[PS3] Killzone 2
- Thread starter macabre
- Start date
Yes.
KZ2 has its own twist in this area since they have a fully integrated clan website, including replays.
The only missing element is Home access (specifically, party and clan+clubhouse integration).
EDIT: I think we can already see killzone.com stats from in-game, but perhaps the replays can be shown in Home TV in the future.
In any case, I hope they make the Warhawk sand table into a developer widget. That way, everyone else can improve on it.
specwarGP2
Regular
I'm sorry, I think my post wasn't clear at all. I never suggested KBM to be patched in - DrJay24 did. I said I'd be ok with it depending on how it got patched in -ie: gamepad users cannot be at a disadvantage. My argument is for an alternate optional, faster, more precise control scheme (like COD4) to be patched in. It would not throw the balance off because everyone would be able to choose which ever scheme suits them best.
How is it ridiculous? The biggest gripe against Lair was the controls. The biggest gripe against KZ2 are the controls. I'm fine with keeping the KZ2's shipping controls the same in SP, since it may or may not break the game (I doubt it). But for MP, there's no reason to not provide an optional control method that many people are asking for.
You dont understand.
It will not alter the intended difficulty, because fixing the controls does NOT mean "twitch aiming". It just means getting rid of the deadzones and acceleration. You can still set the sensitivity to be exactly the same as before, thus it will be just as slow as it is today.
Thus, SP campaign would not be altered in difficulty at all, it would just allow people who are used to the control setup used in every mainstream FPS games on next gen consoles, to aim as good as they can, without having to learn the exact behavior of the accelerated right stick aiming. Nothing in gameplay wise would change at all.
(Except for PDZ, which uses the same control setup as KZ2, funnily enough, i dont remember anybody saying the controls are "realistic" and "weighty" there, just crappy)
COD4 is not "more precise", it has a LOCK-ON system, it simply snaps the reticle on an enemy, the problem is that it will basically ruin the point of aiming over medium distances. K&M is fast enough that even with a lock-on system, controller-users will still get their asses kicked, it's not workable.
Your gripe with Lair might be the controls, but the biggest problem with Lair wasn't the control, it was the fact that it was a shit game. Killzone 2's controls work well since lots of people can play really well, it's just that you might not be able to get used to it.
But it still might break the game. Let's suppose that the SMG is far weaker than the AR in both single-shot and sustained fire, but has a much quicker aiming speed. If you buff turn-speed all around, all of a sudden the SMG's advantage may become insignificant -- there's no reason to take it. You can't just suppose that because something seems like a small change, or an 'equal' change that it actually is.
The situations are extremely different, though. Lair was critically panned, and KZ2 has been reviewed extremely well. Lair was a flop, while Killzone 2 has done quite well so far -- which is important because I see Lair's control-scheme change as a last-ditch effort to try and draw interest to the game. Also, the dislike for KZ2's controls is nowhere near as universal hate for Lair's controls.
I think that's how they have set up the controls for Killzone 2, aiming is more deliberate, changing the acceleration will affect the feel of the game, it's not supposed to play like other games, but it doesn't mean you can't be good at Killzone 2 just because you're good at other console shooters, in terms of accuracy, range and power the weapons are actually really generous.
Probably because PDZ is a shitty game, doesn't have much if any gun recoil, still uses gliding movement and obviously isn't exactly aiming for realism, it's probably one of those games that totally doesn't age well.
Last edited by a moderator:
CoD4 auto aim is optionable. You can turn it off, and it will not snap on at all.
Aiming is more deliberate? ROFL.
Aiming is not more deliberate at all, its just harder because you have to figure out the acceleration script on the right stick.
No , what it means is that you have to spend a helluva lot of time playing KZ2, to get on par with the aim that you allready have in all other shooters except for KZ2 and PDZ.
I do, the problem is your default position in any post is you are right and everyone is wrong. You should work on your people skills.
Speaking in absolutes does not make you more correct. You make assertions without evidence, I can do the same. It will change the difficulty. The zero acceleration and constant speed of turning will make many people better shots, hence it will be an easier game.
specwarGP2
Regular
I don't agree with this. COD and Halo control very similarly but you don't hear people saying that they are the same game with different skins.
I do think that the designers thought the current control scheme would make it stand out from the rest of the crowd, but I also think they underestimated how much a significant portion of KZ2's intended audience really like and are accustomed to COD/Halo style controls.
This kinda reminds me of the New Coke fiasco.
HALO happens to have far better AI and less linear levels, obviously they're not the same game. There's a sense of weight to Killzone 2's controls which is something that many other shooters don't have, it does take some getting used to but it will play very differently if people can quick turn and lock-on with ironsights because right now outflanking someone is very rewarding.
I doubt they're going to change the controls, they've already said they're NOT going to change it, they think it's fine and many people think it's fine (just not you I guess), and patching in K&M isn't an option for Killzone 2 and many other games.
Wow @ the drama. Developers should create their vision and not make clones. I like KZ2, I don't want another COD1/2/3/4/5/6. But I'm not a Halo 3 or COD4 player online, so I guess I'm not frustrated I can't have instant success in KZ2 online, I'm doing fine as a blank slate so to speak.
And how many people actually turn this off when you can snap your sights on someone quickly and down him by pulling the trigger?
We can argue all day about how you don't like the controls and how you want it changed but then they've already said they're NOT going to change it, so you can either learn the controls, or go play something else.
You can turn off the aim assist in CoD4 and the controls are still much better than KZ2. If they add CoD4 like controls, I'll jump in as I'm sure others will also. They can certainly leave the options in there for the currently control scheme. This way those defending it to the moon can still keep using the current control scheme while the rest of us will use the CoD4 style setup. However it's a moot point since GG seems hard on their stance.
All in all, a CoD4 style control scheme would be welcomed by many just like a move and shoot option would be welcomed by many for RE5.
I'm sure you like COD4 controls better, but it will change the way the game is played because it will make the game play different, and like you said, they've already stated that they're not going to change the controls so it's kind of wishful thinking on your part at this point. We can argue who's right and who's wrong but there's no point to it because it will still get you nowhere since you're not convincing anyone who's on the opposite side of the argument and the argument has zero effect on the game.
RE5 controls isn't a matter of turning speed, it's that the tank style controls is incredibly ARCHAIC because it's actually LACKING lateral movement while shooting, so your comparison isn't valid at all.
No doubt, but the question here is whether it'd change the game significantly (since it'd obviously change the game). Would they have to up run speed in MP if you make aiming snappier? Was the game designed to allow you to track an enemy with a gun, up close? Will they compensate by making guns more inaccurate after moving? Or will they instead buff the quicker guns RoF/damage? It's a truism, but CoD plays the way it does because it was balanced that way.
And again, why is CoD the gold standard? Why not Halo? Why not CS? Why not TF2? Should KZ2 strive to be more like CoD in other ways? Maybe we need to be able to throw grenades a lot further, a la CoD, as well, with less priming time.
I find the controls more difficult in KZ2 than other shooters for sure. I'm not going to say they're more realistic since I've only fired various guns at ranges, but I will say it does take a much more concentrated and controlled effort not to over aim (swing past a target) than most FPSs. That said, I kind of like this aspect. The hair-trigger speed of most FPS games is absurd. How many people can really run full speed and draw a perfect bead aim on a guy 50 yards away?
None.
Yet I can do this is virtually every FPS except KZ2 (especially kb/mouse games on the PC).
So I'm through the clear the square mission and getting better at the controls. As I rush the enemy my aiming is very slow and deliberate (as someone else mentioned) because I know I will overaim if I play it too fast.
Good or bad for you, it's just a big change from twitch shooters.
None.
Yet I can do this is virtually every FPS except KZ2 (especially kb/mouse games on the PC).
So I'm through the clear the square mission and getting better at the controls. As I rush the enemy my aiming is very slow and deliberate (as someone else mentioned) because I know I will overaim if I play it too fast.
Good or bad for you, it's just a big change from twitch shooters.
I don't understand either. Even though the controls are great for me, I always expect to learn whatever games controls. Just because I have played a ton of Halo 3 and COD4, I do not expect any other shooter controls to be the same because they are different games.
Can't you use the ALT 2 control scheme?
Similar threads
- Locked
