Killzone public beta later this year (Yes, another Killzone thread)
- Thread starter crazygambit
- Start date
- Status
Its a knee jerk reaction. When someone says Killzone wasnt that great so people shouldnt be expecting something mind blowing, someone else pops in and says Killzone was a 'superb, or certainly way above average FPS that sold great' citing the sales number.
I think its almost a sure thing that the hype build up will be the most damaging thing to the game when its finally shown.
Really the question is more so, what has the dev team or anything they've released done that makes KZ2 such a valuable title worthy of the same acclaim of proven multi-million sellers or classics such as the Metal Gear series?
The other problem is the genre is badly saturated, even by PS3 standards which already had its very decent blast the invaiding alien game through Resistance.
Sony really has started the hype around this game.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2007/06/26/...ravis-williams/
Last edited by a moderator:
While "Halo 3" vs threads spin out of control, it is difficult to discuss Killzone without Halo. Halo was probably the sole reason of existence of the original Killzone even though it wasn't officially advertised as Halo-killer.
So I expect a demo before Halo 3's release if the game is any good.
Sony really has started the hype around this game.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2007/06/26/...ravis-williams/
We all hear that, unfortunately auditory system is not the right one for evaluating looks.
Anyway I don't think Sony needs any more hype with only 2 weeks left. If anything it is dangerous to raise expectations any more.
How do we know that?
Also even if Halo motivated Guerilla to try make a FPS game, that still doesn't give any reason for such comparisons.
Guerilla themselves was saying for a long time that Killzone1 was never intended to be a Halo killer. And this is official.
Assuming you are not questioning my expectations, I don't have any definitive proof as was hinted by the word "probably".
I think the fact that they are both FPSs is reason enough to compare, yet alone they are "the" FPSs for their respective consoles . When I play a FPS I rightfully compare it to others who set the bar.
Killzone was not officially advertised as Halo-killer (the other option would be quite stupid of course, even if the game was far superior). Unfortunately I have no way of knowing their official intentions if that makes any sense. Honestly though, whether or not they intended to make a Halo-killer doesn't really change what I said.
thats what i was thinking. With halo3 i know what to expect i have a bar set, i dont care about graphics in halo3. they are good, we saw that in-engine movie last year.
but killzone? I did see...........................[DELETED BY MOD. Your language is inappropriate]
archangelmorph
Veteran
Wow...
Just wow...
So basically what you're saying is that every developer wh decides they want to make a console FPS is directly motivated to such a decision based solely on the existence of Halo?
I like the way you ignore completely the fact that Killzone's only similarities between itself and Halo are the first person perspective & two weapon hold mechanic.. Beyond that the games are and were intended to be vastly different.. (Killzone has no vehicles, no aliens, tighter-squad-based gameplay, highly seperable AI, vastly seperable sci-fi settings, narrative styles, art direction... the list goes on..)
The only connection between the two games came solely from media hype and media hype alone.. Had another developer put together an epic, highly atmospheric FPS on any other platform (including the Xbox) at the time, it would have recieved the same media hype/reception and the same comparison links to the Halo franchise..
If the developers of Killzone realistically drew inspiration from any FPS around that time I would have prosposed Half Life to have been a much more likely candidate than Halo by far..
Here is my thoughts on Killzone and the importance of a good showing at E3 for it especally with regards to the American market. While I don't think Killzone should have quite the media spotlight on it as it has, wether we like it or not everyone even rival platforms will be looking at how KZ2 turns out:
http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=79920&highlight=Terarrim
Like many people since that trailer I have been waiting and waiting for something out of the Killzone Devs.
There were a fair amount of indications that the KZD (Killzone Devs) were working on Cell+RSX graphics at an early stage. There was a quote posted here about a year, year and a half ago how a KZD said that the Cell could pretty much write from anywhere to the RSX.
Now we also know that KZD, together with The Getaway team and Incognito have all contrabuted to edge. And there has been some impressive facts and figures (to say nothing of impressive demos) at GDC about what the Cell can actually do for the RSX in terms of graphical assist.
We have a huge team backed up by Sony with a mega budget. They know that the whole gaming intranet was really only talking about one thing for weeks even months after E3 2005 and that was, was KZ trailer Pre-rendered or working on PS3 assets. We all know the outcome that it was a target render but still every board exploded with the impact of that trailer.
Finally we had the tidbit from KZD that they were using deferred rendering with MSAA (and the lighting will most probably be HDR). While deferred rendering has been done before to get a boost in FPS or enable more detailed graphics MSAA and HDR was not possible due to DX9 restrictions. This technique is only available with DX10 (windows Vista on the PC). The article also says that the Cell will be using multiple SPE's in Parallel for gemotry as well as working on other graphics.
We also know from the very little information to come out of GDC 2007 that the showing of the game to Devs behind closed doors was more to show physics than anything else (in the game). The one quote that was highlighted was the fact that walls were shot out and then light came streaming in. While destructable terrain had been announced in another review (I belive german) this hinted at something a little beyond just distructable terrain. If this is what the KZD are up to then this means that bullets going through thin walls will allow light into the room (say) as well as the physics of the debri due to impact from said bullets. This is cutting edge physics with, cutting edge graphics and physics (physics for the wall = fragments = allow light to go through, graphics = draw all debri assets = draw the light shining through the hole).
Lastly (and I can't find it but I have read it) Phil Harrison said himself in one interview that the target render of E3 2005 has allready been exceeded in some areas. Now we can only speculate what areas these are. However it a good educated guess would suggest the actual physics are ahead of the target render given what I have written above. Looking at drakes fortune I think graphics should also be as good if not better than the target render, similarly the animation should also be as good if not better again taking a look at drakes fortunes animation (both cloth and body animation there). Another place where the PS3 can EASILY beat the Xbox 360 and maybe even the PC is the quality of sound, depending how much resources they can spare or want to spend on the game. Could Killzone be done in 7.1 surround?? its a possibility, considering the PS3 is acknowledged as able to compete in this area with high end audio technophile equipment this is a fairly safe bet. (And sound 50 percent of any movie and can make a huge impact on a game to, Jurassic Park would not be half the movie (or half the impact) without the sound effects).
To the question will the PS3 live or die by this one game. Well the answer could be yes IMO especally in the US. In japan I don't think its going to make such an impact as they are not so much into FPS's. Europe while liking FPS's also like a diverse range of games.
However the most anti PS3 media, jornos, analysts, newspapers (New York Times (I belive its that paper) says that PS3 is dying in a article this week) has come from US. So for US I believe this game is crucial in proving what the PS3 is about. Many of the hardcore gamers in US are hardocre FPS' players again a reason why KZ is so important to US. If sony and KZD can deliver then I can see a possible swell in optimisam form the US, And from US gamers. If it fails to exite then I can very well see the PS3 bombing for some time and not making a mark at least this christmass.
So while right or wrong I do believe that KZ may be coming for the most critical spotlight ever seen in gaming history. The expectations are either sky high or people waiting for it to fail so they can tear the PS3 in metephorical small bloody pieces.
My opinion is that no on will have a leg to stand on and able to say that it wont be a big game. I do think the game will make peoples jaws drop. Even if the graphics are slightly under par texture wise. The animation, physics and sheer atmoshpere are really going to push the game to another level that hasn't been seen before (well outside of drakes in terms of animation anyway).
In my opinion the impact of KZ is huge. As I stated Sony would be very silly for the sheer publicity that KZ is going to stir to not deliver with KZ. Not because of the target render but because of the huge stir that the KZ target render caused in both the media and gamers alike. The publicity is huge and free. Thats why it is worth putting 150 Devs a huge budget into making this game as good as they can be on the PS3 at this time (games will come out thats better than KZ later on). They also know the backlash that will come out if it doesn't deliver. Thats why just reading between the lines that the KZ devs seem to be both confidant and quitely nervous. It's going to be a huge event not just for PS3 but for all gamers. All gamers even Xbox 360 will players will be looking in to see if KZ delivers (will it be as good, and hoping it wont
So I am super dam exited about Killzone. And I am supposed to be one of the sensible ones around here. And I will be hugely disapointed if KZ fails to deliver. And I will be one of the people who will hold up their hands if this happens and people say told you so. However much people are trying to play this down (pro PS3) and I can understand why that they are. I for one chose not to be afraid, to be confidnat on this one. I have reasons to be confidant and many have been listed above.
Forgive me if I am right over the top on this one but I am and I will be the person sitting on the front bumper of the hype train. What ever happens its going to be a rush!!!!
I want to put where I stand on this very clear. While I am not saying its going to be 3x better than crysis/GeOW I do expect to be blown away by what they have shown. And if they deliver an average game I will be one of the people who will be disapointed and I will having a go at both Killzone and Sony for failing what is probably one of the best business and marketing oportunities they have when it comes to one single game. It makes no sense in them not delivering.
I don't often come out so far. However while JordanL, Udontkneed2know, Lefein and myself (sorry for others) who were strong advocates of the PS3 tech from 2005 and have predicted things that have not only come true but outsurpassed even our expectations at times. With this game I am confidant that the PS3 is going to show excatly what the Cell is all about, and what it can do with having a powerfull GPU like the RSX inside a closed box architecture.
For those who are saying about the time PS3 will get better in time. This is true. However there is one way to claw the time back so to speak. For me from a bsuiness point of view if every project is a traingle of time, quality and money (resourcses). To get the best quality product (i.e. next gen game) in the shortest possible time (i.e. 200 they are shoring these edges of the triangle up by investing resources (the huge cost involved) with both money and man power. So even from a business stand point the project is intended to deliver on the promised target (or brief) that KZD made when they showed the trailer.
The end project (game on shelf) will not be exaclty like the target render it was a target something to aim for after all. However there must be a perceived delivery of the promise or they have failed their customers by not meeting its expectations.
Sorry to go into business aproach but you can see why Sony and KZD need to get this right from this angle to. And why they would deserve PROPER criticism if they dont get it right (and I don't mean critisicm for the sake of it because one shot looked slightly worse than the rest either). They do deserve to be praised to high heaven if they do succeed though due to the very difficult target they set themselves in the first place.
http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=79920&highlight=Terarrim
We don't claim to run a G rated website, but we would appreciate it if you'd generally keep it in PG13 range or throw a modest * or two in if you must cuss; something like that. Or at least be genuinely --and rarely-- annoyed. The above looks like cussing for the purpose of general modifiers, and we'd really not like the site to descend to that kind of post as the standard norm. Thanks.
archangelmorph
Veteran
Excellent?
Killzone will NOT make or break the PS3.. Even in the US.. The price will..
Without Killzone there are enough of the 100+ million PS2 owners eager to get there hands on a price-reduced PS3 to satisfy their diverse tastes in (possible/announced) PS3 versions the MGSs, FFs, R&Cs, GTs, GOWs and Ico/SOTCs of this world.. Not to mention the thousands of other great franchises the PS2 saw over it's lifetime that still hold the possibility of going forward onto Sony's new platform..
Then when you factor in the original IPs from Heavenly sword, drake, LBP, it's pretty clear that PS3 "NEEDS" a "killer" FPS in order to succeed in the US market almost as much as the PS2 did..
So can we please kill this "Killzone HAS to be awesome since the fate of Playstation and even Sony hangs in the balance!!" mentality that's still lingering around...?
Killzone will NOT make or break the PS3.. Even in the US.. The price will..
Without Killzone there are enough of the 100+ million PS2 owners eager to get there hands on a price-reduced PS3 to satisfy their diverse tastes in (possible/announced) PS3 versions the MGSs, FFs, R&Cs, GTs, GOWs and Ico/SOTCs of this world.. Not to mention the thousands of other great franchises the PS2 saw over it's lifetime that still hold the possibility of going forward onto Sony's new platform..
Then when you factor in the original IPs from Heavenly sword, drake, LBP, it's pretty clear that PS3 "NEEDS" a "killer" FPS in order to succeed in the US market almost as much as the PS2 did..
So can we please kill this "Killzone HAS to be awesome since the fate of Playstation and even Sony hangs in the balance!!" mentality that's still lingering around...?
Fu3lFr3nzy
Regular
^ Agreed.
I see KZ2 as nothing more than a great title that fills the void of exclusive FPS shooters on the PS3 platform. I certainly dont see it as a mass console mover as Halo is to the X360.
I see KZ2 as nothing more than a great title that fills the void of exclusive FPS shooters on the PS3 platform. I certainly dont see it as a mass console mover as Halo is to the X360.
Excellent?
Killzone will NOT make or break the PS3.. Even in the US.. The price will..
Without Killzone there are enough of the 100+ million PS2 owners eager to get there hands on a price-reduced PS3 to satisfy their diverse tastes in (possible/announced) PS3 versions the MGSs, FFs, R&Cs, GTs, GOWs and Ico/SOTCs of this world.. Not to mention the thousands of other great franchises the PS2 saw over it's lifetime that still hold the possibility of going forward onto Sony's new platform..
Then when you factor in the original IPs from Heavenly sword, drake, LBP, it's pretty clear that PS3 "NEEDS" a "killer" FPS in order to succeed in the US market almost as much as the PS2 did..
So can we please kill this "Killzone HAS to be awesome since the fate of Playstation and even Sony hangs in the balance!!" mentality that's still lingering around...?
I don't believe its the price of the PS3 that is the problem. It's the fact that the PS3 is not really showing in the games department why people should buy it. The biggest reason is the media storm and negativity towards the PS3 never seen anything like it. PS3 is a superb piece of kit able to rivale high end audio phile players and blue ray players to. Also able to comepte with DVD up converters. It is worth much more than the asking price in my opinion.
Fact is there is a huge amount of media focus on killzone despite the other excellent titels like LBP, 8 days, lair, heavenly sword and so on. I just think that if it doesn't deliver then the media will once again come out and cause a huge media stink wich says the PS3 is both high priced and is not able to outperform the PS3.
Notice I did not say it would doom the PS3 but it would have a huge negative impact on the US market. Especally as the most hardcore FPS crowd live there. (Europe and Asia have more of a broader market imo). So I do believe that if Killzone does not deliver then it could have a major negative impact this christmass and beyond until later in 2008.
Do I think its right that this type of pressure is on one game? The answer is no. However I also belive it is an opportunity if they can deliver on Killzone 2 then the negative media on the PS3 may well be reversed. And postive media will in turn fuel postive consumer base.
I don't think anyone hear can really deny the amount of negative media in the US press. Especally when you have New York times all but proclaiming the PS3 dead!!!!
Remember one of the difficulties of marketing the PS3 is the amount of things it is/can do. Superb high end HD media and audio device, a computer with linux, a multimedia unit with online functionality, a gaming console etc.
For once all media attention will be focused in one small area. So this is Sony and KZD chance to really make this attention for both media and gaming fans into something positive.
If Killzone 2 does not do well I belive the impact will not only affect the game but have negative connertations on other to come games to. Just due to the sheer amount of negativity that will be thrown by other consoles advocates, and the press.
Either way Killzone 2 the impact is going to be far beyond that which one game should really have.
The two go hand in hand, and no machine has ever managed that. PS3 needs to show games that convince people to spend $600, a good $200 more than the competition. You'd not only need a crazy-large improvement over XB360 to justify that much price difference, but you'd also need games so good that people who wouldn't dream of spending $600 on a console will change their mind. Bear in mind that many people have a threshold price for a product as well as threshold value. No matter what exclusive games PS3 gets, it'll just be priced out of range of a lot of people that'd otherwise buy it.
I don't think "being motivated by" implies making a rip-off. Actually the only question you need to ask yourself is whether FPS starving PS2 console space would see any high profile FPS if Halo was not such a success. So is it really "just wow" to think that Halo proved that people are willing play FPS without a mouse? (arguably Goldeneye came earlier, but mouse control was a new thing then)
Interestingly enough, we come to a point where best selling PS3 game, most expensive PS3 game in production, possibly best selling 360 game, many of current and upcoming games are all FPSs. If you don't see a Halo effect, I say "wow, just wow".
While I agree to some extent to what your saying the fact is that the PS3 even just on the Blue Ray and HD upconverter and sound processing abilities able to compete with the very best and most expensive equipment. People are willing to pay lots of money for the best in audio/media as can be seen with HD TV's.
I still believe that the negative media has had a huge impact on the growth of the PS3 in terms of sales.
With all the extra tech the PS3 has over Xbox 360 even if the games were exactly the same due to the other features the PS3 should be perceived to be a better buy.
However as long as the media is so negative, and as long as many people consider the PS3 as just a console (although I admit this is its main function) then sadly you are correct in that the perception is that the PS3 is a $200 dollar more expensive console with few games and nothing that really stands out over the Xbox 360.
Which is one of the reasons I belive that Killzone 2 really has to show what the PS3 is capable of again due to the media spotlight.
Yes, but far fewer people who buy cheapo AV solutions! DVD players are very common. There's hundreds of millions across the world. But these weren't bought en masse when DVD players were $600 a piece! People waited until the price came down. To most people, an HD movie player or high tech audio player isn't something they care to have. These are luxury, minority features. For most people, 44 kHz 128 bit MP3 audio quality would be enough. If it's a choice between an audio player that does that for $20, or one that has audio playback at 24bit 96kHz uncompressed audio for $100, they'll chose the former.
archangelmorph
Veteran
I'm sorry but I don't agree with your sentiment betan that Halo "started it all" in terms of defining the success of FPSs in the console space... There were several FPSs that did pretty well (critically and financially) on consoles way before Halo came along (Red Faction, Timesplitters, Quake 2 (PS1) & Quake 3 (PS2), Goldeneye (definitive), Turok 1 & 2, the list goes on..)
Halo's success defined one thing and one thing only.. That a FPS can hold a rich, atmospheric and immersive experience and doesn't have to focus solely on pointing a gun and pulling the trigger.. So if devs ripped anything from Halo then it was this..
However its arguable that even this ideal came about as a natural progression since many other FPSs were slowly moving in that direction (Deus Ex, Half Life, Unreal, Return To Castle Wolfenstein etc...)
Other than that you could say that Halo introduced the amalgamation of doing campaign & multiplayer, on-foot & vehicular combat "the right way", which is true since these are some of (if not) "the" biggest selling points of the franchise..
But in the context of this discussion such points are irrelevant since Killzone adopted absolutely non of these attributes..
I may not be well informed as I mostly play FPSs on PC, but besides Goldeneye can you show me a financial success story even comparable to Halo's? And I consider Halo:CE as the definition of system seller (well at least before wii sports), even more so than GTA3 or GT. That said, if you look at Resistance, Goldeneye and even Timesplitters they all were lunch titles, released to relatively capable hardware compared to PC at the time. Halo 2 and Killzone on the other hand were released late in their respective console's life, Halo 2's success tells more about Halo than anything else.
I totally disagree with you here. I have been playing FPSs since Wolfenstein 3D, and I sincerely believe Halo didn't bring anything new to the table at all in terms of single-player experience. Atmosphere and immerse experience? For me it is a slow paced FPS with mediocre story and I consider listing Half Life (or even Deus Ex just because it had RPG elements) inferior to Halo, big insult to those games.
Totally irrelevant indeed, as I have no reason to believe Killzone adopted anything from Halo at all. It might or might not, wouldn't care in anycase.
Please ask yourself these questions: If you were Sony, you looked at the competition's only offering which was a successful example of its genre, wouldn't you try to counter somehow? Would it be wise to ignore a game that created Xbox and indirectly 360? Did Sony publish any FPS other than Killzone?
I don't know, I may be death wrong of course but I still think Killzone owes Halo a lot. And that is not an insult to Killzone nor a praise of Halo as a game.
- Status
