the 360 has plenty of multiplatform games to definitely make it a worthwhile purchase." Would I agree with the first part? No, because the quality of console exclusives are incredibly subjective, but I fail to see any harm in the second part. Flame bait? Perhaps, if you're actively looking for something to argue about. Outright or intentional trolling? No and you wouldn't see people like me calling bullshit on your comment.

All of your perceived differences are nothing but nit picking you even prove it within your counter arguments. It no way indicates that the 360 versions are superior. Especially when people playing the game don't notice any difference. The type of person that would notice the difference is the type that sits there and grabs screenshots or counts pixels to prove variations within resolution.. Real world difference none. so :. initial statement of many is false and now you bring fear 2 to the argument and make bold statements and provide nothing to back up your claims.

the halo example - If you used higher res images (hence why I provided 1280x720 and 1920x1080 images) there would be very limited noticable difference by doubling the pixel count. Because we just dont have the visual capability. Unless of course you were to use a bigger screen. The pixel count only has effect on what our eyes can see. Your example actually proves my point. Your not increasing polygon count by increasing resolution are you ? The GT5 screenshots further cement what I was trying to show you..

bioshock - It was not a hardware problem. You forget shitty drivers :) Even then at 720p it plays smoother even with updated drivers. playing it at 1080p provided no added benefit - playing on my projector it obviously did, but then my monitor is very small compared to my wall :)

You notice the last comment I made:

"Despite many first-party exclusive games being superior on the PS3, I feel the 360 has plenty of multiplatform games to definitely make it a worthwhile purchase."

You cant even admit the fact that the ps3 exclusives are better than the 360s? Let me guess KZ2 is not technically superior to anything on 360 right ? yes extremely subjective dude. Some peoples logic is lost in a haze of closet fanboyism. There starts the next round of flame wars and thus proves my initial point to be correct. Why don't you post this comment in the next 360 related article on this site to do with sales. See what sort of reaction you get, see if in fact I have proven my point or not.

I think I have managed to prove my point without needing to try and put you down once. You can write whatever you want now, Ive check mated the argument. If you do carry on your only gonna prove two things:

1. You cant take losing.
2. You have the fanboy bug drilled so far up your colon that it infact now resides within your brain.. :D

It would also prove that my time would be better spent banging my head against a wall than carrying this on, but if I do bang my head against the wall then I might become thick enough to carry this thought process onward.

sc00by_y00,

Really? Go to Eurogamer and check their triple format smack down. You'll read precisely the same goddamn thing I just told you; the PS3 port of Fear 2 has a choppier framerate, no AO, and no AA. Bioshock? A choppier framerate. Need for Speed Underground? A much choppier framerate and blurrier textures due to the different form of AA that's often used on Sony's system. Don't believe me? Here are the links:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/f-e-a-r-2-project-origin-triple-format-face-off-article?page=2
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-18-article?page=3
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-15-article?page=2

So far it's been pretty goddamn obvious that, no matter what I give you or what direction I point you to look at, you won't. I give you an example of how Resident Evil 5 looks better on the 360 because it has full world reflections in water while the PS3 port doesn't and how it has a higher overall framerate; I tell you how it'll impact the viewing pleasure of a game, I tell you which level it'll specifically effect, and I even told you to google it. I even pointed you in the direction of Cosmos's link, where there are almost 18 pages of Xbox 360 vs. PS3 multiplatform title comparisons with 5 games per page. Did you look? Fuck no, you just sat there with your thumb up your ass trying to talk down to me as if I'm a complete simpleton. I've done my homework, jackass, and I've given you the answers; it's not my fault if you don't look at them before you hit the "add comment" button.

Your GT5 shots PROVED NOTHING BECAUSE THERE IS NO REFERENCE POINT TO MAKE A VALID CONCLUSION FROM. None. Each screenshot featured a different model in a different settings with different lighting. So, explain to me carefully why I should take your examples at face value when you're literally telling me to compare three apples against each other when all you've successfully done is give me a bag of mixed fruit. You keep going on and on about how the Halo 2 shots showed nothing when, and this is the key part, it was the same goddamn car, in the same location, with the same lighting. No AA was added and there was no increase in texture filtering. Setting aside the resolution of each screenshot, they were identical. That would allow you to make a fair and valid comparison because you have multiple points of reference; you gave me completely unrelated screenshots. "That proves nothing". To you, perhaps, but to anyone who actually knows how to use the ocular organs god gave them, there was a substantial difference between the two. You just don't want to admit as much because, to you, that'd mean losing face.

"You cant even admit the fact that the ps3 exclusives are better than the 360s? Let me make something abundantly clear to you: I'm a PC gamer who also owns all current gen systems with sizable libraries for everything but the Wii. Because I'm primarily a PC gamer, I couldn't give a rat's ass which of my industry's technological sloppy seconds has more of or the best exclusives; compared to what I'm playing, it's all equally mediocre. Killzone 2? Probably the best looking, most cinematic console shooter I've ever played. Compared to what FPS I've been playing on the PC, it's nothing to sing home about at all. Halo 3? A good end to the series's current story arc and extremely nice HDR lighting effects; it'd be lucky to score a 7 overall when compared to other titles I've been playing. Beyond that, because I have all three systems, I also to have access to all of your cherished exclusives even if they don't come to my primary platform. I can play and appreciate them all. You don't seem to get that.

I do most of my console gaming on the PS3. However, unlike you, I don't have such an extreme bias that I can't see the respective strengths and weaknesses of the system compared to others. Just because you're picking up on a criticism of mine for the system you absolutely cherish as a personal slight doesn't mean I haven't pointed out the faults of the other two. Hell, on the very first page, I pointed out how the PS3's GPU is more powerful overall than the 360's. Did you see that? No, you didn't. I've sung praises for and condemned them each. But you wouldn't know that, because you're too busy trying to paint me as an Xbot to have read anything I've written earlier in this thread or prior to it.

Check mated the argument? If by completely ignoring any evidence I've given you to verify my claims and taking a position of superiority that only a pompous ass like you could, then yes, yes you did win.

Mr Keyboard Warrior or should I just call you Rufus..

Listen Rufus, dont quote and cite Eurogamer to me and expect me to take anything else you say seriously. Read through my comment again and realise why you just sound like a little kid throwing a hissy fit.