Killzone 2 pre-release discussion thread

[patsu]

is there a way to blind fire?

Only for the AI. I couldn't find any blind fire button.

 

[tha_con]

is there a way to blind fire?

Not necessarily blind fire, but you can hit R1 from cover and it will instantly fire wherever your aiming reticle is. You can still take damage while doing this, however.

 

[patsu]

Interesting. I didn't know that.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The alternative (staring at a blank wall in total invulnerability until you get killed in a flanking move you couldn't see) wouldn't be particularly pleasant from a gameplay point of view either.

Then again, getting killed when there is no way to recover health and having top replay the whole section isn't many gamers idea of good design either. If there is a mechanic to recouperate when hiding, the hiding needs to be complete. As grandmaster says, occlude the view completely. It seems a bit odd that this highly trained soldier hasn't got any 'keep you head down so you don't get shot' mentality! Would you really expect him to take cover peeping over the top?

But as deepbrown says, if a chosen game mechanic and the intention is that the pressue is on and you have to run if it gets that bad, it's just a design choice to accommodate. I'm not particularly in favour of that choice because getting injured affects the display making it harder to stay alive.

Not necessarily blind fire, but you can hit R1 from cover and it will instantly fire wherever your aiming reticle is. You can still take damage while doing this, however.

This is where the cover system seems iffy. I tried that when I first read the tip, and it didn't work. I just shot holes in the wall. It seems to depend a lot on type of cover, which isn't clear, and means I can't rely on it as a system. I didn't bother in the end.

 

[Cornsnake]

regarding not knowing where you're being shot from...I had no idea either, but my Son knew - so maybe we're missing something!?

I'll have to ask him - how embarresing!

There is more blood on the screen from the direction your being fired upon. As you take more and more hits all the sides of the screen start to be covered by blood, so it becomes harder to see where the fire is coming from.

I think the best thing you can do is to try be aware of where the helghasts are at any given time.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

This is where the cover system seems iffy. I tried that when I first read the tip, and it didn't work. I just shot holes in the wall. It seems to depend a lot on type of cover, which isn't clear, and means I can't rely on it as a system. I didn't bother in the end.

i thnk you have to remember to hold down the cover button (or be in cover mode) and hit R1. works all the time for me

 

[Cornsnake]

Then again, getting killed when there is no way to recover health and having top replay the whole section isn't many gamers idea of good design either. If there is a mechanic to recouperate when hiding, the hiding needs to be complete.

That depends on how many checkpoints there are. If there is checkpoint before every big fight, then it's not so bad. I might prefer that compared to the stand out in the open and shoot everything for 2 seconds, then go back to cover and heal, repeat until everyone is dead type shooters. It makes you more mindful of your surroundings. Where your enemies are, and where might be a good spot to move to if you get in trouble.

 

[patsu]

It seems a bit odd that this highly trained soldier hasn't got any 'keep you head down so you don't get shot' mentality! Would you really expect him to take cover peeping over the top?

He who is formidable would be peeking at the enemies' flank or rear.
[size=-2]Cut them, my precious ![/size]

 

[Phil]

I think the cover system isn't quite ment for one to jump right into the battlefield and using that as a good spot to snipe your enemies while being in relatively little danger. From what I have seen, there are plenty of places where you can use to cover from enemy fire and work yourself into the battlefield as you kill one by one. The aim would be to change your position often (or move in), as staying too long in one spot will have them flank you from either side. If you do it like this, I would think that the cover system could work quite well without getting too many hits.

Besides, the Hellghasts don't cover themselves more than you do I guess. Equal rights for a fair fight I guess.

 

[tha_con]

Then again, getting killed when there is no way to recover health and having top replay the whole section isn't many gamers idea of good design either. If there is a mechanic to recouperate when hiding, the hiding needs to be complete. As grandmaster says, occlude the view completely. It seems a bit odd that this highly trained soldier hasn't got any 'keep you head down so you don't get shot' mentality! Would you really expect him to take cover peeping over the top?

But as deepbrown says, if a chosen game mechanic and the intention is that the pressue is on and you have to run if it gets that bad, it's just a design choice to accommodate. I'm not particularly in favour of that choice because getting injured affects the display making it harder to stay alive.

This is where the cover system seems iffy. I tried that when I first read the tip, and it didn't work. I just shot holes in the wall. It seems to depend a lot on type of cover, which isn't clear, and means I can't rely on it as a system. I didn't bother in the end.

Somehow I feel as though if you were to be completely behind cover and couldn't see anything, you'd be on the other side of the fence. Frankly, the chances of you dying while in cover are slim, as hits happen, but are so far apart you will regen enough health to stay alive.

You cannot have a system where the gamer cannot see anything. It just wouldn't work.

The way the system is now is wonderful, IMO. There was nothing more ridiculous to me than being behind a small stone pillar in Gears of War 2, and having a Brumak shoot missles at me, and I take absolutely no damage, even though the missle hit the pillar I am standing behind. It takes all of the pressure off of you, and removes any sort of tension from the game.

The way KZ2 does it is the *right* way to do it for a First Person Shooter, IMO.

Also, it seems as though you are too far from cover and crouching, not stuck behind cover. You can tell the difference by the way your weapon looks on screen.

Pressing R1 while in cover will quick fire, pressing up on the left stick will let you peek out to aim.

 

[deepbrown]

Then again, getting killed when there is no way to recover health and having top replay the whole section isn't many gamers idea of good design either. If there is a mechanic to recouperate when hiding, the hiding needs to be complete. As grandmaster says, occlude the view completely. It seems a bit odd that this highly trained soldier hasn't got any 'keep you head down so you don't get shot' mentality! Would you really expect him to take cover peeping over the top?

But as deepbrown says, if a chosen game mechanic and the intention is that the pressue is on and you have to run if it gets that bad, it's just a design choice to accommodate. I'm not particularly in favour of that choice because getting injured affects the display making it harder to stay alive.

This is where the cover system seems iffy. I tried that when I first read the tip, and it didn't work. I just shot holes in the wall. It seems to depend a lot on type of cover, which isn't clear, and means I can't rely on it as a system. I didn't bother in the end.

As I said, if you hide behind cover near death, the shots coming just over the top won't down you. You will still recover, despite these shots. It's just to keep the pressure on....you really are fully behind cover, it's just that GG don't want a wall on screen - they want you to see still. If you developed the game, that would be your choice also.

I like the cover system...don't know how I lived without it in other FPS games. Love just aiming out with the analogue stick. Blindfire works by just shooting R1.

 

[rounin]

I gotta say, I've played the demo several times (not to death, like some members claim they have here...) and I can't say I've had any issues with the cover system. It works.

The only issue I have is like some others, the control's slow/accelerated feeling...whatever they want to call it. I hope it gets fixed. The devs are not doing themselves any good trying to be firm on something that they can quite easily remedy.

 

[deepbrown]

Since I was asked for this by the doubters:

Not very interesting

 

[LordNerevar]

Thanks, now i know that my copy will work online day 1.

 

[Archgamer]

Blindfire works by just shooting R1.

That's not really blindfire. Your still poping out to take quick shots.

In fact blindfire was completely remove after the game was heading in beta.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPK3CKk3QnQ
At 1:06 you see the guy blindfire by holding his gun sideways. GG's said they remove it because they couldn't find a way to make it work since you are just wasting ammo.

I thought it looked cool though, so hopefully it'll come back in KZ3. I would of fully been immerse about the cover system if it also gave you that option since I do use cover extensively in the demo.

Guys, set your gamma correction all the way up. I just did that in the demo and it looks much better as you can see all the little attention to details.

 

[tha_con]

The thing about Blind Fire is that it is there to provide cover. You should be able to blind fire, and the enemy AI should react accordingly (i.e. retreat to cover when blind fire begins).

In Gears is makes me mad when I blind fire and the enemies just soak it up.

Though, this is more suited for a co-op game against AI, using Blind Fire to force enemies into cover, and then take movement accordingly.

 

[Sigfried1977]

I gotta say, I've played the demo several times (not to death, like some members claim they have here...) and I can't say I've had any issues with the cover system. It works.

The only issue I have is like some others, the control's slow/accelerated feeling...whatever they want to call it. I hope it gets fixed. The devs are not doing themselves any good trying to be firm on something that they can quite easily remedy.

I have to agree with this. I just conquered the bridge in chapter 5 (played for around 3-4 hours) and I can't seem to get a firm grip on the controls. It's still a ton of fun (the visuals definitely carry it a long way - gorgeous game)

 

[Strange]

The point isn't so much about the tall walls, it's for the ones that you couch behind. I get your point that if you see them, they can see you, but it still doesn't explain why your guy just doesn't crouch down a bit more so the cover actually, you know, covers him.

Even if the chances of being hit are lower, when you're at your last ebb of energy, it's still not good enough. Just a couple of stray shots are enough to finish you off. This is why I'm finding myself not using much of the cover at all, but instead running back to an area I've completely cleansed of Helghast in order to recover properly.

What?
From what I've seen from the videos, your real character does exist in the game, just as any other ally or enemy.
Being able to see your real shadow show this, and Gureilla has also shown this in debug mode.
I would expect that hit detection is actually based on that character.

Also, it also seems that the player's cover system is actually very similar to the enemy's cover system.
Seeing that WE, the PLAYERS, can shoot off the computer's helmet or hands or whatever while they are in cover.
I would fully expect that THEY, the AI, can ALSO shoot off our helm... sorry, we don't have a helmet... shoot at our head and/or hands/feet while WE are in cover.

Increasing the "coverability" would definately increase the player's survivability, but I would also expect the frustration to go up too, as we won't be able to hit anything in cover either.

If you really do get to your last ebb of energy, I don't think it is a problem of the game itself, but rathar your strategy, in my opinion.
In my experience, shooting in cover rarely results in death, only when they bring out the bazookas or start lobbing grenades.

 

[patsu]

Excellent coverage of KZ2 Multi-player features here:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14721276&postcount=2

Warzone is not only the overall name for Killzone 2's online multiplayer mode, it's a feature that embed a variety of game types. It's all about getting you into tailor built games and then keeping you there. Unlike other shooters, you don't exit a map in this title to change the gametype. Warzone smoothly shifts between different goals of play within the very same fight. It may start out with bodycount but after a while you get orders shouted at you to plant propaganda speakers in the oppositions area. If you succeed at this you might suddenly find yourself as the assassination target of the opposing force. For each different gametype and objective thrown at you there's a point to obtain, the faction with the most points in the end is declared victorious in the Warzone. Winners enjoy the sweet reward of a 50% XP bonus not to mention the glory. Matches are therefor epic in size and dangerously addictive, you will wish for this to be the standard in all competitive games.

The competitive mode revolves around a deep class based system. As you earn XP and various ribbons, more and more classes and abilities as well as weapons gets unlocked for you to use. Each class has both a primary ability as well as a secondary ability (refered to as badges within the game). When you have two or more classes at your disposal you may choose to combine them into a hybrid class. For example, an Engineers primary badge ability is to deploy automated Turret stations that pepper the enemy with lead. At the same time you wish to directly aid your team mates. A good choice then would be the Medics secondary badge ability which is throwing health packs (bags of blood). By combining these skillsets you now create yourself a new hybrid class which is the Engineer Medic. Within a team you may also set up Squads consisiting of four players. HUD indicators will pop up showing the status of those team members and you may converse with them freely for better
on-foot planning.

In Killzone 2's online multiplayer you can quickly choose to join the battles your friends are fighting, there's no down time. Speaking of friends, Killzone 2delivers the most hefty and in-depth clan and tournament geared competitive mode in any console game. Clans support up to 64 members (that means up to four full teams under one roof). The game comes with a fully built in tournament system, there's no need to artificially arrange this outside of the game as it's hard coded straight into the experience. You may also arrange matches via Killzone.com. Any tournament ladder may support as many as 128 clans at anytime. Each new clan starts out with 100 Valor points. Before each clan match you may bet Valor points on your team. The winner takes all robbing the competition of theirs. If you think multiplayer wins and losses in other shooters have been an emotional affair you haven't seen anything yet. Online drama in Killzone 2 will reach new heights, ultra sweet victories and truly bitter tear defeats. Your honor is at stake. This is all on top of the downright brilliant gameplay and audiovisual feast that Killzone 2 delivers, the game will leave a hefty footprint in the competitive landscape.

There are more details in the link (e.g., soldier classes and capabilities). Now I understand what Nick meant earlier in the thread.


EDIT:
Saboteur sounds dangerous.

 

[TrungGap]

The way the system is now is wonderful, IMO. There was nothing more ridiculous to me than being behind a small stone pillar in Gears of War 2, and having a Brumak shoot missles at me, and I take absolutely no damage, even though the missle hit the pillar I am standing behind. It takes all of the pressure off of you, and removes any sort of tension from the game.

Well, if you're going for realism, then modern high caliber guns would not only go through the 1 foot concrete wall, but would kill the target behind the wall...let alone a missile.

There certain thing you'll have to give into to provide a better gameplay. That suspension of disbelief is something you'll going have to do...regardless of KZ2 or Gears.

In Gears, you really can't kill someone that is cover unless you start moving and out flank 'em. In KZ2, you can just stand there and continue to fire until the person behind cover dies.

There's no real concept of cover fire (which is to suppress the person from doing something), because it gives the person behind cover little incentive to stay behind cover. They could just stand behind some object and fire back. Since staying behind cover, doesn't give any worth while benefit.

The thing about Blind Fire is that it is there to provide cover. You should be able to blind fire, and the enemy AI should react accordingly (i.e. retreat to cover when blind fire begins).

In Gears is makes me mad when I blind fire and the enemies just soak it up.

Blind fire is just that...blind. You have little chance of making a critical hit. If you want to take someone that charging you down...then peak your head out and take a shot, of course it also means you're vulnerable. But knowing someone is using blind fire, I know I would have a chance to charge or out flank the person...but would not make such a decision lightly, as a random shot might kill me...

I gotta say, I've played the demo several times (not to death, like some members claim they have here...) and I can't say I've had any issues with the cover system. It works.

I would agree with this. It's not broken or unusable. It requires a different gameplay / tactic. I would less incline to use cover (cover button) and just stand behind some objects just as I would in WaW.

The only issue I have is like some others, the control's slow/accelerated feeling...whatever they want to call it. I hope it gets fixed. The devs are not doing themselves any good trying to be firm on something that they can quite easily remedy.

I have mix feeling about this...Mainly, because I have played PDZ for a while, and have gotten used to the timing. It's will take some time to adjust. For some, it'll be short, for others long. I can understand why they need to do this.

--

Overall, the graphic is great. It's not all all due to technical abilities, but artistic. The characters animation and fluid of the motion is what drive home the realism. However, one of the biggest factor is the lighting...amazing.

However, there are some distracting graphical problem. Shadows are not consistent. Some spot, the light casts shadow and some don't, it's really distracting because it breaks you from that immersion. Sometime, the characters seem to float on the ground as oppose moving. And the level seems to be small, but that's a level design issue (or maybe it's just a demo). These issues are noticeable only because graphically the game is so well executed, these seem to be out of place.

Frame-rate isn't an issue at all. It's not rock solid stable, but good enough, however more importantly...no motion sickness for me!!! Unlike WaW.

This is one of the shortest demo I have played...I wished it would be a little longer.

With all these technical and artistic excellence, you would expect this to be a home run, but having played the demo...I'm not so sure. It's not as fun as WaW (despite of my motion sickness with it). So, I'll wait for it to come down in price before jumping in, unless it's coming out at $50. I'm not paying $60 for any games...(unless it's Diablo 3 for the console).

edit: fixed spelling (diable ==> diablo).