You may be right. Here's an example: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14965761&postcount=10186
I haven't tried it myself. Still stucked with work and SP.
I haven't tried it myself. Still stucked with work and SP.
[PS3] Killzone 2
- Thread starter macabre
- Start date
What have GG been smoking?
They spend millions on this game, and they kit it out with some shitty P2P netcode and think that your average player can host 32 player games without lag?
The lag in this game is terrible. GG has to understand, that just because your hiding lag (by making your gun fire and bullets hit on your screen instantly) doesn't mean its not there. It doesn't mean im not going to notice that people i clearly shoot in the head multiple times, either dont die, or die a full second after ive fired the shot.
Meh. I think im going to trade this one in after i finish SP, unless i get more lucky with my online games, but i doubt that. P2P netcode is terrible for anyone who wants to play semi-competitively. (Its great for noobs, because you all suck anyway and cannot tell if you die because of lag or if you die because you suck. ).
They spend millions on this game, and they kit it out with some shitty P2P netcode and think that your average player can host 32 player games without lag?
The lag in this game is terrible. GG has to understand, that just because your hiding lag (by making your gun fire and bullets hit on your screen instantly) doesn't mean its not there. It doesn't mean im not going to notice that people i clearly shoot in the head multiple times, either dont die, or die a full second after ive fired the shot.
Meh. I think im going to trade this one in after i finish SP, unless i get more lucky with my online games, but i doubt that. P2P netcode is terrible for anyone who wants to play semi-competitively. (Its great for noobs, because you all suck anyway and cannot tell if you die because of lag or if you die because you suck. ).
Oh, I haven't experienced lag yet - and I was sure most said on NeoGAF that it wasn't laggy. Do GG host differently to other online PS3 games?
Oh greatAnother crap online implementation. The whole reason for me buying the game, and we're not going to be able to play together. Any word when GG are gonna fix this? I just don't understand how devs always miss the idea that friends want to meet up and play together, and they need to facilitate this!
We can play together? I'll just join your game...
Uh, that part is easy. Shoot them in the head...and it's about 3 shots in the back for each. Get on a turret and it's one/two turn arounds. Turret it
Well if we are talking about the same place yes there should be.
I'm using standard controls, that's what I normally do for most games (I figure the devs pick the best as the default), I do change sensitivity though.
Currently I have KZ2 sensitivity set quite high (like all my other FPS's) but the default speed is really slow so it's not that high relatively speaking anyway.
I don't have trouble with getting/ aiming/ shooting out of cover controls have become second nature. However on Veteran it is very hard to pull of the sequence of motions and place a shot (let alone a hs) before the Helghast pop back in to cover, due to their constant motion.
I have noticed one laggy game so far, I have not played much it was maybe one out of 8 or so.
I don`t have much online experience ,but compared to warhawk it was much worse , people beaming all over the place...or there were some 56k players in there. Still I got the assassination target within the first 2 seconds anyway :smile:
I generally play with a ping of ~200 due to location, and lag was pretty transparent. The netcode compensates for ping, so you do see people drop a little after you killed them, sometimes you think you get the jump on someone but don't, but it was less apparent than other games I've played.
Yes, there's one on either side. If you approach one and your team member is on it, they'll get off so you can have a go, which is a nice touch.
ShadowRunner
Veteran
So far killzone MP has managed to keep my interest longer than any other FPS ive played bar maybe halo3. I think it may be because im actually ok at this one, well compared to the competition anyway . I think some people struggling with the controls has worked out quite well for me!
I really do like the lights on the enemy, it makes enemy immediatly noticable so that camping is reduced and most times you at least know where your enemy is before you get killed by them. It turns into more of a test of aiming skill rather than just who manages to notice who first.
In terms of lag only my first game i had suffered from it, since then it has been pretty great. Im playing on the EU servers and am located in UK, i can see it being more of an issue in the US because of sheer distances involved.
. I think some people struggling with the controls has worked out quite well for me!I really do like the lights on the enemy, it makes enemy immediatly noticable so that camping is reduced and most times you at least know where your enemy is before you get killed by them. It turns into more of a test of aiming skill rather than just who manages to notice who first.
In terms of lag only my first game i had suffered from it, since then it has been pretty great. Im playing on the EU servers and am located in UK, i can see it being more of an issue in the US because of sheer distances involved.
I'm shocked that you think that.
I know, fanboy and all. Even if I weren't though, I would still appreciate the stellar net code and party system in Resistance titles. Granted, it ultimately boils down to which gameplay you prefer, but this is not a comparison thread.
I will say I find the SP to be more consistent in Killzone 2.
I got the Shotgun last night (I haven't gone too deep in the game, time is limited
) and I *love* it. I found it difficult to use in the MP during the beta, but that may be because it's tuned differently for MP for balance reasons. For Single Player though...wow. It's awesome So my brother picked up this game and wants me to get it to play online with him, but from what it sounds like I'll have to deal with an outdated matchmaking system to get into the same match? Do I really have to sit and spam the "join" command and then hope there are free slots to join his team?
Set up a game with a password only you two know, easy as that.
Then you'd only play with eachothers....?
I know people hate the Call of Doodie word in this thread, but the party feature really is fantastic. I was playing with my friend yesterday because he'd never played it online before. It's so simple to get into a match together, always on the same team. And with party chat, I could talk him through everything without having to worry about the general idiocy of xbox live chat.
Sure, I played online games without those features for a long long time, but once you have them, you don't want to go back.
Hang on. Yes, Sony could be leading a far stronger online strategy and could be forcing all games to have superb unified online services. However that doesn't excuse devs free to design and implement any system they choose to go with stupidly cheap and simple systems! It's not Sony's fault that GG, free to implement a Resistance 2 style matchmaking service if they want, or their own party system, or whatever, decide to just go with a random online encounter method. Do these people not have friends?! Don't they want to team up with the people on their friends list (could be a KZ2 friendslist rather than PSN one, so no blaiming Sony for their own uselessness in this regard!) to play? They've gone a clan system because, quite simply, everyone else does and they weren't able to think beyond the existing limits. And this is common for many, many online games, on lots of platforms save XB360 because MS invested a lot in this. I've been trying to play online with my buddies for years, and every option has some inept aspect or other that makes it painful or impossible. We're talking simple code and services, little variations to existing services, that would open up the game considerable, and yet developers continue to ignore friend gaming in favour of random online encounters.
Anyone designing a game with online should have this simple service implemented in one way or other - friends can form a group and join a game to play together, deciding which sides they are on so they can battle together or fight each other. This should not be limited to people who have played the game for 20 hours before hand. It should not require a minimum or 8 players a side. It should not exclude other people from joining unless that's a selected option, like private games do. This is Good Design, as important as making the game fun and run smoothly, and the gameplay balanced. WH is a shocking example of how with numerous updates, they've failed completely to recognise this wish. It's unacceptible.
As it is, I have KZ2 ready to try tonight only because my friend had already bought it and if nothing else we can host private games and join at the right time, similar to WH. But otherwise I'd have given it a miss, and I'll miss all other online games that fail to provide a simple, working system where I can choose who I play with online. I don't care if it's Sony or sort this out, or the developers making the games. All and any can claim responsibility, but at the end of the day it's the developers writing the code who have to implement the systems if the parent platform doesn't. And for the record I thought to myself last night if Sony haven't got their act together by PS4, introducing all the features we were hoping for when Home released, I'll probably give it a miss.
Similar threads
- Locked
