• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Does Killzone deserve the hype it's getting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sage00

Once And Future Member
Ok, the graphics are good, I think we've established that.

But if any other game was announced by a developer who's last efforts (excluding Killzone Liberation, which is pretty good) were agreed universally to have been terrible, would people start hyping it? I just don't see the basis of this.

I'm not saying it's not going to be good (as they've proven they can, on an off chance, make a good game), I'm just saying it's the sort of game people should be cautious about, given the developers track record. Yet, people seem to be head over heels over it, despite no one having played it, no one having given impressions, etc.

Explain yourself, gaf.
 
Sage00 said:
Ok, the graphics are good, I think we've established that.

But if any other game was announced by a developer who's last efforts (excluding Killzone Liberation, which is pretty good) were agreed universally to have been terrible, would people start hyping it? I just don't see the basis of this.

I'm not saying it's not going to be good (as they've proven they can, on an off chance, make a good game), I'm just saying it's the sort of game people should be cautious about, given the developers track record. Yet, people seem to be head over heels over it, despite no one having played it, no one having given impressions, etc.

Explain yourself, gaf.
Click to expand...


Why not. Seems about the same as Motorstorm, Lair, etc. Just the normal cycle here. I hope it's a fun game when it comes out, but it's not even on my radar yet.
 
$40 million budget, pressure from hype, just too much is at stake this time around. There is no way that Sony will let GG pump out anything less than spectacular at this point, same deal with the E3 reveal.
 
No matter how the game itself ultimately turns out, the incredible visuals achieve what some might consider to be a new standard for all future console shooters to strive for. And, on that level, I think it absolutely deserves all of the hype.
 
nuclear_explosion.jpg
 
Your entire topic is based on the assumption that their studio has remained the same since the beginning.

Quite a few more people have been added to the team since beginning work on Killzone 2. And by quite a few, I mean a shit load.
 
Play Killzone Liberation, then ask yourself that question again.

imho, yes.
 
a.) Killzone 1 was not universally agreed to be 'terrible' - only really, really mediocre. Which is not of course a ringing endorsement!

b.) One of the primary reasons Killzone 1 was held back so was specifically due to technical reasons - atrocious framerate, frequent loading and the uneven pacing due to it. The actual gameplay mechanics were solid and the world was quite compelling.

c.) Killzone 2 probably doesn't deserve the level of HYPE it was getting, but when we first saw the CG video way back Sony set up certain expectations. Everyone expected them to fail colossally to even remotely live up to it. While obviously they didn't recreate the CG (as that would have been impossible), they came so, so much closer than any reasonable individual expected.

d.) And so following that point, yes visuals are a huge part of gaming experiences and knowing you're guaranteed the single greatest visual experience of next-gen (based on what we've seen so far, and notwithstanding future games which look even better) is quite a reason to be hyped.
 
Does your post deserve a new thread?

Ok, it could've gone in the main thread, I think we've established that.

I'm not saying your posts suck (as you've proven you can, on an off chance, make a good post), I'm just saying this is the sort of post people should be cautious about, because it's been beaten to death in the main thread.

Explain yourself, sparky.
 
The hype is solely based on the graphics. The first Killzone was far from a good FPS, and even that game's hype had nothing to do with the actual product. Who knows if the game will be good - no one has played it, and it's early in development.
 
hukasmokincaterpillar said:
Does your post deserve a new thread?

Ok, it could've gone in the main thread, I think we've established that.

I'm not saying your posts suck (as you've proven you can, on an off chance, make a good post), I'm just saying this is the sort of post people should be cautious about, because it's been beaten to death in the main thread.

Explain yourself, sparky.
Click to expand...
:lol

Ok, that one was pretty good. :lol
 
Hype is almost entirely based on graphics. So yeah, it deserves it. We can't judge it's quality until a final version is out, so why try?
 
I still don't get the hype to be honest. Even the graphics are not blowing me away like some. I guess Gears of War and even Ghost Recon spoiled me as I now expect games to look like that.
 
Killzone 1 was fun. It played well enough, I felt the controls were actually well done (compared to other PS2 shooters, i.e. Rainbow Six 3 which controlled like shit) and the combat was fun. It was the technical execution of the whole package that felt like it needed another 6 months of polish.

Killzone Liberation is damn near perfect in what it does, although it also has a sometimes sluggish framerate. Good thing its a top-down isometric game, thus framerate is not nearly as big an issue as it is in a FPS.

From what I've seen of the combat in KZ2's trailers, it seems like the combat was a good continuation of what we saw in KZ1. It seemed very visceral to me, and the bloodspurts kicked ass. The graphics certainly didn't hurt, either. I am very hyped and so are the many Killzone fans (the 1st game sold pretty well, didn't it?).

I think there might be two types of hype: one from genuine Killzone fans like me, and hype from goddamn Sonybots who are only trumpeting the game for their PS3-related causes.
 
The "hype" is pretty subdued, IMO. Theres a big unveiling thread and then a few here and there like with the BBC article. Fans of the game & series post in said threads and are happy. So whats the problem?
 
Sage00 said:
Explain yourself, gaf.
Click to expand...


Right back at you. There is already an official thread and even a seperate thread on this very page for the BBC's 'new' E3 Killzone2 footage.

Can you honestly say you've started this thread with an open mind on the issue, because, it really doesn't read that way.
 
All I know is that I was one of the like...3 people in this forum (10 combined with IGN :p ) that always liked the first game (online and offline); yet..99% of the users hated it like no tomorrow...

Now, because the games visuals are really great; everyone is hyping the game around here...oh well...Oh!, and now "Everyone always loved Killzone".. :lol

Bildi said:
Bioshock starts with a 'B'.
Click to expand...
:lol :lol :lol
Maybe he's talking about Half-Life...or Haze... :D
 
Killzone liberation was the latest project and was incredibly solid, on a technical and gameplay level. Killzone 1 felt really polished, but was too demanding on the ps2; a lack of technical prowess that should be a thing of the past on ps3. Besides, the numbered of people on the team has doubled, and with sony's limitless budget i can see why people are ginuinely impressed with KZ2.
 
fernoca said:
Oh!, and now "Everyone always loved Killzone".. :lol
Click to expand...

Not one person has ever said this. They only correct the view that everyone thought the first was a terrible game - it received mediocre scores, and it was a mediocre game. This is not equal to 'terrible.'
 
Busty said:
Right back at you. There is already an official thread and even a seperate thread on this very page for the BBC's 'new' E3 Killzone2 footage.

Can you honestly say you've started this thread with an open mind on the issue, because, it really doesn't read that way.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't claim to, it was a rhetorical question. If there was a convincing reason posted in this thread for me to believe in the hype I would change my mind, but I'm not seeing it.
 
RumpledForeskin said:
I still don't get the hype to be honest. Even the graphics are not blowing me away like some. I guess Gears of War and even Ghost Recon spoiled me as I now expect games to look like that.
Click to expand...

what....? you want the game to look worse than it does...? Gears looks great, but Graw...? haha
 
Amir0x said:
Not one person has ever said this. They only correct the view that everyone thought the first was a terrible game - it received mediocre scores, and it was a mediocre game. This is not equal to 'terrible.'
Click to expand...
Relative to the hype it received I'd say things turned out pretty terrible..
 
Amir0x said:
Not one person has ever said this. They only correct the view that everyone thought the first was a terrible game - it received mediocre scores, and it was a mediocre game. This is not equal to 'terrible.'
Click to expand...
Potato..Potatoe... :p
 
Sage00 said:
Relative to the hype it received I'd say things turned out pretty terrible..
Click to expand...

No, there's no "relative to the hype" quality marker. That's not how you fucking judge games. Is it good, or is it bad... or is it somewhere in between? Just 'cause some random magazine decided to compare it to HALO does not therefore mean that because it was not as good as HALO, and did not sell like HALO, that it is 'terrible.'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Nintendo games finally getting the VR treatment they deserve.
Retro VR Hype 
1
88
Zacfoldor replied
Killzone Extraction (shadow dropped)
2
90
1K
havoc00 replied
So tired of seeing Kirby and Yoshi getting disrespected by "gamers"
Drama Hype  2
93
1K
Joe Cool replied
Latest Mass Effect 5 theory had me hyped
Hype 
7
394
UniformDeliverance replied
Hermen Hulst appreciation thread.
Hype  2 3
111
829
Sleepwalker replied
Top Bottom