No words can explain this. I'm not sure how you could ever come to conclusion that KZM is inferior to Burning Skies.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Killzone: Mercenary Reviews Thread
- Thread starter DarkLordMalik
- Start date
No words can explain this. I'm not sure how you could ever come to conclusion that KZM is inferior to Burning Skies.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Nah. They shouldn't waste time on SP.
MP is what matters.
I hope there will be more maps as DLC.
Yes, that's the problem and many people look at Metacritic to make their final judgement. At least compare apples to apples for God's sake.
Nowgamer gave Hotline Miami 9/10 for graphics and 8/10 for graphics for this game, and Animal Crossing: New Leaf graphics are as good as KZM
Are you telling me that in any way makes sense?!
Art design my friend, art design. Speaking of art, Killzone looks like just another boring FPS (again, speaking only about art).
I enjoy Hotline Miami, but it's most definitely not for being any sort of graphical powerhouse.
GTA was released for MS-DOS in 1997 and looked like this:
Hotline's got a neat artstyle and I love how it's a parody of so many 8 bit games and older movies, but graphical powerhouse it is not.
But ultimately reviews are completely subjective based on the reviewer, and it's completely possible that he was simply more impressed by Hotline Miami's graphics than Killzone's from an artistic standpoint.
It makes me scratch my head in disbelief, but I get it. The question is, should the "graphics" score be based on pure art style and should "I can't believe they accomplished that on this hardware" come into play as well?
edit - I guess there is no "presentation" score from Nowgamer so nevermind.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
The fact that Killzone seems to run at native res most of the time while keeping a steady 30fps while presenting visuals the way that it does still astounds me.
Artistically, I can see why some would call it "generic", but there are aspects that I really think look great like the enemy designs and overall look of the environments.
Artistically, I can see why some would call it "generic", but there are aspects that I really think look great like the enemy designs and overall look of the environments.
I've never had an issue with the art direction or graphics in a Killzone game. The only thing that has ever bothered me is the actual gameplay. Something tells me I might actually like the handheld version though with a smaller number of players. I've always felt like KZ2 and 3 were too busy.
LOL
I'm not big on FPS' but the fact you have to install a day one patch rendering a user's 4GB memory card useless were they to buy it digitally is not a good start Sony.
Why won't they offer use bigger memory card options, i don't fucking understand this.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
I'm hearing words that this is only 4hrs long.
Is this true?
Is this true?
1. I know.
2. That's where we're disagreeing. I've always thought the Killzone games have had a not so appealing art design. Not as bad as Halo though.
GalacticMouse
Member
I've only seen the one review that said this mention the length of the game. The single player campaign is 9 missions and each one was supposed to be 45-60 minutes long according to the devs.
It's speculation, but what I'd guess happened is that that reviewer rushed through the game in about 4.5-5 hours and rounded down while the hype train rounded up thinking it was a 9-10 hr game. In reality, it's probably somewhere in the middle (i.e. 6-7 hrs) for most people.
Either way, it doesn't seem like it's a lengthy single-player experience by any means, but there's a lot to unlock and the cash you earn in single-player goes towards unlocking weapons/gear/etc for all modes (including multiplayer). The missions are also supposedly somewhat open-ended in that there are multiple ways to approach them, so even though there aren't bots for multiplayer, you can always replay the single-player missions on the train or someplace else you're not connected in order to beef up your arsenal...so there's that.
LunaticHigh
Member
It still doesn't really make any sense. Animal Crossing Art direction is absolutely awful. it looks like a cheap iOS game. Entirely uninspired on virtually every angel when it comes to it's art direction. The only unique and interesting looking things in the game are objects from other games.
Graphically, the game is extremely lackluster and doesn't push the 3DS in any way really. Yet here it scores the same... It's just kinda odd. I'm not arguing any of the reviews, but KZM is a landmark in handheld graphics. It's basically the Crysis of the handheld world.
Personally I think AC's art is charming. When you play as many action games and first person shooters like me, it's, from time to time, a relief to play a game like AC.
OP, you should add PS Nation's review!
http://www.psnation.org/2013/09/04/review-killzone-mercenary-psv/
http://www.psnation.org/2013/09/04/review-killzone-mercenary-psv/
9/10
Killzone actually has pretty excellent art design.
77% on Metacritic with 37 reviews counted
As long as it doesn't go down XD
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Thanks for the info. Kind of disappointing but I'm still picking it up.
I hope there's some extra dlc missions to beef up the campaign.
CorySchmitz
Junior Member
CorySchmitz
Junior Member
SomedayTheFire
Member
good god Polygon. They should at least try to be consistent.
mullet2000
Member
*rolls eyes*
I hate calling out review sites. I rarely ever do it. I think it's dumb and everyone is entited to their opinion. But goddamn Polygon is just so predictable with this stuff.
megaspiderweb
Banned
Who is that dude talking down on Killzones art, like seriously. Look at my DP, i drew it so yes i can talk about art more than you ever will and if you had half a brain, it should not be difficult for you to tell which art took much effort to bring to life.
Also wassup with these inconsistent reviews, its actually getting under my skin
Also wassup with these inconsistent reviews, its actually getting under my skin
I know 'opinions' and all that, but this is a moronic statement.
Regarding the reviews - why care? It's well known that the state of video-game 'journalism' is very poor, and in the end they are subjective, often poorly presented and justified, opinions of some person.
and as for polygon - what more can be said - any company that employs arthur gies is not worth a penny
Official PlayStation Magazine UK:
Killzone Mercenary - 70
Resistance Burning Skies - 80
Polygon:
Killzone Mercenary - 6
Resistance Burning Skies - 6.5
EGM:
Killzone Mercenary - 6.5
Resistance Burning Skies - 6.5
Video Gamer:
Killzone Mercenary - 6
Resistance Burning Skies - 6
I don't get it.
Killzone Mercenary - 70
Resistance Burning Skies - 80
Polygon:
Killzone Mercenary - 6
Resistance Burning Skies - 6.5
EGM:
Killzone Mercenary - 6.5
Resistance Burning Skies - 6.5
Video Gamer:
Killzone Mercenary - 6
Resistance Burning Skies - 6
I don't get it.
This frustrates me. In what PLANET is Resistance BS better than KZ:M?! I'm trying to figure out what standards this game was judged on. It's insane.
Axispowers
Member
Seriously!? Wth I played the demo Immediately uninstalled it after a few minutes. I actually liked the Killzone beta. The fact you can compare the two is crazy.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
As someone who owns and got some legitimate enjoyment out of Burning Skies. This is insane. Literally insane.
Both betas of Mercinaries were more enjoyable than that entire game.
Resistance was terrible. It controlled well but that's it. Everything about Killzone seems quality.
Same reviewer?
Game journalism.
On the EGM reviews, KZM is the best FPS on the Vita yet scores the same as Resistence. So is it the best of not? Quite contradictory no or the reviewer has no context of scores given to games in the same genre.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
Video game reviewers are pure nonsense, like.
It's almost as if we already know this, but are always shocked when it happens.
It's almost as if we already know this, but are always shocked when it happens.
petethepanda
Member
6-7 /10 average is what I was expecting. The game looks amazing and the beta was alright, but nothing about the campaign shown seemed like anything but "it's another shooter" and even the multiplayer beta didn't grab me the way other multi betas/demos have. Having good controls and graphics for a Vita shooter isn't enough in itself.
Which other FPS SP games offers you to play however you want throughout the SP ( sniper, stealth, full out action) and allows you to pick the class you want?
Answer, not many ( some do offer options)
Gameplay wise, it's more diverse and offers more variety than you typical shooter.
TrojanBlade
Member
Ok, why don't all those AAA shooters review lower for their 'by the numbers' SP?
FPS shooters are one of the genres with the lowest innovation rate in SP, somehow it is only important for KZ: Mercenary, which campaign offers more than the typical corridor.
The game offers multiple path and no corridors... I can't understand... It's a portable shooter and it is more various than a normal Call of Duty in the single player!!!
Not shocked by any of this, was even expecting the reviews to be this wide open. Vita games will never be graded on being Vita games, always compared to PS3/Xbox games in terms of playability, value and graphics. But that's why you need to rely a little more of the GAF community. You guys sold me on Burning Skies and COD: Declassified and I loved them both. Played the KZ beta and thought it was a million times better than both BS and COD combined. Definitely picking this game up next Tuesday for sure.
I can't speak for any other outlet, but those were two reviews by two different reviewers. They didn't come at the games with the same experiences, same personal likes and dislikes, same eye for judging a game's elements, same hopes for what the game might do right.
A score, if it is anything, is one person's judgement of a game given their experience with that game, and relative to that game. I gave the original Persona 3 a 9.5 (if I remember correctly), and I gave The Last of Us a 9.5. That doesn't mean they're on the exact same level of quality, because that's an utterly impossible comparison to make. That means, when looking at each game as an individual experience, if 0 is the worst judgement I can pass, 5.0 is average, and 10 is excellent, each accomplished what they set out to accomplish enough, and engrossed me into their worlds enough, that I thought the experience was worth that score.
I think it's impossible to have any scoring system where you can directly compare the scores for two different things, because there's so many variables in what each game is about and what it's trying to do.
saj316 said:
Two different reviewers. Reviewers aren't robots who all come at reviewing a game from the exact same perspective.
Unless I'm mistaken don't all the reviews on the bigger publications go through an Editor first. Shouldn't they be aware of the disparity of the scores?
Right, two different reviewers. Both are however representatives of EGM so EGM's score of this game is exactly the same as Resistance despite the obvious (or maybe not) improvements over it. Please explain that. The reviewer is also benchmarking this game against its console big brother. In what world is this appropriate? It would be more appropriate to compare this to same genre titles on smartphones or other handhelds. This is my biggest problem with reviewers. Where did this right of passage come from? From Sony marketing a console-like experience on the go? Really? Need better justification than that.