THE BORE
General => Video Game Bored => Topic started by: duckman2000 on July 16, 2008, 02:32:21 PM
-
Looks damned good. Amazing visually, but the game actually looks good. Surprise of E3 right there.
http://e3.gamespot.com/live.html?tag=topslot;action;1&tag=topslot;title;1
HD version (http://chkpt.zdnet.com/chkpt/hd_sampler_download_start/http://www.gamespot.com/dl_movie/169_killzone2_e308stage_ps3_vf_2_hd.wmv?s=6194262&c=movie_ftp_&site=1&u=http://download2-east.gamespot.com/sd/D1p7ENajtiYBMnaMX88cIXudjRsgEQRnX0mm9XLY4VwJyihs4t8Q24yLZsrqCdo7iw3d1paLW_xkAzprywnlTImmknO0pujb///d4/gsc/2008/07/169_killzone2_e308stage_ps3_vf_2_hd.wmv)
Improved SP video from Gamersyde:
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_6898_en.html
(http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/9091/1306_0013.jpg)
-
Well, that was a short demo. :( Blim just posted that they have new footage coming in a couple of hours, presumably of MP, so I'll just post that later. Damn that looked good though :wtf, maybe bringing the company into the fold had a greater impact on the game's quality than I had expected.
-
FUCK!
I saw Killzone 2, so I thought that would be a good chance to go take a shower since I saw so much of the single player. I come back and miss it and now fucking Mortal Kombat vs DC is showing. Did they show LBP yet or Flower?
-
FUCK!
I saw Killzone 2, so I thought that would be a good chance to go take a shower since I saw so much of the single player. I come back and miss it and now fucking Mortal Kombat vs DC is showing. Did they show LBP yet or Flower?
Hmm. I don't think they have gotten there yet.
The Killzone MP stuff looked really good. And before any uneducated dolt decides to throw in some "sfag would say that" comment, I'd like to remind said dolt that I have traditionally been very skeptical of Killzone 2. But it really looks like they might pull it off.
-
And before any uneducated dolt decides to throw in some "sfag would say that" comment...
it is impossible to avoid the 'sfag'-throwing trash around here. you can be an avid PC gamer who's even made mods and is working on PC indie games, and even other PC gamers will still call you an sfag for looking forward to littlebigplanet, killzone, or any other sony game. people just love to hate on sony right now.
-
http://www.gamespot.com/video/928377/6194262/videoplayerpop?rgroup=e32008_videos
they uploaded it FAST
-
I really wish we could get some high quality footage of this. Looks so good.
-
that vehicle was sweet. loved the design. stealth sniping = 8). hybrid classes = 8).
trolls can suck it.
-
I'm not seeing any trolls in this thread. Can we keep this shit out of here? Most people here, at least the ones worth talking about games with, are capable of appreciating stuff across platform "boundaries," so trollspotting by way of clairvoyance really doesn't fit in.
-
I'm not seeing any trolls in this thread. Can we keep this shit out of here? Most people here, at least the ones worth talking about games with, are capable of appreciating stuff across platform "boundaries," so trollspotting by way of clairvoyance really doesn't fit in.
I know. I can't believe it either
-
I'll buy it. I'm too busy enjoying the new Warhawk update right now to post anything, though.
-
why didn't sony show more in-game demos period.
-
why didn't sony show more in-game demos period.
Then they wouldn't have had time to show something that is probably possible at some point later. Don't get me wrong, I love what I'm hearing about MAG, but as far as I'm concerned, Sony should stick with showing off its tangible strengths. I mean, this looks genuinely good.
-
Gamersyde got some (off-screen) SP footage up
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_6850_27557_2_en.html
Looks wicked, although I'm really gassed for the multi now. I can understand why this wasn't shown, it really would have stolen whatever thunder Resistance 2 had built up.
edit:
Gamespot footage, HD version of the OP footage (http://chkpt.zdnet.com/chkpt/hd_sampler_download_start/http://www.gamespot.com/dl_movie/169_killzone2_e308stage_ps3_vf_2_hd.wmv?s=6194262&c=movie_ftp_&site=1&u=http://download2-east.gamespot.com/sd/D1p7ENajtiYBMnaMX88cIXudjRsgEQRnX0mm9XLY4VwJyihs4t8Q24yLZsrqCdo7iw3d1paLW_xkAzprywnlTImmknO0pujb///d4/gsc/2008/07/169_killzone2_e308stage_ps3_vf_2_hd.wmv)
-
(http://upload.dfyb.net/uploaded/6j3kv7.gif)
MP preview
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/891/891245p1.html
-
Killzone's also trucking out what Boltjes called dynamic missions. There are five types of battle for you to take out your aggression in -- which include Assassination, Body Count, Search & Destroy, as well as Search & Retrieve -- but when you start a round, you don't have to settle for one mission. In a demo video I saw, the ISA finished up a Search & Retrieve mission and as soon as they were announced as the victors, one of them was targeted for a Helghast Assassination mission. The orange-eyed team surrounded the squad, blasted the target, and won the mission. Then, another mission popped up challenging the ISA to plant a bomb. They did, the device went boom, and the boys won the round 2 to 1.
That's pretty cool
-
Finally got to watch the damned thing in HD myself, and I have to say, that sniper rifle is everything the sniper rifle in Killzone wasn't. The Helghast sniper in general just looks bloody cool.
-
that vehicle was sweet. loved the design. stealth sniping = 8). hybrid classes = 8).
trolls can suck it.
There were no trolls here yet you attacked them.
smh
stealth sniping = 8)
game looks cool, but the metagame (pre-emptive console faggotry) is much more entertaining. You all love it you slags.
-
Nothing groundbreaking, but I really like how they have practically combined the airstrike and heli support of COD4 into one function here.
-
Awesome footage. The game looks great and the multiplayer looks really fun. Hopefully they can clean up the bugs, because the first game had terrible online glitches and exploits. The only complaint I have is that I can't use a 360 controller.
The character models do look a little floaty over the environments. It could just be the animation style, but is almost seems like there is an invisible layer between the character models and the environment.
-
Part 2 of the Gamersyde video is up
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_6878_en.html
Looks pretty awesome, in a Call of Duty 4 sans gun-on-a-stick sort of way. The battlefield generally feels very, er, organic. Also makes a good case for the inclusion of explosive barrels in games where you can actually blow buildings to bits.
-
That new video looked great. I still don't like the fact that they drop you in a vehicle in the end, but it didn't seem too bad.
-
hey remember when everyone thought that killzone 1 would be awesome and up to the fidelity seen on superior xbox hardware
anyone?
oh, the memories
-
hey remember when everyone thought that killzone 1 would be awesome and up to the fidelity seen on superior xbox hardware
anyone?
oh, the memories
Well, I was one of the more vocal Killzone haters, and I've been pretty damned skeptical of this one, but it really does look good. My initial doubt regarding the first one came after actually playing the E3 demo (2004, was it?), as it felt like little more than a pile of bugs in an artistically striking dress. This one seems very different.
I just hope the game has some Luger-like missions. Killzone was for a brief moment nearly enjoyable once Luger was unlocked, and it will be a shame if that is binned in favor of total war at all times.
yeah but this is the ps3, which is like 80% as powerful as the 360.
It's a shame there are so few inspired and capable developers making games for the 360, or that supposed advantage might even show.
-
there is an advantage. a pretty good sized, and more importnatly, efficient advantage.
So then 360 developers basically suck at what they do? As said, that's certainly a shame, all that potential and nothing to show for it.
-
most of these inspired and capable developers are doing multiplat work. about the closest the 360 has to a factor five or naughty dog is rare, and they're stuck in the google-eyed hell of their own creation. well, epic and id seem to do better work on the 360, too.
-
Yeah... Rare certainly seems to be very capable in terms of technology, but to re-use an old complaint, their games almost seem to be developed without a real art director overseeing things.
Whatever though, Killzone 2 looks to be a good game. Not just the remarkable achievement in presentation and technology that I had assumed it would be. Rejoice, motherfuckers.
-
Gears 2 is impressive on the 360. Not the best looking console game, but pretty damn impressive. Other graphically stunning games only on the 360 include the PGR series and..uhh..Gears 2. I guess it gets ahead by having the better looking multiplatform games.
-
if you step back, there are VERY few teams attempting exclusives that exploit the power of their respective hardware. on top of that, wannabe-dev gamers frequently mistake post-processing effects for demonstrations of significant horsepower, overlooking lo-fi textures, faked-and-baked lighting, and jittery stencil shadows, so in the end: what's the point?
-
Gears 2 is hot. Does anyone really give a shit about hardware "edge" anyway these days though? Granted, I did troll the 360 to hell and back after playing Gears PC, but that's my god given right as a PC gamer. Between these two systems, I'm just happy to get stuff that looks as good as Gears 2, or Killzone 2 here.
-
I often don't care too much about how technically amazing a game is. A game can tell me they have all these features, but that means jack shit unless it actually looks good. The only thing I really take into account outside of "this game looks immediately amazing to me" is how much scale plays a part in it. This is one reason why I don't think Uncharted or Gears 1 were THAT impressive. There were only a few enemies on screen at a time and the areas were really small. This is also why Crysis won't be toppled for a long time.
-
Budget is king - if you have a team of nigh on 200 and Sony throwing XX million at each game, then you see good results.
for whatever reason , MS have chosen on the whole not to go that route.
Kojima's analogy seems to be true - if you pay, have talented staff, and have a WHOLE load of time (-impressive- PS3 games seem to be clocking in around 2-3 years in dev time) , then you can make the PS3 shine. I'd love to see a game with a stellar budget , 2-3 years of dev, and a very talented 1st party outfit at the helm on X360 ...but right now, doesn't look like there is a whole load of pressure on the X360 to do that.
At least not yet anyways.
Banjo?
-
what dcharlie wants is a shooter, where graphics really shine.
banjo and pinata are good looking but they are too kiddy for graphical superiority i am afraid.
-
It doesn't help that Banjo and Viva don't have solid frame rates. I really hope they fix that before Banjo is released.
-
if you step back, there are VERY few teams attempting exclusives that exploit the power of their respective hardware. on top of that, wannabe-dev gamers frequently mistake post-processing effects for demonstrations of significant horsepower, overlooking lo-fi textures, faked-and-baked lighting, and jittery stencil shadows, so in the end: what's the point?
I guess that's what I'm getting at though; it doesn't really matter if something is "faked-and-baked" if the end image is a striking one. And in terms of overcoming deficits in available "power," through craftsmanship and strong artistic direction, there seems to be a class separation, with the overwhelming majority of developers, exclusive or not, taking a more blunt, jackhammer approach by infusing detail into a poorly planned, unimaginative image that is more often than not devoid of any artistic value. I guess I just wish there were greater artists, craftsmen and visual directors (I don't think that's a real term, but you know what I mean) to push these systems beyond their apparent abilities.
Anyway, Killzone 2. It looks good, actually. And on the topic of good things about Killzone 2 and other games, why in the hell isn't clan support a standard feature these days? COD4 "clans" is a fucking joke.
-
There's too many FPSes coming out, it's hard to keep track of them. Don't see what makes this game stand out from the FPS cream of the crop (which right now happens to be on 360). Other than it's by a Dutch team.
-
I don't play every FPS out there, but I am going to check out this one. I know this, Resistance 2 and Project Origin are three FPS games I'm looking forward to. I am still kind of on the edge with Brothers in Arms, but I think I will go with that one as well. And Left 4 Dead, but that is different, as is Mirror's Edge. Oh, and Crysis Warhead. And STALKER Clear Skies.
-
There's too many FPSes coming out, it's hard to keep track of them. Don't see what makes this game stand out from the FPS cream of the crop (which right now happens to be on 360). Other than it's by a Dutch team.
Then you honestly aren't looking very hard. I can understand that when it comes to game quality, there is a general distrust toward games from Guerrilla, but this notion that it's somehow an anonymous shooter that does nothing out of the ordinary seems more than a little dumb at this point. Hell, having a complete, purely first person cover system is novel enough to set it apart from gun on a stick games like COD4.
-
What is a gun on a stick game, why is COD4 gun on a stick, and Killzone 2 is not?
-
What is a gun on a stick game, why is COD4 gun on a stick, and Killzone 2 is not?
I actually had to explain this to one of the IW guys, which surprised me. No cover system, not even lean in console versions. You're either standing/crouching behind something, or you're in the open. A particularly jarring thing when even the unwashed terrorist can pull off cover maneuvers that your elite badass S.A.S. self can't. On a visual level, the appearance of the gun in view and gun motion is static as hell. Gun on a stick.
-
pdz is perfect for you.
-
pdz is perfect for you.
That's the shitty shit game that threw you out of first person view whenever you went into cover, right?
:piss Rare :piss2
-
What is a gun on a stick game, why is COD4 gun on a stick, and Killzone 2 is not?
I actually had to explain this to one of the IW guys, which surprised me. No cover system, not even lean in console versions. You're either standing/crouching behind something, or you're in the open. A particularly jarring thing when even the unwashed terrorist can pull off cover maneuvers that your elite badass S.A.S. self can't. On a visual level, the appearance of the gun in view and gun motion is static as hell. Gun on a stick.
So like every FPS game is gun on a stick? And because Killzone 2 has cover it's not?
I'm not surprised you have to explain this concept to people.
-
What is a gun on a stick game, why is COD4 gun on a stick, and Killzone 2 is not?
I actually had to explain this to one of the IW guys, which surprised me. No cover system, not even lean in console versions. You're either standing/crouching behind something, or you're in the open. A particularly jarring thing when even the unwashed terrorist can pull off cover maneuvers that your elite badass S.A.S. self can't. On a visual level, the appearance of the gun in view and gun motion is static as hell. Gun on a stick.
So like every FPS game is gun on a stick? And because Killzone 2 has cover it's not?
I'm not surprised you have to explain this concept to people.
No, not every FPS game is like that. Ghost Recon, which fails to even have a gun in view, feels less like a gun on a stick. And yes, actually being able to perform moves beyond stand, crouch, behind something or not behind something is an immediate improvement from the gun on a stick shit. I fucking hated this shit in COD4. It wasn't as critical in MP, due to everyone having the same brutally limited cover options, but it stuck out badly in SP.
That said, I guess I can admit that the term "gun on a stick" doesn't describe all of this perfectly, but whatever. The gun motion is static enough to warrant the use of the term anyway. :punch
-
anyone claiming KZ2 has a hard time standing out is just plain stupid. this game has THE best art direction and is a step beyond anything else when it comes to capturing visceral first person combat. part of that is the first person cover system that gives your body weight and context in the virtual world.
the multiplayer is very dynamic as well. take TF2's classes and let people mix and match abilities to create your own class that is not only something you don't find in other games (depending on combination), but very powerful in terms of abilities and their effect on the battle.
Primary: Secondary:
-Revive Teamates -Repair dispensers, mounted guns, turrets
-Deploy Turret -Throw health pack
-Stealth -Tag on-screen enemies and broadcast to teamates
-2x Armor -Temporary run speed boost
-Dynamic Spawn Point (smoke nade) -Air drone support
-Disguise -Proximity C-4 sticky chargeYou can pick one primary and one secondary. just from the descriptions, these combinations sound awesome:
turret + air drone -- ultimate automated defense
disguise/stealth + tag enemies -- ultimate recon
2x armor + health packs -- paladin
stealth + air drone -- attack enemies without giving away your position
turret + c4 charge -- set up a one-man ambush
revive + repair -- ultimate support unit
and i'm sure there are other viable combinations as well. i avoided listing combinations of skills from the same class. these are all unlocked similarly to CoD4's perks, except it's more along the lines of "play as a medic to unlock medic badges" etc.
but what's even better about these class combinations is that they are designed in a way that promote teamwork. if you can lay down a spawn point, you can't also lay down a turret. but a group of players can set up a forward base with defenses (spawn + turrets). something like that hasn't really been in games since tribe 2's jericho or deployable inventory stations. a couple games like CoD4 let you make hybrid classes, but the skills are very minor -- these totally change the way you play (like TF2 classes) and are still customizable. they mention 100's of stats you can unlock, so there may be even more customization.
dynamic multiplayer is what i think this genre is sorely lacking and killzone 2 has a great concept going here.
(http://upload.dfyb.net/uploaded/Killzone2_E3Trailer-HD1080.gif)
-
Yeah, the class and clan functions sound quite awesome. It's obvious that it's more than an afterthought, hopefully that doesn't mean that the SP will be lackluster. It seems to be near impossible to find a game that excels at both these days. :/
But it's looking good so far. I'm hoping the weather based weaponry doesn't stop at lightning guns; wouldn't mind seeing a nice blizzard.
-
i came to troll
but mp looks good hm
i don't know how to feel now :-\
-
You can pick one primary and one secondary. just from the descriptions, these combinations sound awesome:
as with everything balancing is going to be incredibly important.
I wonder if they'll have to peg back the freedom a bit?
they've been playtesting multiplayer regularly for over a year now. they can patch balance issues. until there are signs of poor balance, it's unecessary to make it into an issue. i don't see any obvious signs that would lead to them potentially having to drastically change the available skill sets because of glaring balance issues.
and just like with large scale FPS games, i have the opinion that more dynamic MP FPS games are something worth supporting and hyping as long as they look promising and are trying something interesting. it's pretty annoying when people don't even give them a chance based only on the fact that they're taking a risk and doing something most games don't even attempt to do.
that threw you out of first person view whenever you went into cover, right?
i actually think the first person cover system is going to bite the gameplay in the ass a bit. R6V does the same shifting to 3rd person, and it does it for a reason : if you are going to have a ton of enemies running around , the 1st person view leaves you completely blind. Of course, you can balance and design things so it's less painful, but given the levels look pretty open then unless they are going to line enemies up ONLY infront of you then i expect some annoying moments.
Yes, it's way more realistic and it'll be interesting to see how it works, but i'm curious to see how (and if) they pull it off.
a different approach to cover is going to accomplish different things.
just think about the R6 approach for a second -- it's totally bullshit. you are harder to hit, you are often out of view, and you have a better view of the battle yourself. there's no give and take with the third person approach. people out of cover are at a total disadvantage. you can sit behind cover where nobody can see you and you get a full view of the surroundings -- how is that ideal?
a first person cover system just means you'll have to think before you enter cover and weigh it as an option, rather than defaulting to cover every chance you get because it's often the only real option.
-
ust think about the R6 approach for a second -- it's totally bullshit. you are harder to hit, you are often out of view, and you have a better view of the battle yourself. there's no give and take with the third person approach. people out of cover are at a total disadvantage. you can sit behind cover where nobody can see you and you get a full view of the surroundings -- how is that ideal?
you are mistaking realism for gameplay though you at least in a round about way get what i'm talking about.
a first person cover system just means you'll have to think before you enter cover and weigh it as an option, rather than defaulting to cover every chance you get because it's often the only real option.
totally agree - my point is that this may become frustrating due to it's realism. Again, it'll be down to balance.
i wasn't really talking in terms of realism. i was talking in terms of gameplay. i think the third person cover system is a flawed system for multiplayer. multiplayer is all about risk/reward. there is not enough risk and too much reward for third person cover systems. in games like R6, not going into cover us usually just not an option -- going into cover lets you scout out the area without even poking your head out. in KZ2, cover is more likely to be a viable option, rather than the only option (ie. no real option) like in third person games.
CVG and n'gai both gave positive previews of the first person cover system. i haven't seen any negative hands on reports. closest thing was gamespot talking about how sometimes your cover is destructable ;)
-
was talking in terms of gameplay. i think the third person cover system is a flawed system for multiplayer. multiplayer is all about risk/reward.
well, yes, the question is whether the system is usable or not. if it is 32 player, at which point does the cover system become advantageous? i have yet to play KZ2, so i would be interested if the have , say, a faster camera for scouting behind you.
CVG and n'gai
hmmm - CVG long stopped being a source of -anything- , and n'gai thinks he knows me (according to 1up pod cast at least), so i think both are crazy! ;)
that said, <anecdote hat> my most sceptical game developer friend was incredibly impressed when he went over to Guerilla and was singing the games praises which is INSANELY rare, so i have my optimism hat on for the final results </anecdote hat>
i think the bolded text examplifies the point i'm making. the answer to your question is: not all the time. it's probably not going to be the answer for every situation, which is my entire point.
a time where i think it WOULD be useful (provided it sufficiently gives the player cover in the first place) is when you have teamates covering your six. and after all, that makes sense for gameplay balance and realism alike.
again, you're most likely not going to use a first person cover system like you do a third person cover system.
-
Omg, the Stealth Sniping looks yummy :drool
-
i actually think the first person cover system is going to bite the gameplay in the ass a bit. R6V does the same shifting to 3rd person, and it does it for a reason : if you are going to have a ton of enemies running around , the 1st person view leaves you completely blind.
See, I think this is a good thing. It's native to the first person format, which in itself offers a limited view compared to a third person camera. But to me, this disadvantage, or really, lack of advantage, adds something to the game. I played GRAW in first person, despite that view definitely being the "crippled" one, for the simple reason that it enhanced the immersion, and made the game feel more satisfying to play. Now considering how interested Guerrilla seems in pushing the first person view, in terms of everything from interacting with the environments to the look of the gun in view, I'm really happy that they didn't throw it all away for a more forgiving cover system. It will probably not be the perfect option for all moments of combat, but at least the FPS stays an FPS.
As far as I can tell though, the peek system in Killzone 2 seems to be of the somewhat forgiving kind, where peeking keeps you relatively safe from fire. So it may be a compromise still, but it's one I can live with. I seriously hated what Ubi did with Rainbow Six Vegas.
-
Yeah, the cover system in Killzone 2 actually gives you more view of the area compared to just simply ducking behind an object in a game like Halo or Call of Duty.
-
Is that available through any online DL service?
-
I seriously hated what Ubi did with Rainbow Six Vegas.
i was fine with it as R6V is :bow :bow :bow2 :bow2 levels of awesome.
Shame they initially fucked up R6V2, nice that it's now fixed, but i already got to 20/20/20 :/
I guess i can still get my overal rank up :/
Well, to each their own. The 3rd person cover fire system symbolized everything I've grown to despise about Rainbow Six as of late. Although to be fair, at least Ubi did give us some cover fire features, even if it was a clumsy, jackhammer solution. That's more than can be said for most shooters, even the ones that make all sorts of noise regarding the supposed elite nature of the player's character.
-
Cover is basically bullshit in all FPS games where you can be shot more than one time. Oh snap, better take cover, I don't want to get shot the 10x it will take to kill me.
Circle strafing > cover in any game that has cartoon DOOM damage, which is sadly all games now a days. Is that not elite enough for you? Running sideways really really fast while maintaining perfect aim and shrugging off bullets?
-
Or, like in Battlefield 2, Dolphin Diving!
[youtube=425,350]51MRK9kJ2G0[/youtube]
-
Cover is basically bullshit in all FPS games where you can be shot more than one time. Oh snap, better take cover, I don't want to get shot the 10x it will take to kill me.
It certainly makes my character, and subsequently me, feel more capable. The COD4 idea of combat feels fundamentally crippled, and even more so when you're the only fucker on the battlefield with these restrictions. Fucking lame.
Is that not elite enough for you? Running sideways really really fast while maintaining perfect aim and shrugging off bullets?
Not really, unless elite = fighting on dollys. :-X
-
Cover is basically bullshit in all FPS games where you can be shot more than one time. Oh snap, better take cover, I don't want to get shot the 10x it will take to kill me.
Circle strafing > cover in any game that has cartoon DOOM damage, which is sadly all games now a days. Is that not elite enough for you? Running sideways really really fast while maintaining perfect aim and shrugging off bullets?
I hope Killzone 2 doesn't have super cartoon damage then. I don't remember Killzone 1 much outside of broken controls.
I think the best thing about a cover system is blind fire. Blind fire is great, as is effective use of suppressive fire.
-
Cover is basically bullshit in all FPS games where you can be shot more than one time. Oh snap, better take cover, I don't want to get shot the 10x it will take to kill me.
Circle strafing > cover in any game that has cartoon DOOM damage, which is sadly all games now a days. Is that not elite enough for you? Running sideways really really fast while maintaining perfect aim and shrugging off bullets?
I hope Killzone 2 doesn't have super cartoon damage then. I don't remember Killzone 1 much outside of broken controls.
I think the best thing about a cover system is blind fire. Blind fire is great, as is effective use of suppressive fire.
One thing I do remember about Killzone 2 was that bullets did, in fact, put hurt on the character's health. In that game, this sucked major balls as the controls felt so brutally unresponsive.
A shooter should at the minimum have the lean and peek abilities of for example Airborne.
-
Cover is basically bullshit in all FPS games where you can be shot more than one time. Oh snap, better take cover, I don't want to get shot the 10x it will take to kill me.
It certainly makes my character, and subsequently me, feel more capable. The COD4 idea of combat feels fundamentally crippled, and even more so when you're the only fucker on the battlefield with these restrictions. Fucking lame.
I thought you were a PC gamer. COD4 PC has leaning and sidling. Surely the two most common activities of the elite soldier.
Not that cover is terribly useful in that game. It's a fast paced arcade shooter. You don't hold positions. You run around like a mad man owning people through the use of sick aim.
Cover (and let's call leaning "cover") is a mechanic that doesn't really become useful unless you design a game around it. You need to make death painful (as in you're out for the round, or you have a ridiculously long trek back to the fighting) and you need to design levels, damage and player movement around battles that naturally lend themselves to clean lines of scrimmage.
No one bothers with cover when it's likely some moron is going to spawn behind you any second.
-
The 3rd person cover fire system symbolized everything I've grown to despise about Rainbow Six as of late.
well, i'm baffled - what exactly don't you like about the 3rd person cover system in R6? Is it just down to the fact it enhances the view point and is therefore unrealistic?
despise R6 of late? each to their own of course, but ... wow.
It's not even that it's unrealistic that bugs me; shooters are by and large unrealistic by design. But I can not fucking stand how it constantly fucks with the perspective, and throws me out of first person. And yeah, I haven't been happy with R6 since Raven Shield, although this latest game, Vegas 2, really takes the fucking cake in terms of unbridled awfulness.
-
Raven Shield is the last game I played where I bothered to lean.
-
I thought you were a PC gamer. COD4 PC has leaning and sidling. Surely the two most common activities of the elite soldier.
Not breaking the immersion, and giving the player some reasonable abilities, is what I would consider useful. It will change the gameplay, but for me it's really primarily about actually getting some god damn moves beyond stand-crouch-fire. I know the PC version has more movements, which is why I was specifically referencing the console versions. Still, the opposition pulls off stunts well beyond even that, which again fucks with the experience by making me the least capable dude around. Apparently, my main ability is that I can absorb more damage, and don't think for a second that I'm all that hot about that either. If there must be a quick fix system, I prefer the inject system of other games, simply because it makes damage something that needs tending to.
Additionally, given how much emphasis that has been placed on this cover fire system as well as the destructible props, I'm not ready to write it off as not being part of the core design of the game. The Helghast certainly seem eager to use cover fire themselves, so we'll have to wait and see exactly how much damage they can deal within this design. On a to have or not to have basis though, I for one am happy to see that they are going in this destruction.
-
The 3rd person cover fire system symbolized everything I've grown to despise about Rainbow Six as of late.
well, i'm baffled - what exactly don't you like about the 3rd person cover system in R6? Is it just down to the fact it enhances the view point and is therefore unrealistic?
despise R6 of late? each to their own of course, but ... wow.
you're the only one here talking about how it relates to realism.
third person cover games, in multiplayer games, are a flawed game mechanic. unless, of course, your goal for a game is really to make leaving cover the last thing a player wants to do. because third person cover is so advantageous, not going into cover simply isn't an option in most cases. it's too safe. there is almost no risk. it promotes turtling.
-
I should clarify that I don't actually think that Vegas 2 is a horrible game as such, it's just a spit of shit on what Rainbow Six once was, or at least the direction the franchise was going in. As a general action game, it's not bad at all, aside from the mentioned first, er, third, er, first person bullshit. But yeah, it was designed for that, it just felt like a lame design choice.
To bring this back to Killzone 2 though, have they said anything about putting helghast dogs in this game? I've never played Liberation beyond the demo, but I remember seeing these things in the intro cinema and hoping to hell that they'd make it into Killzone 2. Anything on enemy types so far, or are they just focusing on the combat mechanics for now?
-
If they are looking for good AI to learn from, look at FEAR or Project Origin.
Oh, transition to third person in a first person shooter is just annoying all around. The Vegas games, PDZ, and that new Bond game are all guilty of this sin.
-
R6 forces you into cover by default as it's pretty much a 1 shot 1 kill game - 2 if you are heavily armoured (and therefore slower). my point which you seem to be missing is that a first person mechanic may lead to problems of it's own -in terms of gameplay-. There is still plenty of risk as you still have to snap back into first person and turn to take out people who flank you. You still have to be observant and you still need someone covering you, but it helps take away any frustrations you may have if the friendly AI doesn't kick in.
R6 for instance (especially for those of us who play it on the realistic setting) in a first person view would become pretty annoying pretty quickly. I understand that it gives you an advantage in terms of view points, but the alternative in a game like r6 would be even more instant deaths.
Again, i can only restate that it'll come down to how the game is balanced. A first person cover system in R6 would have made what is already a very very hard game on the top difficulty insanely hard.
Still, takes nothing from the game for me - still one of the best shooters out there IMO.
note - it the AI is shit first or third person cover will still lead to it being abused. R6-1- and the patched R6-2- has some of the best AI out there, so you wouldn't be turtling at all. :D
Hopefully GG are loooking at R6 and other games with high quality AI , that's where the game will find it's true standing.
you know, R6 games were 1-2 shot kill/death games before they had cover. raven shield is still the best R6 game.
raven shield has a very precise lean and crouch mechanic, which could be compared to KZ2's cover system on a 'manual' setting (in terms of controls). popping out of KZ2's cover looks very easy and quick, and not jarring since you never leave first person view. it's basically a more context sensitive version of raven shield's mechanics (again, in terms of controls).
and you keep talking about AI, but i'm talking about multiplayer in this multiplayer thread. i've made that clear in my posts, too. i'm not talking about singleplayer at all.
-
If they are looking for good AI to learn from, look at FEAR or Project Origin.
Oh, transition to third person in a first person shooter is just annoying all around. The Vegas games, PDZ, and that new Bond game are all guilty of this sin.
I count F.E.A.R. as the first game to actually make me feel like prey. Sure, other games have had threatening enemies with good guns or even smarts about them, but nothing like in F.E.A.R.
That's something I wish more developers went for, making the player feel like prey. The Killzone 2 demonstration I've seen have displayed enemy behavior that ranges from forgivable through cannonfodder to at times good, but I haven't seen anything that does the Helghan appearance and military culture justice. Other games like COD4 make enemies seem like suicidal maniacs with a shitload of grenades, and that's not great either.
And Vegas, good A.I.? Good marksmanship, sure, and the bullets hurt, but I have yet to observe enemy behavior that I'd consider particularly bright. Vegas 2 seemed better, but not by much. And the friendly A.I. is just embarrassingly shit, although not necessarily from a lack smarts, but due to the completely unnatural behavior of the team mates in relation to myself in the game. No dudes, please do not stand at the top of the stairs where you will get killed by the guy behind the mounted machine gun. Be smart enough to realize that following my exact placement command isn't always the best idea. And then you had the sheer glitches, where I had to lead the poor buggers along a few meters at a time because they couldn't see past a plant.
Can't do that 'suur. :wtf
-
Improved Gamersyde video:
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_6898_en.html
(http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/9091/1306_0013.jpg)
-
MP profile screen, badge screen and weapons screen
(http://i38.tinypic.com/9lesd2.jpg)
(http://i35.tinypic.com/30cumaf.jpg)
(http://i33.tinypic.com/20a2yix.jpg)
-
If you are an IGN insider, they have a 720p direct feed stage demo up for download. Game looks reallygood.
-
No IGN insider here. I see IGN also has a HD version of the E3 trailer of Infamous. :(
But yeah, the game actually looks good, as a game. Highly unexpected.
-
The image quality and framerate are impressive but the AI still seems really weak. The enemies act like robots that are just waiting to be shot.
Also, WTF at the pre-alpha status. When's this game going to be done?
-
I'm just surprised that it actually really holds up actually in direct feed high resolution straight gameplay. I have a hard time really judging a game if the videos shown are things the developers wanted us to see or just simply off screen. There is a lot of really good detail on the guns, although the ground looks a bit weird in comparison (not saying the ground looks bad, it is just a bit jarring to see such quality in the weapons and buildings, but the ground looks a bit off). It also didn't seem to have any weird jaggies or anything like that, so that is good.
-
The image quality and framerate are impressive but the AI still seems really weak. The enemies act like robots that are just waiting to be shot.
Also, WTF at the pre-alpha status. When's this game going to be done?
I've seen the griping about the A.I. (and the developer has even responded to it with claims of it being tweaked for dumb journalists), and it sounds a whole lot like nervous overreaction to me. At worst, the A.I. seems to be COD quality, and for a demonstration it hardly seems like anything out of the ordinary. Reminds me of the complaints regarding the A.I. in the Gears of War demonstrations, really, which subsequently brings to mind nearly every shooter demonstration in memory. We'll see where it ends up.
-
The image quality and framerate are impressive but the AI still seems really weak. The enemies act like robots that are just waiting to be shot.
really? there was one example where they were charging, and then when they saw the player come out with a rocket launcher, they turned around and went back to cover :lol
the enemies are just slow moving, which makes them seem dumb and unresponsive. it'd be cool if they ran faster on higher difficulty levels. seems like a smart way to scale difficulty (along with other things).
-
Yeah, reading the comments regarding the footage, you'd think the enemies were all clumped together and charging headfirst into machine gun fire, which doesn't seem to be the case. At worst, they are as you say a bit slow and not always keen on winning, but they seem capable of greater things.
I was cynical of this before this E3, but Guerrilla has as of late done nothing but crush cynical bullet-point after cynical bullet-point, so I'm dropping it for now.
-
What they need to do is make the enemies spam grenades. Nothing tricks people into thinking they are dealing with cunning enemies like a barrage of grenades.
-
KZ2's AI is no worse than COD4 but like DFYB metioned, the game moves a bit slower. In COD4, the action is going so fast and there are so many enemies that you never really notice the lack of AI.
-
They probably need to be faster, or at least a good deal more aggressive. Their "smarts" or moves, I see very little wrong with. Allegedly, they are working on this, and again... remember the Gears of War peek-a-boo demonstration? Now I'm not saying that Guerrilla has what it takes to deliver on all fronts, but I think they've earned the benefit of a doubt at this point.
-
Guerrilla games studio visit, "director's cut."
http://gamevideos.com/video/id/19937
The industrial design kicks ass, and it's nice to see that they are giving gun models plenty of attention. A nice piece on behavior/"A.I." towards the end as well.
-
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6hhy9_killzone-2-online-multiplayer-trail
Trailer from Leipzig.
Looks great, but total bullshit with people talking with each other on PSN. That never happens.
-
Much better than the previous MP trailer. Hopefully this can take over the reigns from COD4 for me. Looks great, although there is one thing that shatters the pretty image; the "rag doll" deaths. It obviously makes for something more unexpected and unscripted than the COD4 ones (dudes simply falling to their knees regardless of how they got killed looks weird too), but there is a bit too much movement to it. Looks great otherwise though.
That sniper rifle view is fuck awesome.
-
Yeah, I dig the high tech hud for snipers that highlights the heads of everyone in their view.
-
There're a bunch of waving cloths in that video. I wonder if you can punch holes in them like the free PhysX game from Nvidia.
It's kinda cool for people who were cumming over Resistance's glass effects. I'll post some caps when I have time.
-
That's not new tech, didn't Bloodrayne have that?
Don't remember. I barely played Bloodrayne. The PhysX effects look different and much better than anything I've seen even though the game itself is kinda crap. It's kinda hard to describe in words. You can check out my caps later or try it yourself if you have a Geforce 8 or higher. The downloads are available on Nzone.com
-
And I'm starting to looking forward to this FAR more than R2.
R2 is proven to be, at the very least, good. The MP in Resistance was really quite awesome, and they've really pushed it above and beyond that now. Killzone 2 here looks to do all the right things, and looks spectacular doing those things, but it's still an unknown for me.
-
And I'm starting to looking forward to this FAR more than R2.
R2 is proven to be, at the very least, good. The MP in Resistance was really quite awesome, and they've really pushed it above and beyond that now. Killzone 2 here looks to do all the right things, and looks spectacular doing those things, but it's still an unknown for me.
I was all psyched up for K2. For realz (you can check my old posts).
But the recent videos have dampened a lot of that enthusiasm. The visuals are still good but the gameplay still seems nothing more than the least we'd expect from a professional FPS game.
R2, though, shows some promise. I didn't care for R1 but what I've seen makes me think R2 will likely be a much better game than R1 and KZ2.
-
What it comes down to is that if Guerrillla gets this right, meaning the quality of the gameplay matches the presentation, it will be one hell of an event, a milestone even. Multiplayer seems to focus on all the right things, and it looks amazing. At this point, though, I'm not ready to assume that they will nail it, although I'd say it's probably likely that at least the multiplayer will be awesome.
In regards to Resistance, on the other hand, it's all but guaranteed that it will be at the very least good and polished. And the multiplayer options, from the 8-player online campaign mode to the 60-player online competitive mode, are well above the norm. Looking at the games without consideration for the featuresets and sheer numbers, it feels like KZ2 is the riskier, but it could mean a higher reward. We'll see.
Resistance 2 does seem more superficially barren and "engineered," though. I suspect that its sci-fi settings will look remarkable, however. But Killzone 2 is quite obviously, on a visual level, the more creative and inspired of the two.
-
Resistance, to me, just feels like a "Me Too" amalgamate of different games in the genre ad the universe doesn't really interest me at all.
KZ2, like Gears, has a great universe to explore. Though both games failed to do so in their first game.
I can see that. I actually wrote a little review after finishing the game, and I was quite proud of my summary of the game as an FPS Best Of. Which it was, in some ways. It did everything well, it just didn't do anything remarkable. Which was, honestly, very surprising given the track record of Insomniac. I thought they'd go crazier with the weapons and enemies, but it stayed fairly safe. Clever weapons aren't as much fun as insanely explosive and wacky weapons.
-
Resistance 1 to me was Insomniac thinking "Halo is hot, CoD is hot, Half Life 2 is hot, and we can make cool weapons; lets make an FPS!" And that was all good, and I enjoyed Resistance quite a bit for a console shooter (in the sense that it is just a up linear shooter). The multiplayer in Resistance was actually quite good, and one of the great parts is that it was so fast, which was quite refreshing after playing the painfully slow Halo games, or most other games modeled on Halo (a lot).
Resistance 2 seems to take the ideas present in the first game, focus a little less on copying from others, and trying to do some really cool, unique things with the game. The multiplayer seems like it is going to be amazing with both the 8 player co-op with leveling system and classes, as does the 60 person multiplayer where you break into smaller squads as you complete objectives as the enemy counter squad goes against you. Single player also seems like it is going to have some changes, and they mentioned there are a lot of bosses, so it almost seems more in the vein of how they has their Ratchet titles sectioned off.
Killzone 2 looks like it is going to be sci-fi CoD, but hopefully with improvements on various areas where CoD sucks (like terrible scripting and all that shit). I hope it turns out great, because the setting and all that look great. Biggest problem with the first Killzone was that it was fundamentally broken from a gameplay and control standpoint.
I would say I am more excited for Resistance 2 than Killzone 2, but both are games I am looking forward to quite a bit. And Gears 2, and bunch of other things.
-
Resistance, to me, just feels like a "Me Too" amalgamate of different games in the genre ad the universe doesn't really interest me at all.
KZ2, like Gears, has a great universe to explore. Though both games failed to do so in their first game.
I can see that. I actually wrote a little review after finishing the game, and I was quite proud of my summary of the game as an FPS Best Of. Which it was, in some ways. It did everything well, it just didn't do anything remarkable. Which was, honestly, very surprising given the track record of Insomniac. I thought they'd go crazier with the weapons and enemies, but it stayed fairly safe. Clever weapons aren't as much fun as insanely explosive and wacky weapons.
I can understand why, because its not RC, it has to have some reality to it. But the guns just seemed very un-inspired, even at a subtle level. They were just guns in the typical FPS arsenal mold with little twists on them.
The other thing that I like more about KZ, is that the enemies in Resistance don't have a real identity. So you don't get involved as much as you should when fighting an enemy hell bent on taking over your world.
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff320/altogetherandrews/chimera.jpg)
Well, there. Which looks more interesting, or more "Insomniac?" I'd argue that the former has more personality, but somewhere along the line the design was changed to be more "realistic" or some such. I'm sure you're right, in that they wanted to keep it grounded due to the genre switch (although I think they probably weren't sure where to set the boundaries too), but I think that might have been a mistake. Just go crazy, we like crazy stuff. That's, after all, why we like the Ratchet games. Not sure where this idea comes from, that an FPS format demands a more conservative approach, but I'm hoping they have binned that mentality now.
As for the guns, I think the Hailstorm was a brilliant weapon, and the Bullseye was a clever, if less than explosive one. Being able to brake your rockets with the LAARK was also cool... but not cool enough for an Insomniac game.
-
the voice chat made that trailer weird.
-
This game has amazing tech. For PS3 fanboys, this game shows that, when funds are poured into a game, it can do things the 360 can't. But don't expect greatness. All the buzz is that it plays like a PS2 Medal of Honor game.
-
Dont know if this has been posted yet
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38548.html (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38548.html)
I think it looks incredible. I thought the first Killzone had a great MP component, it was just riddled with glitchers and lag. Will be buying a PS3 for this game