[PS3] Killzone 3 game discussion

[assurdum]

It's not that I'm against on-rails sections. They can be fun. It's that (a) they make terrible finales, and (b) the worst kind of rail shooter is where you're constantly shooting down incoming missiles instead of bad guy space ships, hence why KZ3's finale was so disappointing.

Overall, KZ3's vehicle sections were much better than KZ2's. The tank section was just lame (with 512 MB, you can either have high-res graphical assets or enough space to maneuver), and the turret section was kind of boring, too. But I think KZ2's on-foot sequences were generally more engaging. I didn't particularly like KZ3's jetpack sequences. They were okay, but they were too constrained by invisible walls. Crysis 2 did this sort of thing much better (power jump isn't quite a jetpack, but same idea). I didn't really like the space station battle, either. It was just way too rails-y, and the physics didn't make any sense (why does gravity stop working when someone dies?)

The opening sequence where you escort the convoy was pretty intense. I enjoyed fighting my way through the jungle. The junkyard mission was okay. And the mechs were fun. But most of the infantry combat was either unmemorable, gimmicky, or so linear that it made Call of Duty look like a sandbox game.

Well, kz2 use barely 256MB of ram in the graphic maybe even less from what I remember ...

 

[Billy Idol]

For me, KZ2 campaign was one of the best FPS campaigns I played. I remember every set piece and firefight. But in KZ3....I first did not really care to finish it (costed me several gaming sessions to finally finish it...) and now...I can't remember a single firefight or setting in this game...heck I can't even remember the ending?!?! I also think that besides the really high resolution textures (which is great)...graphics and settings and the less colorful look of KZ2 was way better and had way more impact on me (I still remember the train section in KZ2, where I stand there and could not believe what I am seeing here )

I hope KZ4 will be more than KZ2 than KZ3 with respect to campgain!!

 

[Prophecy2k]

...
The opening sequence where you escort the convoy was pretty intense. I enjoyed fighting my way through the jungle. The junkyard mission was okay. And the mechs were fun. But most of the infantry combat was either unmemorable, gimmicky, or so linear that it made KZ2 look like a sandbox game.

Fixed for accuracy ;-)

KZ3 was waaaay less linear in its infantry bits than the average COD game we've had this gen (and i've played most of them).

COD4:MW was the only SP COD campaign I enjoyed and everything else pales in comparison to KZ3 (dispite the fact that they're simply very different games), talk less of KZ2.

KZ3 did miss alot of what made KZ2 special, but it wasn't as bad as many like to make out. I think the shock of what went wrong going from 2 to 3 has dispropotionately soured KZ3 in the eyes of many gamers.

Guerilla desperately needs to regain gamer's confidence again with KZ4. I just hope that unlike Resistance 3* (which was spectactular), gamers actually give KZ4 a chance and buy it despite being soured by KZ3.

(*R3 was one of the best SP FPS campaigns this gen, along KZ2, and it suffered a terrible fate because of the disappointment of its predecessor)

 

[patsu]

Just purchased a 3d tv and the 3d effects are very impressive in this game. Really enjoying it even though its in a lower native res the image still looks sharp and colorful to me.

Yap ! Now that you can see it for yourself. Do you agree that stereoscopic 3D makes a difference to the level design ?

The maps look cluttered and too busy in 2D. In 3D view, the battlefield looks more "organized" and beautiful to me since I can perceive it better (more depth, more room, and more insights about the space and objects around us).

Stuff that were mangled together in 2D view are now spaced out nicely and logically. IMHO, that's the biggest impact to the game when you game in 3D.

Move controller comes second. I feel that the on-rail and sniping segments are designed for the device.

 

[fearsomepirate]

KZ3 was waaaay less linear in its infantry bits than the average COD game we've had this gen (and i've played most of them).

I've played them all. I'd compare KZ3 to Black Ops and MW3 in its linearity. It's very much "Go this way, you have no options, no, you cannot see what is in that room, no you cannot walk around the back, no, stop, no, go in this straight line, please." Exception is the petrucite rig, but that's about it.

Guerilla desperately needs to regain gamer's confidence again with KZ4. I just hope that unlike Resistance 3* (which was spectactular), gamers actually give KZ4 a chance and buy it despite being soured by KZ3.

I think Guerilla's biggest problem is that they're not confident in their own ideas. So they always ape something from a more popular game in a way that doesn't really fit, and it brings everything down. So in KZ2 has that level where you drive the tank, obviously because Halo has drivable vehicles, but they give you an area the size of a small parking lot to drive around in, which ruins it. And I doubt that nuke would have gone off in KZ2 if COD4 hadn't done it. Then in KZ3, they put perks in the multiplayer and force all public games to be via random matchmaking because that's what COD does. They put Halo-inspired jetpacks in them, and of course the map they're on is a death trap if you don't have one (and the map is unavoidable due to the new COD-style matchmaking). Both KZ2's and KZ3's campaigns are much more COD-like than KZ1's, which was really the most original one in the series.

There's nothing wrong with looking to other games for inspiration, but there's a difference between that and ineptly aping whatever it is you think makes Game X popular. They've got great artists, animators, and programmers, clearly some of the best in the business. But they have got to get some people in who have a better sense of game design.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I've played them all. I'd compare KZ3 to Black Ops and MW3 in its linearity. It's very much "Go this way, you have no options, no, you cannot see what is in that room, no you cannot walk around the back, no, stop, no, go in this straight line, please." Exception is the petrucite rig, but that's about it.

I think Guerilla's biggest problem is that they're not confident in their own ideas. So they always ape something from a more popular game in a way that doesn't really fit, and it brings everything down. So in KZ2 has that level where you drive the tank, obviously because Halo has drivable vehicles, but they give you an area the size of a small parking lot to drive around in, which ruins it. And I doubt that nuke would have gone off in KZ2 if COD4 hadn't done it. Then in KZ3, they put perks in the multiplayer and force all public games to be via random matchmaking because that's what COD does. They put Halo-inspired jetpacks in them, and of course the map they're on is a death trap if you don't have one (and the map is unavoidable due to the new COD-style matchmaking). Both KZ2's and KZ3's campaigns are much more COD-like than KZ1's, which was really the most original one in the series.

There's nothing wrong with looking to other games for inspiration, but there's a difference between that and ineptly aping whatever it is you think makes Game X popular. They've got great artists, animators, and programmers, clearly some of the best in the business. But they have got to get some people in who have a better sense of game design.

Whilst I agree with your initial statement I think your examples leave faaaar too much to be desired.

Firstly Halo having driveable vehicles doesn't at all indicate that Guerilla was looking at that game when they put the tank in KZ2. Halo wasn't the first game to have driveable vehicles either, so making such a connection is more than little presumptuous. KZ2 also has the mech section which Halo doesn't have at all (but judging from the recent Halo 4 footage of the MP level with the Mech, Halo may even ape KZ). Vehicles in KZ are simply logical, and I think the size of the play areas given were more to do with HW limitations than anything else. The tank and mech levels in both KZ2 & KZ3 fit perfectly into their lore and settings, so i hardly think they aped someone else's idea, rather they were intended from the beginning to add variety to the gameplay, but (at least in terms of the tank bit - which i actually enjoyed) could have been better implemented.

The nuke section also fits perfectly into the story and setting, and took place in a cut-scene so i completely don't see the similarity between COD's and KZ's. That's nonesense and I think you're really reaching there, again because it's not as if COD was the first game to have footage of a nuke going off, nor was KZ's nuke out of place in its story or universe.

I agree on the perks system in KZ3 MP, however to be honest and fair to Guerilla, you go and read all the initial reviews of KZ2 and see all of the obviously biased criticisms of how "it doesn't play like COD" and "it should play like COD if it wants to capture COD gamers". So they took said criticisms on board and justifiably made KZ3 MP like COD, and suddenly, becuase people are now getting sick of COD, it's all "wah wah wah it's too much like COD". I'd hardly blame Guerilla alone for that, as the critics and gamers are also responsible for being idiots during that period around KZ2's release.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Halo wasn't the first game to have driveable vehicles either, so making such a connection is more than little presumptuous.

No, it's not. It stretches the bounds of credulity to assert that when a game has many, many similarities to the most popular games of previous years, that the designers were in no way whatsoever inspired by or imitating those popular games. Do you think current-gen FPSes almost all have ironsights aiming because all the developers went back and played Delta Force and Operation Flashpoint, or because Call of Duty is ridiculously popular?

I agree on the perks system in KZ3 MP, however to be honest and fair to Guerilla, you go and read all the initial reviews of KZ2 and see all of the obviously biased criticisms of how "it doesn't play like COD" and "it should play like COD if it wants to capture COD gamers".

I am being fair to them. Before COD4, reviews were all "It should play like Halo. Why isn't this game more like Halo? Blah blah Halo blah blah blah." And before that "Why isn't this game more like Quake?" and "This game should be like Goldeneye." But that's not how industry leaders work. It's not how you build a series. You can't let customers or reviewers design your product, because they tend to be uncreative people who are only able to say, "Make it more like this other product that already exists," which is a recipe for failure.

Of course, they'll never have 1st-tier success as long as they don't have split-screen multiplayer, but that's a different story.