Killzone 2 pre-release discussion thread

[JPT]

If that's true, then that's great news I hate it when devs take the easy way out (prerendered cutscenes using enhanced in-engine assets). Realtime is where it should be this gen.

If it saves time, ie developers get to use the time on other aspects of the game, please keep the prerendered screens.

 

[Arwin]

Yeah, who cares on the PS3? If they have enough space on the BD to do high quality stuff, and in the meantime can stream the level into memory or into HD cache while playing the intro, all the better. Realtime is nice if you need it (you want to do zoom/movement effects, need all the space you can get on the disc, etc.) but otherwise it doesn't matter all that much. Just pick whatever works best in the given situation - easy way out is also the best way if there are no drawbacks.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Looks like there's no plans for Co-op, even post launch.

"Currently there are no plans for co-op in Killzone 2," said game director, Mathiji de Jonge. "Technically it would be quite difficult to implement it for the story mode as for example the mission sections are loaded in seamlessly – no loading screens , and that would cause issues with teleporting players.

Would have really liked a LAN/Online Co-op mode. Oh well.

EDIT

The interview this information was sourced from

 

[AlNom]

Indeed... it's a rather monumental undertaking if there were no plans for it originally. Just the existence of player 2 can bring up a host of new issues in terms of scripting.

 

[Gradthrawn]

Indeed... it's a rather monumental undertaking if there were no plans for it originally. Just the existence of player 2 can bring up a host of new issues in terms of scripting.

If I'm not not mistaken, Insomniac mentioned something along those lines as the reason for not having a co-op mode in the R2 main story campaign. Perhaps GG can implement a co-op similar to that of R2, an objective based, team mode, with Enemy AI. They already have bots. That's something I would like almost as much as a co-op story mode.

 

[patsu]

Impossible. People can't get any more emotional then they've been when the 2005 E3 movie has been released. I've never ever been flamed as much as back then...

Things have subsided over the years, but they can indeed pick up again over the next few weeks. Speaking of the 2005 trailer, KZ2 has far surpassed my expectation. Never thought a game can look this good.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

It surpassed my expectations, and by far, too - but it does not excuse Sony for that stunt. (whicb we now won't talk about as it's all festering. disease ridden water under the crumbling bridge - mod)

 

[Gradthrawn]

Direct feed version of the Ballet of Death.

[gt]44316[/gt]

EDIT

The direction of the body for some of the death animations seems a bit off, or in some cases, opposite of the direction one might think it should be. Noticed a strange glitch with the weapons dropping. They seem to "jump" a bit when released by the NPCs. Particularly noticeable when dropped by those in the air or still standing. Pure nitpicking, I know.

EDIT 2

Timing in the shaky-cam video had the Helghan's shots at the end (~1:20) perfectly timed to the high pitched "pings" in the music. At least, I think it was pings in the music. May have been coincidental, and just simply the muted gun shots. Either way, it worked well. Not so noticeable in the direct feed version. Maybe clipped during the encoding process?

 

[patsu]

Hmm.... give me back the pings. It closes the video very well. It's not the same without them.

 

[zoekimball]

I am really happy with how MotorStorm, MGS4 and KZ2 have come through. The final game or beta showed depth that the original trailer can't capture.

I am not. Compared to the MGS4 teaser/target render, it is a severe letdown. And the hardware is not to blame. Nor the developer. But simply that they didn't have enough time to make use of all the more advanced resources that are now available through Naughty Dog and Guerilla. If KP make MGS5 or ZOE3, I hope they do intend to access these and hit new potential.

 

[Antan]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R1Qgm-y2sp4&feature=channel_page

latest IGN Insider preview (review code). Potential spoilers, though nothing i don`t think anyone already knows.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Lack of co-op is a crying shame. Co-op would almost certainly have sold me on this game, that I'm otherwise reticent to buy into as it's too grizzly for my tastes. I suppose given the nature of the epic set-pieces, co-op wouldn't fit terribly well and the creation of a whole new campaing would be too much work. I dare say competitive online will be plenty enough goodness for the typical genre fan this game is appealing to though that lack of co-op won't impact sales.

 

[Asher]

Lack of co-op is a crying shame. Co-op would almost certainly have sold me on this game, that I'm otherwise reticent to buy into as it's too grizzly for my tastes. I suppose given the nature of the epic set-pieces, co-op wouldn't fit terribly well and the creation of a whole new campaing would be too much work. I dare say competitive online will be plenty enough goodness for the typical genre fan this game is appealing to though that lack of co-op won't impact sales.

Completely with you on this. I'll download a KZ2 demo to check out the graphics, but the chances of me buying this game without co-op are about nil right now.

 

[DemoCoder]

This seems like an insane standard to hold a game to now. Brilliant online team based multiplayer is not enough, now, unless the single player missions are cooperatively playable, a game's not worth buying? Let's leave aside the fact that in many cases, SP missions don't fit co-op experience, especially in games like Half-Life where the player is supposed to be Gordon and all of the NPCs talk to you directly.

And much of the co-op experience I see in games that have co-op tacked on IMHO falls short of SP experience. The exceptions I think are games that are first-and-foremost made to be co-op, like Left for Dead.

It seems people are gearing up to find excuses to give KZ2 a poor rating, since it appears the excuses they had prepared (graphics won't hold up, KZ1 gameplay sucked, so therefore the game might be pretty, but gameplay won't, MP gameplay won't be good, etc) aren't panning out given leaked reviews. Now it's down to silly stuff like the crouch button not being toggle like CoD4, no co-op, no split-screen (am I the only one who HATES split screen and I mean HATE, it's called first person for a reason, and there's this little thing I pay for called the internet that I expect to use for MP gaming. Split screen ruins my cinematic experience and decreases the resolution available for me making it harder to see). , etc.


Is it really the case now, that if you are prejudicial, a game has to have the union of all features of every competiting game not to have unfair criticism plied?

I mean jesus christ, very few games have co-op, and co-op gets very old after awhile compared to MP where your enemies are real live humans and not scripts and bots. Good MP lasts for years. Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, and Team Fortress still hold my gaming attention.

 

[obonicus]

This seems like an insane standard to hold a game to now. Brilliant online team based multiplayer is not enough, now, unless the single player missions are cooperatively playable, a game's not worth buying? Let's leave aside the fact that in many cases, SP missions don't fit co-op experience, especially in games like Half-Life where the player is supposed to be Gordon and all of the NPCs talk to you directly.

And much of the co-op experience I see in games that have co-op tacked on IMHO falls short of SP experience. The exceptions I think are games that are first-and-foremost made to be co-op, like Left for Dead.

I agree with you, though I think Gears of Wars' approach isn't bad, but in KZ2 it might be contrived to have someone with you 100% of the time. In Gears of Wars it works because Dom is almost as much a protagonist as Marcus.

 

[Lucid_Dreamer]

The Best Bits of Killzone 2 (IGN)
"Five reasons why Guerrilla's battle-hardened shooter will dominate PS3 next month."

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I could not care less about coop. Co-op is not a deal breaker for me, its a nice addition to have, but i care about the multiplayer and singleplayer experience first and foremost.

Coop (split screen) is a fun way to beat a singleplayer game, nice bonus, but nothing else to me. I only play through most games once anyway, so doesn't matter to me. I've never been to found of Humans vs AI online either, mostly because in most games the AI is to stupid to provide a challenge, and in the games where they can provide a challenge the moron humans fighting on my team usually does more harm than good.

MP is whats going to take most of my time.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

"Five reasons why Guerrilla's battle-hardened shooter will dominate PS3 next month."

Lol. Just dominate next month?

Its not particularly hard to dominate the month of February\March,aspecially when your the only high budget title around thats going to be released.

"dominate PS3 this year" would be better.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This seems like an insane standard to hold a game to now. Brilliant online team based multiplayer is not enough, now, unless the single player missions are cooperatively playable, a game's not worth buying?

Not in my case. But in my case, a co-op game is a far more likely be bought because I want to play cooperatively with my mates. Over the years co-op has always given us the most fun and satisfaction. So in the case of KZ2, co-op would have pushed it from a 'maybe' into a 'well I can't refuse it now, can I?!' position.

This true for a lot of games. My primary reason for considering R2 was co-op and I wouldn't be looking to get Sacred 2 if it didn't have co-op. But that's just me and where gaming fits into my life at the moment. Little games like Puzzle-Quest for 'downtime' relaxation, and long gaming sessions given over to playing with mates. Except cooperative games are still too few and far between. Sacred 2 can't come soon enough!

 

[rounin]

Not in my case. But in my case, a co-op game is a far more likely be bought because I want to play cooperatively with my mates. Over the years co-op has always given us the most fun and satisfaction. So in the case of KZ2, co-op would have pushed it from a 'maybe' into a 'well I can't refuse it now, can I?!' position.

This true for a lot of games. My primary reason for considering R2 was co-op and I wouldn't be looking to get Sacred 2 if it didn't have co-op. But that's just me and where gaming fits into my life at the moment. Little games like Puzzle-Quest for 'downtime' relaxation, and long gaming sessions given over to playing with mates. Except cooperative games are still too few and far between. Sacred 2 can't come soon enough!

I agree. I beat Resistance 1 3 times because of the co-op experience.