-
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.
Playstation Blog - Killzone Shadow Fall Insurgent Pack Out Today
- Thread starter Vanillalite
- Start date
This was a selling point for me.
NullPointer
Member
Tell me about it. Its still planned for what, June?
And botzone is great, but I wish I could easily save the settings I use when playing it. I remove all grenades and one-shot kill weapons since the AI is just a bit too effective with them.
To start understanding why KZ:SF failed is to recognize that the type of gamer that loves to play shooters is really someone who spends very little time playing anything else.
Between COD and BF, they have captured the attention of these gamers entirely.
When Shadow fall launched a lot of general gaming enthusiasts like the ones on this site played it and even loved several aspects of it. But the general gamer will never be the one to just stick to the same shooter game for months and years, and inevitably move on.
Now what explains the captive audience of COD and BF4 especially with the kind of gamers that every MP shooter needs desperately to be successful?
Basically you can think of it similar to how social networks like Facebook work. These systems need a certain level of 'critical mass' to be successful. Once it attains this number, the mass itself attracts even more people to it, the growth follows an exponential curve.
Once the mass accumlates, it also gains a factor of stability, thus for example COD gets away with recycling the same outdated game mechanics and sub-par graphics release after release. Or BF4 is a hugely successful game inspite of the fact that at release time it was broken as shit.
Fundamentally the dedicated shooter fanatic does not find it worthwhile to unlearn his muscle memory and develop the twitch reflexes in a new game from scratch so that he can start being dominant again.
In essence shooter fanatics don't play online multiplayer to actually enjoy playing the game, it is all about enjoying the thrill and exhileration of beating other humans in a battle of wit and skill.
In this scenario the quality of the game becomes secondary, what matters is that they have devoted the number of hours to develop their twitch skills to be good at that game and they are simply not interested to start from scratch again.
There are cases when this stranglehold can be broken, by spending billions in marketing and hype by mega corporations (Titanfall) or by products from an almost universally revered studio in the genre (Bungie)
However the chances of them actually being able to dethrone the existing leaders are slim.
KZ: SF did not have the budget nor the pedigree to provide an actual challenge.
It didn't help that they actually launched with the lack of some obvious features like voice and clan support, although to be honest it mostly would not have mattered.
Which is all a little depressing since KZ:SF is a bloody awesome multiplayer shooter.
But then I have given the time and effort to become good at it...
Between COD and BF, they have captured the attention of these gamers entirely.
When Shadow fall launched a lot of general gaming enthusiasts like the ones on this site played it and even loved several aspects of it. But the general gamer will never be the one to just stick to the same shooter game for months and years, and inevitably move on.
Now what explains the captive audience of COD and BF4 especially with the kind of gamers that every MP shooter needs desperately to be successful?
Basically you can think of it similar to how social networks like Facebook work. These systems need a certain level of 'critical mass' to be successful. Once it attains this number, the mass itself attracts even more people to it, the growth follows an exponential curve.
Once the mass accumlates, it also gains a factor of stability, thus for example COD gets away with recycling the same outdated game mechanics and sub-par graphics release after release. Or BF4 is a hugely successful game inspite of the fact that at release time it was broken as shit.
Fundamentally the dedicated shooter fanatic does not find it worthwhile to unlearn his muscle memory and develop the twitch reflexes in a new game from scratch so that he can start being dominant again.
In essence shooter fanatics don't play online multiplayer to actually enjoy playing the game, it is all about enjoying the thrill and exhileration of beating other humans in a battle of wit and skill.
In this scenario the quality of the game becomes secondary, what matters is that they have devoted the number of hours to develop their twitch skills to be good at that game and they are simply not interested to start from scratch again.
There are cases when this stranglehold can be broken, by spending billions in marketing and hype by mega corporations (Titanfall) or by products from an almost universally revered studio in the genre (Bungie)
However the chances of them actually being able to dethrone the existing leaders are slim.
KZ: SF did not have the budget nor the pedigree to provide an actual challenge.
It didn't help that they actually launched with the lack of some obvious features like voice and clan support, although to be honest it mostly would not have mattered.
Which is all a little depressing since KZ:SF is a bloody awesome multiplayer shooter.
But then I have given the time and effort to become good at it...
Syph Medwes
Member
Wait, what? I think that's totally fair. Of course everything free would be preferred, but hey, welcome to the real world.
At least this way everyone gets the same maps to play on.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I disagree. Ghosts can be a pain in the ass with the constant camping, but it's waaaay more fun to play, and has waaaay more modes to choose from. The maps are also varied and interesting, which is something you simply won't find in Killzone. While it's paid DLC I'd rather play on a map like Fog then the boring and sterile "hanger" arena.
There are times in Killzone when I don't even get what's going on, or unsure of how the hell I died in the mess of shitty muffled sound effects. At the end of the day it's all about having a fun time, and I think the online player numbers reflect pretty well on which games get it right.
Having said that I'm still holding onto my copy of SF in case by we mistakenly get a free map pack that has interesting environments to shoot in.
That whole thing can be summed up in two words: no adaptability. You are probably spot on too. Most people want a comfort zone and can't be bothered to ever learn anything new or adapt to new conditions.
bananafactory
Banned
Same, I enjoyed KZSF and appreciate they changed things up....but I need my M82. I just do.
I'm sorry, this explanation is reductive hogwash. What's more likely is that people who regularly play shooters have particular expectations for what they enjoy. This is a long-standing niche. Well-developed preferences and expectations aren't a shortcoming. If you truly think someone is missing out, that's different from the implied insults rooted in what you wrote.
CyclopsRock
Member
I think that paints people as lazy but I don;'t really think that's fair - you need a reason to change, not a reason not to. Clearly KZ didn't provide a good enough reason for people to change their mind about what game they preferred. The fault for that doesn't lie at the feet of "lazy consumers".
BattleMonkey
Member
People obsessed with the numbers like somehow stops you from playing the game. You click play and you get in matches almost instantly, theres tons of games going on at all times, you don't need hundreds of thousands of players to have an active community or able to play a game.
People still play Battlefront 2 daily, yet you are lucky to see even 200 people on at once. But it's playable and active.
KZ is only 24 players at most, your not playing with all those other tens of thousands in other games either.
People still play Battlefront 2 daily, yet you are lucky to see even 200 people on at once. But it's playable and active.
KZ is only 24 players at most, your not playing with all those other tens of thousands in other games either.
April Fools right?
Actually I've had problems with matchmaking. And that was months ago. Do I even need to mention the lag? Did that get fixed?
The only mode that you might "easily" be able to get into is Team Deathmatch. Every other mode is pretty much dead.
Northern Lights
Banned
Probably a lot since it came out early everybody thought the content would come out earlier but look at how everything is getting released. They should just give up and focus on the sequel and make it just like Killzone 2. Felt like this game was rushed needed an extra 9 months. GG isn't known for putting out a lot of post game content and they are working on another big IP this game isn't getting focused on much.
What you just describes sounds just like the broken piece of shit I returned to Amazon a few months ago. I'd rather stick with KZ. I can always find a game, and GG are great about updates and communicating with their audience. Oh, and the game works in all modes. If there's a problem, you can contact personnel directly via Twitter and they will actually check and resolve server issues. Fuck EA and Dice.
Also, how do people get off criticizing GG for only including a portion of the DLC behind a paywall? If DICE did the same thing, and released maps free, but gave you the choice of purchasing the extra weapons and vehicles that usually come with, people would love them for it. I guess you'd rather pay $50 on top of the $60 you already shelled out for something that's finally in beta phase.
"It's only broken if you try to play the one mode that defines the series."
Fixed
On topic: Only had time for a few minutes of play, which means I didn't get to try out the new class. But, the M82 fits like a damn glove. Love that thing!
Not at all. I have bought the yearly CoD and played them all quite a bit except MW2 which was bad. That said, Killzone feels more strategic to me and a lot less lone wolf. Plus the class system, no auto aim, no bullshit killcam and seemingly much less aggressive hit prediction make me feel that KZ is a lot more fair. The announcers in MP are generic as fuck and I wish there was a proper CTF mode, but I'd rather play KZ than Ghosts any day. CoD is still fun though, I'm not shitting on it by any means.
AgentOtaku
Member
This please
I played a quick match with it and I like it. I would've posted screens but I had to run out the door after my match. Disappointed that the reload animation is exactly the same as the Rumbler though instead of that clip flip like in previous killzones.
Beeblebrox
Member
Am I the only one still having problems with installing that first DLC with 2 free multiplayer maps? I tried everything - downloaded it from US and UK store, tried downloading it from the game itself (always got some stupid error and couldn't download it from there for some reason), downloaded it from my library, but it just downloads and stands there in my Notifications, saying "Waiting to install".
NullPointer
Member
True, but all of this non-community-splitting DLC makes sense if the multiplayer will become freely available to all PS+ subscribers at some point. Maybe that's the end-game here.
That's really mean to think of it that way, this developer is giving you free maps. They need to make money some how and it's only 10 dollars which is fair. Other games do similar things such as battlefield 4 with guns. You want to use a certain few guns you have to buy them. Same with Call of duty ghost now, a map pack now gives you guns.
No, that's the next expansion.
Don't know that I'd say lazy... If you look at the games popular to the masses they cater to a lesser challenge rather than greater. Titanfall? Auto lock gun with AI fodder. COD Ghosts? Sights that highlight enemies and tons of killstreaks that auto kill. BF4? A lot of guided fire and forget weapons plus some fire in that general direction. Plus all three have aim assist. KZ has no aim assist, no auto locking weapons except to negate bots, and the bots are not that great. So my thought is that game is not easy enough (accessible) and people are not willing to adapt and learn a new skillset. Pretty much what the guy I quoted said.
Edit: I would also add that a few people I know won't touch BF because it looks too complicated or only play TDM on COD because they get confused by the objectives. That ladies and gentleman are the masses. From my experience anyway.
This has been obvious for much of last gen. Xbox has that online shooter crowd on
lock-down. The only reason I game mostly on PC and PS consoles is usually because
of the bevy of compelling single players games across numerous genres.
Raonak
Banned
Free maps > free classes- if I had to choose one.
paid classes don't fracture the userbase while paid maps do. you can still play with players who have paid classes while you can't join into paid maps games.
seems like a good enough update.
I actually wonder if PS+ being required has anything to do with it.
paid classes don't fracture the userbase while paid maps do. you can still play with players who have paid classes while you can't join into paid maps games.
seems like a good enough update.
I actually wonder if PS+ being required has anything to do with it.
Melchiah
Member
Ah, depending on its quality, I might jump in the multiplayer then.
sacrificengineer
Member
I'm on my phone at work. Can't stream.
Figured as much about the reload animation. It was the same way in Mercenary.
TheUnsunghero26
Member
The most popular game on both the PS3 and 360 is COD. One of the most popular single player games of that gen, Skyrim, sold more on 360 (though Western RPGs tend to lean towards Xbox, as JRPGs lean towards PS).
No mass appeal to KZ franchise. Sony killed off their best shooter (SOCOM) so there is nothing to that caters to hardcore FPS fans except 3rd party games like BF and COD. MS has Halo and gears. Solid MP shooters. Sony does not.
If they nurtured SOCOM last gen, on PS4 it would of been massive. Sadly Zipper/Sony lost their hold on the game.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
Where is the promised coop? Mp is dead.
MMaRsu
Banned
I am sad to say I have to agree with this. I love this game's multiplayer and I play it a lot actually! I do want to support Guerilla but the game is basically dying, everytime I log on there's less players
. The people who continue to play the game should be rewarded in a sense, and locking this content behind a paywall is not the best way to do it in my opinion. Not saying Guerilla shouldn't keep bringing out more options for customization and earn money from that.
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
Lo, no, not everyone. We know you hate KZ:SF but there's no need for hyperbole.
Meus Renaissance
Member
Last time I checked, there were on average about 800 people playing. How bad is it now?
Bill Squabber
Member
They should've just remade KZ2's MP.
Mass Effect
Member
Hmm, I'd just be worried that within the next month or so this game could be dead. Don't want to spend $60 on a dead game.
love the avatar by the way lol
--
Also out of curiosity, what's the player population on CoD: Ghosts (for PS4 obviously)?
On a weeknight about 50-60k roughly.
I love the KZ:SF multiplayer. But yes it is dying I hope it goes F2P somewhere down the line like KZ3 so maybe it will stay alive enough so I can jump in now and then. I was looking forward clan matches like in KZ2 but right now I can't see me putting that much effort into this.
I hope it goes F2P somewhere down the line like KZ3 so maybe it will stay alive enough so I can jump in now and then. I was looking forward clan matches like in KZ2 but right now I can't see me putting that much effort into this.Same or better to be honest, plenty to keep the game alive. It doesn't need many due to the 24 player max head count.
7v7 classic warzone is the highlight anyway, only need 14 for that so as long as there's 13 others on there you're golden. ;-)