san andreas kick ass of gta 4...gta san adnreas is one of the 3 best games of ps2 and games like fallout 3,uncharted 2 or MGS4 are better than gta 4 in ps3
Okay, it seems this is a messed up game (as others claim and seeing all the bad reviews) but my question is - I see a lot of people saying this is short: short as in, Ive played it 12 hrs non stop or Ive played it moderately and it still seemed as being short? Cause there is a huge difference? Im willing to give this game a shot but Im interested in the play-time
depends on the difficulty you play it on and on your playstile, each chapter takes me around 2 hours and there are 8 chapters, so i think for a single player FPS game this linear its fine.
It just kinda' suck. The gameplay is weak, the graphics are OK, the story ain't the best, the game is short, boring and there is no diversity in it whatsoever. Rent it, don't buy it.
WTF I DONT KNOW WHY THE PEOPLE DONT PLAY THIS ONLINE...IS SIMPLY AWESOME....TELL ME WHICH GAME HIS ONLINE IS IN ONE STREET OF NEW YORK WITH 1000 WEREWOLFS....THIS IS EPIC....I always stay in legendary online ,agree me: Sauron925
Gawd... I've never played the demo of this game but a friend of mine has bought the game and he borrowed it to me, i was kinda happy 'till i started playing... OMFG! Is there any story....? u just keep advancing and shooting... i can't explain, this game doesn't make sense! It has nice graphics (kinda) but it sucks... _FAIL_
man u can be the the best player and i respect you desicion but you cant be so ignorant ,you gat to now what is a fucking minotaur and if you didnt playe it dont talk
i liked the stealth kills in the game, but sometimes i found out that the AI can figure out where you're at even if they weren't looking at you. it was a little annoying because sometimes the AI was slow as hell. like you said, i just ran around and shot everyone. i did have some pretty awesome moments in the game such as lighting up a jeep, toss it down hill into a village, blow it up, run for cover, and kill enemies from the back. it didn't happen a lot, but it was dynamic.
C, it's moments like that where it shows what Crysis is truly capable of. Their's over 2 hundred custom made singleplayer maps made for crysis, so your bound to find more replayability in it as it's content continuesly expands. They already have completely seperate guns that can be integrated into the game, with their own damage, skin, features, and ammo capacity.
the things that far cry 2 does that killzone 2 doesn't do is stuff that killzone 2 never intended to integrate in their game like a dynamic weather system, 24 cycle, fire propagation and some other things that the killzone engine could easily handle. i think it could have better lighting, physics, character models (the ones in far cry are a little polygonal, even the ones on PC), animation, and even textures. i'm not saying far cry 2 should look like killzone 2.
for example. most games use eight lights total for an entire level while killzone 2 is using 8 lights on just a single enemy character. killzone 2 ends up using over 230 different light sources for just the inside of a building which is pretty amazing. the parallax, animation, physics, models, and atmosphere is amazing.
For Far Cry 2, that would be impressive, but well, Crysis, that's another thing... for instance, during the night levels, lamps, jeeps, computers, spotlights, and any other sort of lightsource (including your own) casts it's own reflective, dynamic, fully volumetric lighting.
yeah, like i said, crysis is the only other game that bests killzone 2 as for the lighting goes. far cry's dynamic lighting is nice, but it has no where as many light sources. i'm not sure how much light sources are used for certain levels in crysis, but i know it uses real time ambient effects which is pretty nice. i don't think killzone 2 does that, but it does have volumetric lighting as well.
Crysis beats every single game on the market right now, at everything... theirs no denying it.. The only "ability" KZ2 has over Crysis is the "4d graphics", but then again, Crysis has an infinite Skybox, dynamic 3d rendered ocean, physics that support soft body physics, liquid, rigid bodies, and ragdoll, used "Screen Space Ambient Occlusion" for the first time in gaming history, subsurface scattering, all particles (including fire and rain) being effected by wind and other forces, and much more
in terms of graphics, yes. in terms of substance, killzone 2 beats it. a lot of the game felt tacked on and generic. killzone 2 is doing a lot of great things to differ itself from other FPS's. killzone's propriety physics engine is being considered to be used for the euphoria engine (which is THE BEST physics in the world), sci-fi war story, 256 64player clan support with tournaments and valor points, mix and match class system, hit-response system, ranking, leaderboards, and others.
euphoria an ANIMATION engine, not a full on physics based engine. Substance? That is highly argueable, in Crysis' favor too. Cryengine 2 is being used by architects and is alos being used for educational purposes. It is THE MOST advanced engine out their as, and probably the best overall. theirs a reason why its won 7 awards, all being GOTY and Best ---- awards... and those are just awards from major review sites. Really, look up what the Cryengine 2 is capable of.
exactly, just like killzone 2's. it switches between animation and physics just like killzone 2 and the euphoria engine which is why GG is thinking about licensing a few patents on the engine.
Ok, this is my last comment, Killzone 2 isn't even comparable to Crysis and what it has acheived, it is a benchmark not only for gaming, but also for other, more important commercial uses, which it is already being used for, widely. Killzone 2 is possibly the greatest FPS on the PS3, and the best looking for consoles, but for PC killzone can't even "shake a stick" at some of the games for PC, and by some, i mean about 5 - 10.
i already said for the millionth time that killzone 2 doesn't beat crysis. it is comparable in a lot of ways, but there's no denying that crysis remains number one. on the other hand, there are things that killzone 2 does that crysis doesn't feature. as for games on PC, the only game that i've seen that is better than killzone 2 stalker and crysis. that's it. and the point i was saying that it's the best console FPS out which actually plays better.
And on a final note, i take that comment of "Far cry 2 not even being in the same league of Killzone 2" as an insult, as i've seen far cry 2 on full resolution, on ultra high in DX10, sure my computer got about 5 - 10 FPS, but when i just stood their, and looked, i could barely even go back to playing at my normal settings, it could've even matched crysis on all high with a few very highs.
like i said before, i never denied far cry 2 looking bad but it really doesn't have a stick to shake at compared to killzone 2. i've played both games and i could still see killzone 2 being superior. the textures, atmosphere (best war game atmosphere in history!), death animation, character models, weapon animations, the detailed urban environment, and other things are so much better. if far cry used killzone's engine, i'm sure it would only make it look better.
If far cry 2 used killzones engine, you could say good bye to the natural environmental degradation system, fire propogation, and all the other things which keep it environmentaly realistic. Killzone doesn't look "photorealistic" which is what both crysis and far cry 2 were going for. (play far cry 2 on PC, not rented for console, since the graphics were lowered) Killzone 2, looks more "cartoony", or surreal.
killzone 2 doesn't try to look photorealistic, but neither does far cry 2. the environments are crisp, but not photorealistic. the only times i thought far cry 2 looked photorealistic was when i was looking at backdrops or the horizon from a distance, but once you get up close, the textures and polys didn't look realistic. and that's another thing i like about killzone 2 is it's art direction. it's unique. it's not cartoony, it's immersive and visceral.
Visceral eh? stabbing and impaling people with machetes isn't visceral? and i really don't know what texture quality/res you played the game on, but the textures look fine up close, the only thing that would be bothersome about farcry 2 would be the popping, such as shadows, various vegetation, and the smoothening on models as you get closer. When i say photorealistic, i mean that it's aimed at looking like the real world, with it's art direction. KZ2 isn't cartoony but it is surreal.
it's more of the war setting and atmosphere that made killzone 2 feel enticing. the story in the game isn't the best i've seen, but i love war themed games and the story is pretty good. i like open world games partially mainly because there is no sense of direction or motive so when i kill someone, i don't feel like i'm killing for a particularly good reason since it's sandbox and not objective based. that's just me though. i know some love sandbox games, but i get bored with them.
Well, their korean militants and your a specialized US military unit sent in to find out whats going on. Their are many parts in the game where you can slip past the Koreans without them even noticing you, so you don't HAVE to kill them throughout the game, but it's the more favored choice because remaining sneaking through undetected is ALOT harder and depending on your play style, not as fun.
also, killzone 2's uses a fourth dimensional real time environmental deterioration. unlike most games that uses pre-sets codes that are time sequenced for things to degrade (ie: the weapons from far cry 2 that will rust and jam), every thing has a real time effect on how the environment ages. if something is in too much exposure to sunlight, the environment takes a toll from the heat exposure. same goes for weapon damage, water, and other factors. it's subtle though since it takes a whil
I've never heard of that since it's announcement, nor have i seen anything on it under it's engine description or tech description so i can only treat it as loose talk. Far Cry 2 uses gradual deterioration for it's guns, over a long period of time only degrading the more you FIRE them. It's environment deterioration is much more complex, especially when you throw in fire.
Also, nor do i believe KZ2 would have that kind of environmental effect since it has no effect on gameplay.
here's a direct quote from sony developers, "The mark of change made apparent as life progresses through time. You then see the prime example of wood rusting discussed earlier, and then the textures of the wall beginning to fade on the roof above you. The SPUs certainly helps tremendously on top of the fast processing core for dynamic 4D graphics..."
"...The most important and unique ability of the architecture of the PS3, however, allows the Algorithmic suite to continuously stream textures, using one or two SPUs to compute the textures to be given to the GPU to be displayed. This eliminates the need of having to stream that content from the Blu-ray. "
that's 4D in a nutshell and how it's used in some upcoming ps3 games such as killzone 2. this environment effect is mainly there for the realistic value and it's all real time, not preset.
Yes but it can only be utilized to a certain extent, probably the reason why it hasn't been mentioned too much for KZ2, because it was only implemented to a certain extent.
it wasn't limited, it just was decided not to fully use it for stuff like guns or characters. if you look thoroughly, you'll see that GG is advertising that it uses 4D. the main reasons it isn't as publicized is because most people come across a huge misconception that 4D refers to graphics when it doesn't and the fact that the in game effect for killzone 2 is so minimal that it's hardly noticeable. the whole point however is that its being used as part of the game.
K.... i knew what 4d graphics were though, just saying. I mean, i've even seen them in action over HUGE time lapses, it's just so minimal though, it really is even noteworthy unless you sit their and watch it. SO.... i don't really feel like spending the rest of this saturday night conversing about this so i'll just leave it as, Killzone 2, so far, is the best looking CONSOLE FPS (arguebly), but it's still got miles to go against the PC department.
well the game saves its states, it doesn't restart so you can see changes every time you go back in forth between levels. you don't need to site there for days to see it, you'll see it every time you turn on/off the system and play it again. but yeah, i'm back on ship duty in about 5 hours so i need to get some sleep. eitherway, killzone 2 is easily the best looking console game, not even arguably.
It's been tested and proven that the 360 can process 4d graphics renders, BUT, not to it's fullest potential, which i assume would mean, not as well as the PS3 can. BTW, i just thought of another title, Alan Wake. it's not released yet, but as it's a 360 exclusive and it's said to be able to do amazing things, have amazing graphics, 100% dynamic and volumetric lighting and weather, it should be quite the contender to make the 360's tech shine.
well sony is the only ones using it as mandatory propriety engine for their games, mainly first party titles. it's not a programmable code for the specific video game itself since it's dependent on the video game developer to use it, it's integrated into the operating system of the console and the code is received from the game when it registers that 4D code or whatever it will be called. so it's not the same since sony patented this technology. i look forward to alan wake though.
also, i think some games are rated higher over others when it really doesn't deserve it. for example, blacksite had average reviews but the gameplay itself wasn't broken in any way. clive barker's jericho also had low ratings when it was actually unique in a lot of ways compared to most FPS's. why is that games like halo keep getting high scores when other competent shooters get marked down simply because they aren't as popular. it's pretty biased i think.
i don't deny halo and counter strike being good games, but you got to admit that they're sort of out of their prime because just about every other FPS that releases is on par or even better than those games. counter strike is about a decade old and if the same exact game were to be released today, i'm sure most people would consider it a generic FPS because today's standards has evolved so much. i love counter strike, but they need to seriously move on because games are getting better than it.
Your not going to get any innovation in the fps genre because it is just jam packed with games. No fps this gen has been innovative and offered a new experience other than left for dead , all other games are like one another except halo and left for dead because of their style and universe. Please name me an exclusive fps better than halo because none , released or going to be released, look as fun or interesting as halo.
Halo is up their with Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake, in the most legendary FPS series catalogue. So, even if Killzone 2 does turn out to be good, which i doubt it will, and if it does, it will still have to drag around that dead end, Killzone 1.
they're famous like doom and quake, but it doesn't mean they can get stale after a while. i loved the first halo, but they started going downhill besides the online they included in halo 2. the main reason why i don't like it as much is because the single player was just flat out boring and i would like it if bungie actually changed the "feel to the game." why not include a sprint or hell, even jet packs. i would even like it if they had classes.
look at reviews for killzone 2. it already has a 5/5 from gamepro, 9/10 from opm uk, 15/5 from opm us, 10/10 from opm au, 9.7/10 from webmaster911, 10/10 from 576K, and a lot of other reviews gave it high scores. a lot of these reviewers said stuff like "the best console FPS ever," "the new era half life 2," etc etc. i don't see how you think it would fail just because the first one was mediocre. i guess we should think the gta series will be dragged down because of it's first three games
who the hell is webmaster911? and i assume OPM stands for playstation magazine, as those are the main sites that have been giving it ratings. And, as i said, until i see ratings from Gameinformer, Gametrailers, 1up, Gamespot, and other MAJOR gaming reviewers, i'm not going to fall in line with whateveryone BELIEVES, as their are plenty of games that got great ratings to reviewers who got early copies of it, as they were most likely if not completely, brided/payed to advertise the game for them
dude, OPM always rate their own games low. this is like the first time they actually gave a high review to a ps3 exclusive. they're anything but biased. also, i just posted a lot of those no names sites because they still got a review copy of the game and their feedback is important. also, how is gamepro not credible? IGN is already saying how the game is going to get high ratings and such. i'm sure gameinformer will give a high score. gt's, not sure.
Saying what reviewers ARE going to give it is like assuming how the superbowl will turn out, just because of speculation and whatnot, doesn't garuntee it that status, just look at too human, that game was raved to be a dominator, but then it turned into garbage, and im not saying killzone 2 will turn out to be as bad as the original, but a perfect example would be the original killzone, it was hailed as the win all, end all, for sony and microsoft, and the supposed "Halo Killer", but it was crap
i understand that, i'm just saying that a lot of true impressions of the game have been overall very very positive. i've been reading a lot of bold claims such as "best fps ever made" or "the next half life," etc. i'm just saying the game is going really good so far unlike the first killzone where people were saying it was average even before the review embargo on the game was lifted.
Next Half Life? Best FPS ever made? I relized you said bold but i never thought it would be taken to such amazing extremes, best FPS on PS3, most likely, best FPS ever? I doubt that more then i doubt that i won't die if i play russian roullette with a fully loaded revolver.
Strange, all i've ever heard on the xbox boards is how shitty the beta of killzone was and how shitty it will be, but apparently it's pretty good, now aint that the damndest thing?
lol where did you hear that bull? i haven't heard a single person who didn't praise the beta. the only complaints they could find was stuff like there were connection errors, one of the classes was under-balanced, the shotgun range was too far, the death delay animation, and a few texture issues. what's crazy is that it's just a beta for testing and all of these things and even others are being ironed. the beta was pretty good from what i've heard from everybody else.
"Strange, all i've ever heard on the xbox boards is how shitty the beta of killzone was and how shitty it will be"
Oh really? Mind if you link me to that forum? because I've searched xbox 360 forums talking about this game and all I ever hear are them whining and wanting this game on their shitty console, besides it's normal behavior for them to diss a game that ain't on their console, and then jizz over it when it is announced for the xbox, same thing happened with FF13 LMFAO
why do you doubt it so much? because you don't want it to be that way? in case you didn't know the game IS being pushed to amazing extremes. whether you like it or not, they're actually raising a benchmark in console FPS gaming. i have never seen a game that resembled CG as much as killzone 2 and the only real competition killzone 2 has graphically is crysis (in which crysis is still better of course), but the magnitude of the game is nothing short of amazing.
I guess i could admit that deep down i don't want it to be that way, but that's also not to say that i never expected it to be so great in the first place. And a great game that truly renders CG, i woud have to say even crysis is out matched by Project offset, hell, FEAR 2 looks better then killzone 2, FEAR 2 is also REALLY fun btw, i played the demo, it truly felt like a revolutionary tactical experiance, challenging AI, excellent weapon choice, interactive environments... But yea...
i'm really down with FEAR 2 but those graphics are far from being anything killzone 2 can do. i've been looking at project offset for a while and those graphics look nice but i need to know whether it's in-game or target render because both sony and microsoft pulls that shit saying it's in-game. offset reminds me more of crysis than anything else, but even still the artistic direction isn't the best i've seen. i like killzone 2's gritty sci-fi, death animations, weight and movement, etc.
Are you serious? They look AMAZING, i mean, they have destructible environments, ambient occlusion, it's really an understatement to say that their far from anything Killzone 2 can do, it's not the greatest looking game ever. I feel that it's getting too much praise from it's graphics. You've played the Demo for FEAR 2 right? i mean, i didn't even play it on full it looked amazing, almost making me second guess crysis for a second.
trust me, i played a little bit of killzone 2 and what i saw had some very serious CGI looking moments. i promise i'm not exaggerating when i say this. there's this one level i played on where rico bashed down a door (obviously a script piece) but i couldn't believe how good it looked. the animation is some of the best i've ever seen. also, killzone 2 uses ambient lighting, volumetric lighting effects, post processes parallel geometry, motion blur (not lens blur), indirect lighting.
I'm sure, their are plenty of games with "CGI like moments", like for instance, in far cry 2, i was going down the river in a boat, i passed by station and they began chasing me with cars along side the river, it was like a chase scene out of some indiana jones movie practicaly. I don't want to get into a conversation over the tech of different games, so im just going to say, alot of games already have those things.
i'm not saying far cry 2 doesn't look good, but killzone 2 looks miles ahead of far cry 2. i rented far cry 2 a while back and the vegetation and water effects look great, but the character models aren't that great and some of the environments look jaggy. and i never said killzone 2 looks better than crysis, i'm just saying that i like killzone 2's art direction. there are too many jungle/environmental games and killzone 2 separates from it with their own unique look.
*erm* you rented it? they degraded the graphics on consoles, play it computer, full anti-aliasing, you won't see any jaggies... and the character models, well, they may not be great to the extent of crysis but their pretty good. Crysis CAN be played in urban environments, theirs even a mod out for crysis that does so. Not only that, but theirs a mod being made for crysis, BASED ON MGS4, and it looks better then it too (graphics), infact, all the mod for crysis look orgasmic.
i rented it and played a little bit of the game on PC. pc did look better but not far off from the console version i played. i only got to play far cry on PC for a few minutes while i put a few hours in the game on console. and of course crysis mods would look great considering it's the best graphical game to date. however, PC game development has been lazy and not capilizating on such feats that crytek did with crysis.
Don't bring FEAR 2 in the arguement, I don't know how desperate you can get, first fanboys said killzone 2 will never match its graphics...
now GG proved them wrong, and then fanboys suddenly have to bring up some bullshit like ... BUT OHH FEAR 2 looks better than killzone 2! even though game developers have repeatedly said things like Killzone 2 is the BEST LOOKING GAME ON ANY CONSOLE...you never played the killzone 2 demo, so shut the hell up lol
LOL, yea, okay, best on any console.... WELL, HMMM, FEAR 2 IS ALSO ON PC AND PORTS TO CONSOLES OR CONSOLE VERSIONS ARE KNOWN FOR HAVING DOWNGRADED GRAPHICS. Go play fear 2 on pc you cunt.
FEAR 2 isn't even close to killzone 2 in graphics, thats why you're a dumb ass, all i ever hear killzone 2 being compared to graphically is Crysis, Fear 2 is out of it's league, only a random youtube dumb ass like you who can't admit killzone 2 looks good thinks FEAR 2 can beat it, thats the worse comparison i've ever heard thus far
and i'm buying FEAR 2, but i highly doubt it will match killzone 2. i've already seen gameplay of it and even though it always looks better live than streaming it on the internet, it still doesn't look as good as killzone 2 on youtube compared to fear 2 on youtube. that's just me impressions on it. i wasn't blown away by fear's graphics, but it does look like fun. i like the weapons and enemies. trust me, there's a reason why killzone 2 got an official "undisputed graphics" award.
undisputed graphics? thats for current games being released right? not overall? cause if it is "overall" i would have a hard time comprehending that. But, have you played the demo? If you have, it plays (gameplay) alot better then how it looks since you can interact with the environment to make use of tactical cover, and the destructibility both in and out of the mini mech is astonishing.
gametrailers and g4tv labeled killzone 2 with best graphics for console and the other game competitors were street fighter 4, far cry 2, call of duty world at war, gta4, gears 2 and some other games that i can't remember. not only that, the game comparisons were with killzone 2's alpha builds, not the final build which looks substantially better. and i know the gameplay in killzone 2 is awesome since i played it already. it's easily my favorite FPS at the moment.
"guess i could admit that deep down i don't want it to be that way"
Oh enough fucking said fanboy behavior right there, stop hating fool... now you're making some bullshit up saying FEAR 2 looks better than killzone 2, get a grip dumb ass, theres a reason why all beta testers are praising this game highly including game reviewers etc.....
oh did I mention today gamepro gave killzone 2 5/5 and now the metacritics score for this game is 98%?
"but that's also not to say that i never expected it to be so great in the first place" wow, that explain much? and mabye it's because of people like YOU which make it that i never wanted it to be that way. And actually, it IS starting to NOT be that way, just went down 2%, down to 96 LOL, and just look at the user scores for it, their even lower then the scores for GEARS 2 and all the Halo's. So get off your high fucking horse, you just got owned in the face, WHAT BITCH?!
umm you realize the big boy reviewers reviewed the game today and the game sits at 95% metacritics right? and gears of war 2 only got 93% metacritics, so in other words, it scored higher than gears...
and user score for GEARS 2 and all the halo's? are you serious? I told you, user scores are saturated with fanboys, metacritics even had to address this issue by locking up the user scores
but in case you didn't know, gears 2 had a user score of 4.1 and halo wars had 0.8
LOL i meant gears of war 2 had a user score of 6.1.... killzone 2 has a userscore of 6.3
SO WHAT NOW BITCH? you know I have no idea why the fuck you would bring that to the arguement in the first place because it is totally irrelevant and not a credible source...
but even going by YOUR OWN TWISTED arguement you still lost...
"just went down 2%, down to 96 LOL, and just look at the user scores for it, their even lower then the scores for GEARS 2 and all the Halo's. So get off your high fucking horse, you just got owned in the face, WHAT BITCH?! "
Gears 2 only had a 93% metacritics dumb ass LMFAO, and the fact that you use userscores in your arguement is just pure sad, the metacritics user score is FILLED WITH people repeatedly voting to bring another console's game down, metacritics locked the scores up b/c of it
umm first of all, Halo 3 has 94% on metacritics not 97...
unless you were refering to HALO 1, why the hell would you bring halo 1 into this conversation when we're comparing Next-gen console games?
I told you, userscores mean nothin because it's saturated by fanboys, thats why metacritics locked the userscores until the game releases from now on, keep up to date..
eat what? Weren't you the one that THOUGHT gears 2 had a BETTER USER SCORE than killzone 2? LMFAO
AHHH, sorry, i meant Gears 1 has a better user score, lol, it's next gen, so you can't say shit about it, oh, and it's 94 is based on 88 reviews, when Killzone 2 comes anything close to that, THEN say shit...
ummm, lets see, proven me wrong on two things, the user scores for the halo games and.... the gears 2 use scores, and those, i messed up and was thinking of Gears 1.... the rest is just pure, biased belief. Besides, you've already BEEN proven wrong many, many, many, many, more times in the past by me AND that other guy that was on here earlier, not only did we prove you WRONG but also prove you to be a fucking hypocrite.
I proved you wrong for user scores for halo games, and gears 2 userscores.. I proved to you how utterly SHIT and completely useless the userscores on metacritics are because they are not reliable
I gave you credible sources that are totally against your biased view and ridiculous claims like "FEAR 2 looks better thann Killzone 2"
I told you halo wars got 0.8 / 10 on metacritics and you didn't say shit and yet you still kept on relying on the userscore arguement
by the way dumb ass, you should keep in mind Killzone 2 is being literaly nit-picked to death and criticized ever since the game as in development, first they complained about the 2005 CGI trailer and said it was impossible, then when GG proved them wrong they attacked the gameplay, and then when reviewers proved them wrong they had to resort to nit-picking small things like "having no installs"
Reviewers complained about installs in the past, and now they are complainign about "no installs"
lol, toda vez que o monstro vai atacar muda a cena!
NeoQueiroz 4 weeks ago
I have the game played the story mode it was mad fun
trialoffire95 7 months ago
Iv got that game............
MegaEMA86 7 months ago
This game had a good idea... but it's shitty gameplay let it down.
CyberYeoo 8 months ago
haha this reminds me of original doom music...
TheJesusCrysist 8 months ago
no wonder this game was such a fail its horrible
117HaWx 9 months ago
awesome game.
Markehslo 1 year ago
This game is Legen... wait for it... DARY!
ericlinkgf 1 year ago
This game looks hard, since the animals are not getting killed easily...
monsterviolence 1 year ago
never heard of it but it looks good
Rangerfull3 1 year ago
it is worth to buy buy it from cdon for 14.95€
aqwdaman 1 year ago
Trailer, not gameplay. They're not the same thing BTW!
asdfasd705 1 year ago
awesome game
Hollow2304 1 year ago
Its like Nightmare Creatures meets Quake
Finalknot 1 year ago
HEY. I WANT EVERYONE TO GIVE ME 10
Kilonoid 1 year ago
Looks kinda GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY
Murderface357 1 year ago
SHIT game
Satanismisoverpower 1 year ago
this game is not bad..but its kinda `EMPTY` .. Where`s the health bar and all other things?? 0_o
izwandy1 1 year ago 2
rofl better than MW2
Crazyguitar96 1 year ago
sucks
c0mrade1337 1 year ago
Y do so many ppl hate on this game it's really not that bad I have fun playing it cuz the creatures r cool
Rollinitup 1 year ago
In this clip not one enemy was killed, whoever played this sucked
sk3tch069 1 year ago
what ur GT
MrOmegaProductions1 1 year ago
this game doesnt look like it would get old at all,kill some werewolves then some more then a gryphon then more wolves,awesome
alfonzo830 1 year ago
People truly are fucking stupid. This game is not bad! It's not amazingly awesome, but around a 7. Not a fucking 2!
Jarek4 2 years ago
would nominate this game to top 10 worst games 2008
Lolismad 2 years ago
shit game!
teken1000 2 years ago
game looks scary with those wolf things
SuperReviewBro 2 years ago
This game sucks
I know because I bought it :S
remkoseghers 2 years ago
first chek on youtube before buy
couse now i dont buy it
steenist 2 years ago 2
@steenist
Thats true
I was a fool indeed
I only watched the trailer
remkoseghers 2 years ago
allways watch the gameplay before buying a game ; ) ( a gamer's tip)
mu7araq007 2 years ago
@mu7araq007
I know
I've been a fool xD
remkoseghers 2 years ago
o rly?
yosmer333 2 years ago
realy what ?
mu7araq007 2 years ago
my brother in law just bought me this game but i havent played it yet. looks good though
oiboy626 2 years ago
what is the story behind this game? were did the creatures come from?
amorrow794 2 years ago
the concept was so promising but from what i've seen the game is not good
metalpsips 2 years ago
this game is a conplete disappointing its soks
pedro98076 2 years ago
Hmm... I dunno. The concept sounds fun, but the gameplay I've seen doesn't really impress me at all.
simplethunder 2 years ago
THIS IS NOT GAMEPLAY!
moisen123 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ok kill me but i hate gta 4 ...gta san andreas is much betteeeeeeeeer than the gta 4....more weapons,cars,blood...and funnyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
graphics arent good but the gameplay is simply fantastic
gta san andreas= gta san andreas
gta 4= like getaway or godfather
RKJPounce 2 years ago
you re so right dude. gta 4 was such a dissapointment. San andreas was really the best gta since now
SonLenin 2 years ago
san andreas kick ass of gta 4...gta san adnreas is one of the 3 best games of ps2 and games like fallout 3,uncharted 2 or MGS4 are better than gta 4 in ps3
RKJPounce 2 years ago
i didnt play fallout 3 or mgs4 but uncharted 2 is way better than gta4. by the way the only thing gta4 has better than san andreas is the graphics
SonLenin 2 years ago
great true...only graphics..... but jugabilty,blood,funny,cars....TSSS....GTA SAN ANDREAS
RKJPounce 2 years ago
no dude...many stuff are better than san andreas...you should play ti more...
mu7araq007 2 years ago
Dude tell me about those stuffs? No wait i'll do it first.
- Graphics
- Internet acess
- Online gameplay
SonLenin 2 years ago
+many places to visit+its in NEW YORK+
for the first time you can do funny stuffwith your friends and chat with them,so its not just '' online gameplay ''
and i dont think that someone has a mind would prefer San andreas on IV :b
mu7araq007 2 years ago
Well there are many minds who prefer san andreas:) Put those new stuffs in San andreas and it would be the best game ever;)
SonLenin 2 years ago
Okay, it seems this is a messed up game (as others claim and seeing all the bad reviews) but my question is - I see a lot of people saying this is short: short as in, Ive played it 12 hrs non stop or Ive played it moderately and it still seemed as being short? Cause there is a huge difference? Im willing to give this game a shot but Im interested in the play-time
blairdom 2 years ago
depends on the difficulty you play it on and on your playstile, each chapter takes me around 2 hours and there are 8 chapters, so i think for a single player FPS game this linear its fine.
distordedmediaZ 2 years ago
nothing special will buy call of duty 4 or gta IV insted of this skit!
facilia1 2 years ago
Yeah am glad I didn't get this now - Looks pretty generic.
steveharley0345 2 years ago
is the game fun
stickguy911 2 years ago
suck dick
mrpoop1997 2 years ago
this game loooks fun, but got a shit rating from everyone. why? O.O
crisomflames 2 years ago
It just kinda' suck. The gameplay is weak, the graphics are OK, the story ain't the best, the game is short, boring and there is no diversity in it whatsoever. Rent it, don't buy it.
PigBenis1337 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this shit sucks 4 all yall niggaz that think that this shit is tite is trippen
japangirl913 2 years ago
WTF I DONT KNOW WHY THE PEOPLE DONT PLAY THIS ONLINE...IS SIMPLY AWESOME....TELL ME WHICH GAME HIS ONLINE IS IN ONE STREET OF NEW YORK WITH 1000 WEREWOLFS....THIS IS EPIC....I always stay in legendary online ,agree me: Sauron925
RKJPounce 2 years ago
You can add AI? HFS
marineooo5 2 years ago
All caps
Fanboyism
Spanish
Yeah, you kinda fail, mate.
steveharley0345 2 years ago
hey sence you seem to be a fan of legendary do you think its worth buying, because the demo was sweet
halflifefan84 2 years ago
worst game ever! -100
RiotsWithEmos 2 years ago
Im Agree :(
RU5T3R 2 years ago
I disagree heavily and laugh at you while I'm at it.
SpraxIAKS 2 years ago
this game, the it just look unreal
jimmytrinh95 2 years ago
wen i played this game it scared the shit out of me XD
batofu 2 years ago
I own this game! it has good gamplay and story(breaking the werewolfs arms are FUNNY)
boredboys6178 2 years ago
Msg me for a link to full download
Bloodthirstaid 2 years ago
Gawd... I've never played the demo of this game but a friend of mine has bought the game and he borrowed it to me, i was kinda happy 'till i started playing... OMFG! Is there any story....? u just keep advancing and shooting... i can't explain, this game doesn't make sense! It has nice graphics (kinda) but it sucks... _FAIL_
OneManAndHisToaster 2 years ago
ok...
WTF!!!!!
pezza2k8pezza 2 years ago
i played the demo last night. it was odd, but i like it!!
MarineLatrine 3 years ago
game is crap stay away from it
AlekVicious 3 years ago
whats so crapy about it?
horserider101202 3 years ago
looks better without a crosshair and hud
layzivan167 3 years ago 2
i played the demo its not that good sry
oOZamuriiOo 3 years ago
this looks awesome 5 *****
ubersniper2324 3 years ago 8
this game looks sick
xXDr34MsNo3v1lXx 3 years ago 3
this game sucks
DaDrifta360 3 years ago
no you suck the only reason you are saying it cuz u cant beat th minotaur
HUDSON2CBLOWS 3 years ago 13
whats that?
DaDrifta360 3 years ago
man u can be the the best player and i respect you desicion but you cant be so ignorant ,you gat to now what is a fucking minotaur and if you didnt playe it dont talk
joacoarce 3 years ago
dude have you seen the ratings for this game
it IS bullshit
listen to the fuckin music on the demo
dannyboi9891 3 years ago 2
HAHAhhh didn't try the game ! but the music on the demo I'm with ya !!
tinacroft 3 years ago
hey HIDSON2CBLOWS , iiiiii beat the Minotaur!! it was kewl.
MarineLatrine 3 years ago
later on.. you fight two miotaur's i beat the game quite easy...
196278 2 years ago
cool game
DaRkVeGeTaBLe1 3 years ago
also, stalker clear sky uses screen space ambient occlusion.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Yes, but it was released after crysis.
bud389 3 years ago
i liked the stealth kills in the game, but sometimes i found out that the AI can figure out where you're at even if they weren't looking at you. it was a little annoying because sometimes the AI was slow as hell. like you said, i just ran around and shot everyone. i did have some pretty awesome moments in the game such as lighting up a jeep, toss it down hill into a village, blow it up, run for cover, and kill enemies from the back. it didn't happen a lot, but it was dynamic.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
C, it's moments like that where it shows what Crysis is truly capable of. Their's over 2 hundred custom made singleplayer maps made for crysis, so your bound to find more replayability in it as it's content continuesly expands. They already have completely seperate guns that can be integrated into the game, with their own damage, skin, features, and ammo capacity.
bud389 3 years ago
like i said, it was only fun for so much for me. it could've been so much better.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
the things that far cry 2 does that killzone 2 doesn't do is stuff that killzone 2 never intended to integrate in their game like a dynamic weather system, 24 cycle, fire propagation and some other things that the killzone engine could easily handle. i think it could have better lighting, physics, character models (the ones in far cry are a little polygonal, even the ones on PC), animation, and even textures. i'm not saying far cry 2 should look like killzone 2.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
for example. most games use eight lights total for an entire level while killzone 2 is using 8 lights on just a single enemy character. killzone 2 ends up using over 230 different light sources for just the inside of a building which is pretty amazing. the parallax, animation, physics, models, and atmosphere is amazing.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
For Far Cry 2, that would be impressive, but well, Crysis, that's another thing... for instance, during the night levels, lamps, jeeps, computers, spotlights, and any other sort of lightsource (including your own) casts it's own reflective, dynamic, fully volumetric lighting.
bud389 3 years ago
yeah, like i said, crysis is the only other game that bests killzone 2 as for the lighting goes. far cry's dynamic lighting is nice, but it has no where as many light sources. i'm not sure how much light sources are used for certain levels in crysis, but i know it uses real time ambient effects which is pretty nice. i don't think killzone 2 does that, but it does have volumetric lighting as well.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Crysis beats every single game on the market right now, at everything... theirs no denying it.. The only "ability" KZ2 has over Crysis is the "4d graphics", but then again, Crysis has an infinite Skybox, dynamic 3d rendered ocean, physics that support soft body physics, liquid, rigid bodies, and ragdoll, used "Screen Space Ambient Occlusion" for the first time in gaming history, subsurface scattering, all particles (including fire and rain) being effected by wind and other forces, and much more
bud389 3 years ago
in terms of graphics, yes. in terms of substance, killzone 2 beats it. a lot of the game felt tacked on and generic. killzone 2 is doing a lot of great things to differ itself from other FPS's. killzone's propriety physics engine is being considered to be used for the euphoria engine (which is THE BEST physics in the world), sci-fi war story, 256 64player clan support with tournaments and valor points, mix and match class system, hit-response system, ranking, leaderboards, and others.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
euphoria an ANIMATION engine, not a full on physics based engine. Substance? That is highly argueable, in Crysis' favor too. Cryengine 2 is being used by architects and is alos being used for educational purposes. It is THE MOST advanced engine out their as, and probably the best overall. theirs a reason why its won 7 awards, all being GOTY and Best ---- awards... and those are just awards from major review sites. Really, look up what the Cryengine 2 is capable of.
bud389 3 years ago
exactly, just like killzone 2's. it switches between animation and physics just like killzone 2 and the euphoria engine which is why GG is thinking about licensing a few patents on the engine.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Ok, this is my last comment, Killzone 2 isn't even comparable to Crysis and what it has acheived, it is a benchmark not only for gaming, but also for other, more important commercial uses, which it is already being used for, widely. Killzone 2 is possibly the greatest FPS on the PS3, and the best looking for consoles, but for PC killzone can't even "shake a stick" at some of the games for PC, and by some, i mean about 5 - 10.
bud389 3 years ago
i already said for the millionth time that killzone 2 doesn't beat crysis. it is comparable in a lot of ways, but there's no denying that crysis remains number one. on the other hand, there are things that killzone 2 does that crysis doesn't feature. as for games on PC, the only game that i've seen that is better than killzone 2 stalker and crysis. that's it. and the point i was saying that it's the best console FPS out which actually plays better.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
you do realise you and cyberwaffles took up 25 comment pages,man get a life
halflifefan84 2 years ago
And on a final note, i take that comment of "Far cry 2 not even being in the same league of Killzone 2" as an insult, as i've seen far cry 2 on full resolution, on ultra high in DX10, sure my computer got about 5 - 10 FPS, but when i just stood their, and looked, i could barely even go back to playing at my normal settings, it could've even matched crysis on all high with a few very highs.
bud389 3 years ago
like i said before, i never denied far cry 2 looking bad but it really doesn't have a stick to shake at compared to killzone 2. i've played both games and i could still see killzone 2 being superior. the textures, atmosphere (best war game atmosphere in history!), death animation, character models, weapon animations, the detailed urban environment, and other things are so much better. if far cry used killzone's engine, i'm sure it would only make it look better.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
If far cry 2 used killzones engine, you could say good bye to the natural environmental degradation system, fire propogation, and all the other things which keep it environmentaly realistic. Killzone doesn't look "photorealistic" which is what both crysis and far cry 2 were going for. (play far cry 2 on PC, not rented for console, since the graphics were lowered) Killzone 2, looks more "cartoony", or surreal.
bud389 3 years ago
killzone 2 doesn't try to look photorealistic, but neither does far cry 2. the environments are crisp, but not photorealistic. the only times i thought far cry 2 looked photorealistic was when i was looking at backdrops or the horizon from a distance, but once you get up close, the textures and polys didn't look realistic. and that's another thing i like about killzone 2 is it's art direction. it's unique. it's not cartoony, it's immersive and visceral.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Visceral eh? stabbing and impaling people with machetes isn't visceral? and i really don't know what texture quality/res you played the game on, but the textures look fine up close, the only thing that would be bothersome about farcry 2 would be the popping, such as shadows, various vegetation, and the smoothening on models as you get closer. When i say photorealistic, i mean that it's aimed at looking like the real world, with it's art direction. KZ2 isn't cartoony but it is surreal.
bud389 3 years ago
it's more of the war setting and atmosphere that made killzone 2 feel enticing. the story in the game isn't the best i've seen, but i love war themed games and the story is pretty good. i like open world games partially mainly because there is no sense of direction or motive so when i kill someone, i don't feel like i'm killing for a particularly good reason since it's sandbox and not objective based. that's just me though. i know some love sandbox games, but i get bored with them.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Well, their korean militants and your a specialized US military unit sent in to find out whats going on. Their are many parts in the game where you can slip past the Koreans without them even noticing you, so you don't HAVE to kill them throughout the game, but it's the more favored choice because remaining sneaking through undetected is ALOT harder and depending on your play style, not as fun.
bud389 3 years ago
also, killzone 2's uses a fourth dimensional real time environmental deterioration. unlike most games that uses pre-sets codes that are time sequenced for things to degrade (ie: the weapons from far cry 2 that will rust and jam), every thing has a real time effect on how the environment ages. if something is in too much exposure to sunlight, the environment takes a toll from the heat exposure. same goes for weapon damage, water, and other factors. it's subtle though since it takes a whil
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
I've never heard of that since it's announcement, nor have i seen anything on it under it's engine description or tech description so i can only treat it as loose talk. Far Cry 2 uses gradual deterioration for it's guns, over a long period of time only degrading the more you FIRE them. It's environment deterioration is much more complex, especially when you throw in fire.
Also, nor do i believe KZ2 would have that kind of environmental effect since it has no effect on gameplay.
bud389 3 years ago
here's a direct quote from sony developers, "The mark of change made apparent as life progresses through time. You then see the prime example of wood rusting discussed earlier, and then the textures of the wall beginning to fade on the roof above you. The SPUs certainly helps tremendously on top of the fast processing core for dynamic 4D graphics..."
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
"...The most important and unique ability of the architecture of the PS3, however, allows the Algorithmic suite to continuously stream textures, using one or two SPUs to compute the textures to be given to the GPU to be displayed. This eliminates the need of having to stream that content from the Blu-ray. "
that's 4D in a nutshell and how it's used in some upcoming ps3 games such as killzone 2. this environment effect is mainly there for the realistic value and it's all real time, not preset.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Yes but it can only be utilized to a certain extent, probably the reason why it hasn't been mentioned too much for KZ2, because it was only implemented to a certain extent.
bud389 3 years ago
it wasn't limited, it just was decided not to fully use it for stuff like guns or characters. if you look thoroughly, you'll see that GG is advertising that it uses 4D. the main reasons it isn't as publicized is because most people come across a huge misconception that 4D refers to graphics when it doesn't and the fact that the in game effect for killzone 2 is so minimal that it's hardly noticeable. the whole point however is that its being used as part of the game.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
K.... i knew what 4d graphics were though, just saying. I mean, i've even seen them in action over HUGE time lapses, it's just so minimal though, it really is even noteworthy unless you sit their and watch it. SO.... i don't really feel like spending the rest of this saturday night conversing about this so i'll just leave it as, Killzone 2, so far, is the best looking CONSOLE FPS (arguebly), but it's still got miles to go against the PC department.
bud389 3 years ago
well the game saves its states, it doesn't restart so you can see changes every time you go back in forth between levels. you don't need to site there for days to see it, you'll see it every time you turn on/off the system and play it again. but yeah, i'm back on ship duty in about 5 hours so i need to get some sleep. eitherway, killzone 2 is easily the best looking console game, not even arguably.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
It's been tested and proven that the 360 can process 4d graphics renders, BUT, not to it's fullest potential, which i assume would mean, not as well as the PS3 can. BTW, i just thought of another title, Alan Wake. it's not released yet, but as it's a 360 exclusive and it's said to be able to do amazing things, have amazing graphics, 100% dynamic and volumetric lighting and weather, it should be quite the contender to make the 360's tech shine.
bud389 3 years ago
well sony is the only ones using it as mandatory propriety engine for their games, mainly first party titles. it's not a programmable code for the specific video game itself since it's dependent on the video game developer to use it, it's integrated into the operating system of the console and the code is received from the game when it registers that 4D code or whatever it will be called. so it's not the same since sony patented this technology. i look forward to alan wake though.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
awsome, im trying this in the marketplace.
gamefreakdude89 3 years ago
also, i think some games are rated higher over others when it really doesn't deserve it. for example, blacksite had average reviews but the gameplay itself wasn't broken in any way. clive barker's jericho also had low ratings when it was actually unique in a lot of ways compared to most FPS's. why is that games like halo keep getting high scores when other competent shooters get marked down simply because they aren't as popular. it's pretty biased i think.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
i don't deny halo and counter strike being good games, but you got to admit that they're sort of out of their prime because just about every other FPS that releases is on par or even better than those games. counter strike is about a decade old and if the same exact game were to be released today, i'm sure most people would consider it a generic FPS because today's standards has evolved so much. i love counter strike, but they need to seriously move on because games are getting better than it.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Your not going to get any innovation in the fps genre because it is just jam packed with games. No fps this gen has been innovative and offered a new experience other than left for dead , all other games are like one another except halo and left for dead because of their style and universe. Please name me an exclusive fps better than halo because none , released or going to be released, look as fun or interesting as halo.
Jman2k9 3 years ago
Halo is up their with Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake, in the most legendary FPS series catalogue. So, even if Killzone 2 does turn out to be good, which i doubt it will, and if it does, it will still have to drag around that dead end, Killzone 1.
bud389 3 years ago
they're famous like doom and quake, but it doesn't mean they can get stale after a while. i loved the first halo, but they started going downhill besides the online they included in halo 2. the main reason why i don't like it as much is because the single player was just flat out boring and i would like it if bungie actually changed the "feel to the game." why not include a sprint or hell, even jet packs. i would even like it if they had classes.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
look at reviews for killzone 2. it already has a 5/5 from gamepro, 9/10 from opm uk, 15/5 from opm us, 10/10 from opm au, 9.7/10 from webmaster911, 10/10 from 576K, and a lot of other reviews gave it high scores. a lot of these reviewers said stuff like "the best console FPS ever," "the new era half life 2," etc etc. i don't see how you think it would fail just because the first one was mediocre. i guess we should think the gta series will be dragged down because of it's first three games
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
who the hell is webmaster911? and i assume OPM stands for playstation magazine, as those are the main sites that have been giving it ratings. And, as i said, until i see ratings from Gameinformer, Gametrailers, 1up, Gamespot, and other MAJOR gaming reviewers, i'm not going to fall in line with whateveryone BELIEVES, as their are plenty of games that got great ratings to reviewers who got early copies of it, as they were most likely if not completely, brided/payed to advertise the game for them
bud389 3 years ago
dude, OPM always rate their own games low. this is like the first time they actually gave a high review to a ps3 exclusive. they're anything but biased. also, i just posted a lot of those no names sites because they still got a review copy of the game and their feedback is important. also, how is gamepro not credible? IGN is already saying how the game is going to get high ratings and such. i'm sure gameinformer will give a high score. gt's, not sure.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Saying what reviewers ARE going to give it is like assuming how the superbowl will turn out, just because of speculation and whatnot, doesn't garuntee it that status, just look at too human, that game was raved to be a dominator, but then it turned into garbage, and im not saying killzone 2 will turn out to be as bad as the original, but a perfect example would be the original killzone, it was hailed as the win all, end all, for sony and microsoft, and the supposed "Halo Killer", but it was crap
bud389 3 years ago
i understand that, i'm just saying that a lot of true impressions of the game have been overall very very positive. i've been reading a lot of bold claims such as "best fps ever made" or "the next half life," etc. i'm just saying the game is going really good so far unlike the first killzone where people were saying it was average even before the review embargo on the game was lifted.
btw, cardinals are going to win; called it.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Next Half Life? Best FPS ever made? I relized you said bold but i never thought it would be taken to such amazing extremes, best FPS on PS3, most likely, best FPS ever? I doubt that more then i doubt that i won't die if i play russian roullette with a fully loaded revolver.
bud389 3 years ago
it wasn't fanboys that said next half-life LMFAO it's from game reviewers
"yea, and how the PS3 boards helped advertise halo 3 / sarcasm
LAWL "
All I ever heard on ps3 boards are how shitty halo 3 is, well I guess if you consider that as advertising then ur a dumb ass LOL
btw what ps3 boards are u refering to? LAWL
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
Strange, all i've ever heard on the xbox boards is how shitty the beta of killzone was and how shitty it will be, but apparently it's pretty good, now aint that the damndest thing?
bud389 3 years ago
lol where did you hear that bull? i haven't heard a single person who didn't praise the beta. the only complaints they could find was stuff like there were connection errors, one of the classes was under-balanced, the shotgun range was too far, the death delay animation, and a few texture issues. what's crazy is that it's just a beta for testing and all of these things and even others are being ironed. the beta was pretty good from what i've heard from everybody else.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
"Strange, all i've ever heard on the xbox boards is how shitty the beta of killzone was and how shitty it will be"
Oh really? Mind if you link me to that forum? because I've searched xbox 360 forums talking about this game and all I ever hear are them whining and wanting this game on their shitty console, besides it's normal behavior for them to diss a game that ain't on their console, and then jizz over it when it is announced for the xbox, same thing happened with FF13 LMFAO
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
why do you doubt it so much? because you don't want it to be that way? in case you didn't know the game IS being pushed to amazing extremes. whether you like it or not, they're actually raising a benchmark in console FPS gaming. i have never seen a game that resembled CG as much as killzone 2 and the only real competition killzone 2 has graphically is crysis (in which crysis is still better of course), but the magnitude of the game is nothing short of amazing.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
I guess i could admit that deep down i don't want it to be that way, but that's also not to say that i never expected it to be so great in the first place. And a great game that truly renders CG, i woud have to say even crysis is out matched by Project offset, hell, FEAR 2 looks better then killzone 2, FEAR 2 is also REALLY fun btw, i played the demo, it truly felt like a revolutionary tactical experiance, challenging AI, excellent weapon choice, interactive environments... But yea...
bud389 3 years ago
i'm really down with FEAR 2 but those graphics are far from being anything killzone 2 can do. i've been looking at project offset for a while and those graphics look nice but i need to know whether it's in-game or target render because both sony and microsoft pulls that shit saying it's in-game. offset reminds me more of crysis than anything else, but even still the artistic direction isn't the best i've seen. i like killzone 2's gritty sci-fi, death animations, weight and movement, etc.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
Are you serious? They look AMAZING, i mean, they have destructible environments, ambient occlusion, it's really an understatement to say that their far from anything Killzone 2 can do, it's not the greatest looking game ever. I feel that it's getting too much praise from it's graphics. You've played the Demo for FEAR 2 right? i mean, i didn't even play it on full it looked amazing, almost making me second guess crysis for a second.
bud389 3 years ago
trust me, i played a little bit of killzone 2 and what i saw had some very serious CGI looking moments. i promise i'm not exaggerating when i say this. there's this one level i played on where rico bashed down a door (obviously a script piece) but i couldn't believe how good it looked. the animation is some of the best i've ever seen. also, killzone 2 uses ambient lighting, volumetric lighting effects, post processes parallel geometry, motion blur (not lens blur), indirect lighting.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
I'm sure, their are plenty of games with "CGI like moments", like for instance, in far cry 2, i was going down the river in a boat, i passed by station and they began chasing me with cars along side the river, it was like a chase scene out of some indiana jones movie practicaly. I don't want to get into a conversation over the tech of different games, so im just going to say, alot of games already have those things.
bud389 3 years ago
i'm not saying far cry 2 doesn't look good, but killzone 2 looks miles ahead of far cry 2. i rented far cry 2 a while back and the vegetation and water effects look great, but the character models aren't that great and some of the environments look jaggy. and i never said killzone 2 looks better than crysis, i'm just saying that i like killzone 2's art direction. there are too many jungle/environmental games and killzone 2 separates from it with their own unique look.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
*erm* you rented it? they degraded the graphics on consoles, play it computer, full anti-aliasing, you won't see any jaggies... and the character models, well, they may not be great to the extent of crysis but their pretty good. Crysis CAN be played in urban environments, theirs even a mod out for crysis that does so. Not only that, but theirs a mod being made for crysis, BASED ON MGS4, and it looks better then it too (graphics), infact, all the mod for crysis look orgasmic.
bud389 3 years ago
i rented it and played a little bit of the game on PC. pc did look better but not far off from the console version i played. i only got to play far cry on PC for a few minutes while i put a few hours in the game on console. and of course crysis mods would look great considering it's the best graphical game to date. however, PC game development has been lazy and not capilizating on such feats that crytek did with crysis.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
If you haven't played the demo of FEAR 2, you really should, screenshots of the game just don't do it's graphics or gameplay justice.
bud389 3 years ago
Don't bring FEAR 2 in the arguement, I don't know how desperate you can get, first fanboys said killzone 2 will never match its graphics...
now GG proved them wrong, and then fanboys suddenly have to bring up some bullshit like ... BUT OHH FEAR 2 looks better than killzone 2! even though game developers have repeatedly said things like Killzone 2 is the BEST LOOKING GAME ON ANY CONSOLE...you never played the killzone 2 demo, so shut the hell up lol
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
LOL, yea, okay, best on any console.... WELL, HMMM, FEAR 2 IS ALSO ON PC AND PORTS TO CONSOLES OR CONSOLE VERSIONS ARE KNOWN FOR HAVING DOWNGRADED GRAPHICS. Go play fear 2 on pc you cunt.
bud389 3 years ago
FEAR 2 isn't even close to killzone 2 in graphics, thats why you're a dumb ass, all i ever hear killzone 2 being compared to graphically is Crysis, Fear 2 is out of it's league, only a random youtube dumb ass like you who can't admit killzone 2 looks good thinks FEAR 2 can beat it, thats the worse comparison i've ever heard thus far
Your desperate attempts are failing
Pathetic
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
and i'm buying FEAR 2, but i highly doubt it will match killzone 2. i've already seen gameplay of it and even though it always looks better live than streaming it on the internet, it still doesn't look as good as killzone 2 on youtube compared to fear 2 on youtube. that's just me impressions on it. i wasn't blown away by fear's graphics, but it does look like fun. i like the weapons and enemies. trust me, there's a reason why killzone 2 got an official "undisputed graphics" award.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
undisputed graphics? thats for current games being released right? not overall? cause if it is "overall" i would have a hard time comprehending that. But, have you played the demo? If you have, it plays (gameplay) alot better then how it looks since you can interact with the environment to make use of tactical cover, and the destructibility both in and out of the mini mech is astonishing.
bud389 3 years ago
gametrailers and g4tv labeled killzone 2 with best graphics for console and the other game competitors were street fighter 4, far cry 2, call of duty world at war, gta4, gears 2 and some other games that i can't remember. not only that, the game comparisons were with killzone 2's alpha builds, not the final build which looks substantially better. and i know the gameplay in killzone 2 is awesome since i played it already. it's easily my favorite FPS at the moment.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
I can agree that it could be the best looking CONSOLE title, that being said, their are many titles for PC which have surpassed it.
bud389 3 years ago
i would say only crysis on PC surpassed it.
cyberwaffles 3 years ago
"guess i could admit that deep down i don't want it to be that way"
Oh enough fucking said fanboy behavior right there, stop hating fool... now you're making some bullshit up saying FEAR 2 looks better than killzone 2, get a grip dumb ass, theres a reason why all beta testers are praising this game highly including game reviewers etc.....
oh did I mention today gamepro gave killzone 2 5/5 and now the metacritics score for this game is 98%?
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
"but that's also not to say that i never expected it to be so great in the first place" wow, that explain much? and mabye it's because of people like YOU which make it that i never wanted it to be that way. And actually, it IS starting to NOT be that way, just went down 2%, down to 96 LOL, and just look at the user scores for it, their even lower then the scores for GEARS 2 and all the Halo's. So get off your high fucking horse, you just got owned in the face, WHAT BITCH?!
bud389 3 years ago
umm you realize the big boy reviewers reviewed the game today and the game sits at 95% metacritics right? and gears of war 2 only got 93% metacritics, so in other words, it scored higher than gears...
and user score for GEARS 2 and all the halo's? are you serious? I told you, user scores are saturated with fanboys, metacritics even had to address this issue by locking up the user scores
but in case you didn't know, gears 2 had a user score of 4.1 and halo wars had 0.8
WHAT BITCH?
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
LOL i meant gears of war 2 had a user score of 6.1.... killzone 2 has a userscore of 6.3
SO WHAT NOW BITCH? you know I have no idea why the fuck you would bring that to the arguement in the first place because it is totally irrelevant and not a credible source...
but even going by YOUR OWN TWISTED arguement you still lost...
Gears 2 6.1 userscore, killzone 2 6.3 userscore....
How sad how sad LMFAO
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
"just went down 2%, down to 96 LOL, and just look at the user scores for it, their even lower then the scores for GEARS 2 and all the Halo's. So get off your high fucking horse, you just got owned in the face, WHAT BITCH?! "
Gears 2 only had a 93% metacritics dumb ass LMFAO, and the fact that you use userscores in your arguement is just pure sad, the metacritics user score is FILLED WITH people repeatedly voting to bring another console's game down, metacritics locked the scores up b/c of it
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
Halo has an 8.1 userscore.... so, what are you talking about again? and it also holds a 97 on metacritic, so.... eat it?
bud389 3 years ago
umm first of all, Halo 3 has 94% on metacritics not 97...
unless you were refering to HALO 1, why the hell would you bring halo 1 into this conversation when we're comparing Next-gen console games?
I told you, userscores mean nothin because it's saturated by fanboys, thats why metacritics locked the userscores until the game releases from now on, keep up to date..
eat what? Weren't you the one that THOUGHT gears 2 had a BETTER USER SCORE than killzone 2? LMFAO
pathetic
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
AHHH, sorry, i meant Gears 1 has a better user score, lol, it's next gen, so you can't say shit about it, oh, and it's 94 is based on 88 reviews, when Killzone 2 comes anything close to that, THEN say shit...
bud389 3 years ago
Your arguement is failing bud 389.... now you're just desperately trying to pull shit out of your ass..
I already told you in the first place, user Scores on metacritics dont' mean shit...
Halo wars got a 0.8 / 10, don't you fucking understand?
here's your contradiction, so gears 1 got a 8.0 and gears 2 got a 6.1, does that mean Gears 1 is better than gears 2?
SEE the irony? Userscores dont' mean anything on metacritics, I already told you they had to lock up user scores now
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
umm so far Killzone 2 got 95% even after the big game reviewers like IGN rated it.... how is that not close?
WHY don't you know your GAMING FACTS before you say shit?
I've proven you wrong on EVERY SINGLE ARGUEMENT you typed
your desperate arguements are failing
pathetic
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
ummm, lets see, proven me wrong on two things, the user scores for the halo games and.... the gears 2 use scores, and those, i messed up and was thinking of Gears 1.... the rest is just pure, biased belief. Besides, you've already BEEN proven wrong many, many, many, many, more times in the past by me AND that other guy that was on here earlier, not only did we prove you WRONG but also prove you to be a fucking hypocrite.
bud389 3 years ago
I proved you wrong for user scores for halo games, and gears 2 userscores.. I proved to you how utterly SHIT and completely useless the userscores on metacritics are because they are not reliable
I gave you credible sources that are totally against your biased view and ridiculous claims like "FEAR 2 looks better thann Killzone 2"
I told you halo wars got 0.8 / 10 on metacritics and you didn't say shit and yet you still kept on relying on the userscore arguement
Enough said yo LMFAO
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
WHAT BITCH?! (Copying your dumb ass expression LMFAO! )
Hawkhunter07 3 years ago
by the way dumb ass, you should keep in mind Killzone 2 is being literaly nit-picked to death and criticized ever since the game as in development, first they complained about the 2005 CGI trailer and said it was impossible, then when GG proved them wrong they attacked the gameplay, and then when reviewers proved them wrong they had to resort to nit-picking small things like "having no installs"
Reviewers complained about installs in the past, and now they are complainign about "no installs"
Hawkhunter07