Allow me to begin by stating my opinion. This is my blog after all, and I feel a certain entitlement to inserting my thoughts in this space I've cleared for myself.
Killzone 2 is an excessively hyped disappointment. It's a game made for fans, loved by fans, and pushed by fans. What is Killzone 2? It's pretty, and in more than one way. The graphics are nice, the effects are nice, the atmosphere is nice. Even the way certain mechanics work, like cover and reloading and blowing up enemy turret emplacements - is all designed to be pretty, inciting those ooohs and ahhhs from the fanbase.
But as far as I could tell in my experience playing it, that's all the game was. The controls - established to be "more realistic" achieved little of this supposed verisimilitude, instead making the player feel clumsy and numb, like you feel when you go back and play Goldeneye for the N64 after all these years.
So where are these reviews coming from? They're riding a wave stemming from the original Killzone (A game I've never played, but heard decent things about). I'm not saying Killzone 2 is bad, but they make it out to be glorious and groundbreaking. It IS NOT. You want to see games that made FPS players across the globe to weep in wonder? Halo is one, Gears of War is another (although not technically a First Person title, it fits my purposes here), and Call of Duty 4 yet another. Gears of War and Halo in all their incarnations have been Xbox exclusive, so they're easily in the same boat as Killzone 2 in the regard of audience.
These games and others have had enormous impacts on the gaming scene - whether is is recreational or professional. MLG, the largest professional gaming league in history, is so big today directly due to Halo's popularity. How many people do you know that own a 360 but don't own a copy of Halo 2 or 3? It's almost a staple product for the box, whether you're a hardcore FPS fan or not. To focus on Halo 3, it has a far more compelling story, and comparable graphics. The game has an outstanding score, and introduces two amazing features that set it apart from every game of it's generation - Forge, the built in stage editor - and Theatre, which records an entire match from an omniscient perspective.
Killzone 2, in comparison, isn't terribly unique. It's just another FPS. It's pretty, and it's set in an interesting world, but that's it. I think all the hype is directly tied to people who have too much trouble keeping it in the pants when they see the long-awaited sequel to a game they loved. I'm not condemning them entirely. I know when Diablo 3 is finally slotted for release, I'll verbally abuse anyone who utters a single negative syllable about it. That doesn't instantly make Diablo 3 the best game ever though (Although Blizzard's sterling reputation for never turning out a bad game says a great deal).
We're all a fan about something. It's important to us, sure, but it doesn't make us right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I haven't had a chance to play the game so I lack that experience and point of view, and yes, this is definitely eye candy at its finest. I can barely remember what was like to await an especially hyped game and for it to be a letdown.
ReplyDeleteThis is interesting to me, though. A lot of the reading material suggests that Killzone 2 is somehow inherently deserving of high praise, but I have to ask why. What exactly about this game is so overwhelmingly inspiring that everyone has to laud its existence, and any who disagree are clearly in the wrong. I haven't played the game, I played the demo and that was enough for me. I wasn't blown away, my already thinning hair didn't thin any faster for having experienced its demo. So, to me at least, it calls to question, what exactly about this game is so awe-inspiring?
ReplyDelete