Killzone 2 pre-release discussion thread

I've played the demo over 10 times already and I'm having a difficult time acclimating to the aiming lag. It doesn't feel like I'm trying to aim with a weapon with weight, rather it just feels sluggish and imprecise. A pistol is light, so it should exhibit the same "weightiness," but it does.

I really hope GG releases a patch which gives players the option of using the sluggish aiming or quicker more precise aiming.

 

That won't happen, that was a design decision and it isn't going to get change.
The only that worries me is that Guerrila makes those changes on their future games, just because a bunch of Call of Duty gamers want to play Call of Duty in space [ directed by Ridley Scott and rendered by God ].

 

Although I've played quite a few console shooters, I consider myself to be an average player in multiplayer.

I have not found a good sensitivity that works for me yet. Partly because of my unfamiliarity with the PS3 controller and partly because of the games implementation. I also had a hard time with Resistance 1 because I just do not have the fine motor skills I guess.

For those that are having a problem, what is your console experience with FPS? I ask because I'm wondering if the problem is because of my noobish nature or is the problem actually the games implementation.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yFa_EZORYo

That doesn't seem like a good design decision at all.

 

I am not a great FPS player (K/D usually slightly above one, or 20-30% under water in R2 now). Didn't really have a problem with KZ2 aiming or turning. They don't make any big difference to me either way

I don't usually turn unless someone spawned behind me in MP. I would strafe or duck for cover without turning (Hide first, then regroup). If it applies uniformly to all players, then I guess the playing field is level.

 

Good controls (particularly good aiming controls) are paramount in a shooter. If they get in the way such that they frustrate and hinder the player, the whole "shooter" premise falls apart.

People can knock COD4 all they want, but it definitely sets the standard (and i suppose an expectation level) for aiming controls that don't get in the player's way.

 

The controls would need to match the game's play style and level design. e.g., It seems that the default controller config is better suited for KZ2's cover mechanics compared to ALT 2.

For sensitivity and latency in aiming control, I think they can just tune it further when people set it to higher sensitivity. The difference seems more stark in higher sensitivity settings only.

In the default config, I hardly notice it at all.

 

I never really noticed a delay in firing, but the bit about the bit about flicking the stick may be why I find it more difficult to make small adjustments to my aim. And he shows that he doesn't have much input lag in his tv too.

 

So i played the demo like 5-7 times now.

First impressions:

That crash landing was very impressive.

Graphics are awesome at times, sometimes not so awesome. The lighting and special effects like motion blur, dof, etc ect makes it a very pretty experience most of the times. Sometimes when the special effects are not there, it does not look that good.

There are times thought when the wall textures seem a bit to flat for me, looking like they could use mapping. Ground textures where very sharp for a console, overall IQ was very nice (4x AA?)

I kinda thought there would be more destructibility, explotions look awesome thought. Shooting at walls is not as awesome as it could have been sadly, but its okay when you shoot at something not metal.

Animations looked great, however there where times where the guns kinda felt like they had to little impact on the enemies. Sometimes i would shot people (aspecially helgast using turrets) and i would see blood come out but the guy doesn't move at all. While i haven't actually shot anybody with a M16 like weapon nor something what looks like a very high caliber personal cannon but i would suspect that the guy would move atleast a little bit upon getting shot.

The controlls felt terrible. Way to slow: Yes, CoD4 is unrealistically fast, but KZ2 is unrealistically slow, The acceleration on the right stick (same scheme that is used in PDZ - which also was terrible there) is very annoying, makes it very much harder to aim precicely, because i have to predict acceleration pattern aswell as concentrate on aiming.

I usually play at max sensitivity on all FPS games, in KZ2 max sensitivity is very very very slow, feels like at best- medium\low CoD4 settings. That is fine i guess since the pace of the game is also slow, i can live with the slow aiming but combined with the acceleration thingy makes it really hard to accept the setup.

Impressions after 5+ tries:

Looks awesome, the more you see of the special effects the better. The lighting effects produced by your gun alone can sometimes be very impressive.

Controlls are still an issue, im still cursing them every time i play but ive come to accept how slow everything moves. The accelerated right stick is still very annoying. In CoD4 i can headshot you jumping off a car mid-air, but here im having a hard time aiming fast for the heads of stationary targets even.

Animations are sweet..

The secondary weapon is very cool

 

Don't judge the graphics based on your impressions from the demo.
Some of the moments you experience in the later campaign levels far outclass anything seen in the demo. Some of the levels are much more impressive than the demo.

Regarding the controls, i say this once again, if you want CoD like controls, play Call of Duty.
Some of us hate playing online where anyone can kill you, regardless of their shooting skills, just because there is an insane amount of auto aim.

 

KZ2 controls are excellent.

 

game designers... how much does rendering a scene dictate how fast your player (screen aiming reticule etc) can move?

Is it possible that some of the slow responding controls I'm reading about be a factor of the incredible amount of post processing or rendering the graphical beauty?

Games like CoD WaW (less effects) allow you to spin around in circles on a whim and never tear or lose FPS. Is it possible KZ2 is pushing the limits so far with graphics that the devs had to make the aiming slower in order to allow it to render without slow down or screen tear?

 

If they need fast action *and* the post processing is slowing things down, can't they simply turn things off (or add more blur) when the player's spinning. No one spins when playing an FPS anyway. A stationary target like that would be dead in no time.

 

I was using "spinning around" as an extreme example of course. But you do need to spin 180* often when you hear an enemy walking up behind you. assuming they don't turn off effects and want as much going on as possible is movement speed a concern when rendering a game?

 

Hmm... the complain is with delayed aiming and accelerated turn. Once accelerated, the frames render quickly. Would be surprised if it's bottlenecked. The delayed aim simply shifts a dot. So it should not be a big problem too.

 

ok so once the reticule starts moving at a normal speed, (assuming the complaints are just delayed acceleration on controller) can you spin around pretty danged quickly then and move about at break-neck speeds?

Lost planet had some weird acceleration on the controller too but it offered a "fixed" control speed which was more responsive but the rendering and movement was never as fast as other games. I assumed the reduced speed it was due to all of the particle rendering the games does. I was just wondering if the case was similar here.

far Cry 2 does some incredible rendering also and the controls almost feel like "steering". in fact they are very jerky until you get used to them but you can never move about quite as quickly as you can in some other games. I'm just wondering if screen speed is a consideration when making a game and perhaps was a design choice in KZ2 based on the extreme rendering?

edit BTW, I'm talking mostly multi-player here

 

Playing the first Killzone the week before the demo, the controls took a little getting used to. But after a while they were fine. Now playing the demo they felt even better, and after playing through it over 20 times, I can make headshots easily. Well, in the SP at least. I think people need to give it some time, and if you still don't like after that, that's fine too. It's not for everyone I guess.

At anyone who's played the beta, are the same controls used for the MP? From the videos it seems its much faster paced. All I know is that it doesn't used the cover system.

 

I don't know about neck breaking, but once you hold down the Sprint button, you can run pretty fast across the battlefield.

Haven't tried MP yet. It supports 32 players and SP-level visuals.

 

Well maybe if enough people complain, maybe GG will release a patch. It worked for Burnout paradise.

And what's wrong with COD4 speed aiming? I personally think this "weighty" aiming isn't realistic at all. It's supposed to convey momentum, but tiny adjustments have the same lag as large ones, small weapons have the same lag as large ones.

 

And CoD4 aiming is realistic?
Each weapon has a weight. Doesn't matter how much. When you use your hands to pull it, after you stop pulling, it still has enough momentum to move little further.
Exactly why there is no difference between pistol and a rifle, i really don't know, but i enjoy aiming and firing a weapon in KZ2 much more than i do in CoD4 (which probably has something to do with a fact that KZ2 isn't a casual friendly game with insane amount of autoaim).