Killzone 3 will outscore Halo: Reach. New FPS king!!

Not on Gamespot. That would require AAAA. No, Killzone 3 will beat Reach's disappointing 91 Metascore (incidentally the same score Killzone 2 got).

Agree, disagree? Voice your opinion via the poll above :D

Edit: nuts. I forgot to put "Rico sucks!" in the poll :lol:

COD says hi.

COD says hi.

tbolt76

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

lol @ not grey enough.

In terms of score? Maybe. But I like to form my own opinion instead of peeing my pants over Metacritic scores.

In terms of score? Maybe. But I like to form my own opinion instead of peeing my pants over Metacritic scores.

DraugenCP

I'm sure you do. But sadly, unless your opinion is listed on Metacritic it means diddly squat here. Also, since maybe isn't on the poll I'll use my vote to vote "You bet!" for you :oops:

im sure killzone 3D will be superb. i just don't see it being as good a reach.

Nope Killzone will always play second fiddle to Halo in every way, I dont know why thats so hard for you cow's to swallow.Sp4rtan_3

What about graphics? :shock:

But sadly, unless your opinion is listed on Metacritic it means diddly squat here.

EliteKitteh

Eh, they'll both be overshadowed by the score of 98.7 for the Halo CE remake.. just saying. :P

[QUOTE="Sp4rtan_3"]Nope Killzone will always play second fiddle to Halo in every way, I dont know why thats so hard for you cow's to swallow.EliteKitteh

What about graphics? :shock:

So when did we decide meta critic was the new standard around here? which game did gamespot flop to bring this change about?

I would say KZ is more comparable to GoW than Halo anyway being a more corridor experience.

[QUOTE="EliteKitteh"]

But sadly, unless your opinion is listed on Metacritic it means diddly squat here.

Ninja-Hippo

Sit down :roll: you know how this works by now.

There's no way it gets AAAAE here. Does'nt take that much for it to beat Halo for me personally though.

It looks pretty incredible so far. I hope it is better. Why wouldnt I? Im not some kind of fanboy or something.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="EliteKitteh"]

But sadly, unless your opinion is listed on Metacritic it means diddly squat here.

EliteKitteh

Sit down :roll: you know how this works by now.

No, Halo will always be the best FPS along with Half Life.Xbox and PC have their revolutionary FPS's and the PS3 doesn't, no matter how many Killzone's they do.

it might beat reach ,but not halo 3 which was a better game...

No, Halo will always be the best FPS along with Half Life.Xbox and PC have their revolutionary FPS's and the PS3 doesn't, no matter how many Killzone's they do.

Hatiko

You're annoying. You think I really care if it gets a point higher on MC? I'm just playing the system wars game here. Here we have Killzone and Halo. Two exclusive FPS franchises that have clashed many times in the past. This time, there's a very good chance that Killzone, the original "Halo killer", garners higher critical acclaim than Bungie's latest. That would be significant in SW.

Get it? :| Right, moving on...

EliteKitteh

:)

Lol no. Killzone will never be the Halo killer, its as simple as that.

Stringerboy

Killzone 2 killed ODST....

Lol no. Killzone will never be the Halo killer, its as simple as that.

Stringerboy

To be fair to Halo Reach the metascore is dragged down by a number of ridiculous reviews which shouldn't even count towards the metascore; including that laughable 5/10 'not worth $60' one which the reviewer himself later said was way too harsh just two weeks after posting it.Ninja-Hippo

Red Orchestra 2 will be the best fps game in 2011. Killzone 3 ofc will get a better score and will sell more, why? Because reviewers are just as brain dead as certain fanboys. They will review the game on nothing more then hype and the omg that's COOL! factor... They act like as if they never played a first person shooter before. Good graphics your guaranteed at-least a 9.0 this gen.

[QUOTE="tbolt76"]

COD says hi.

EliteKitteh

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]To be fair to Halo Reach the metascore is dragged down by a number of ridiculous reviews which shouldn't even count towards the metascore; including that laughable 5/10 'not worth $60' one which the reviewer himself later said was way too harsh just two weeks after posting it.ducati101

As much as I enjoyed Killzone 3 when I was playing it, innovative is one thing you can't call it. Well...you can, I guess; you can call a McDonalds cheeseburger a gourmet meal, but it's still a McDonalds cheeseburger.

Oh, and for the record...the same thing basically applies to Halo.

[QUOTE="ducati101"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]To be fair to Halo Reach the metascore is dragged down by a number of ridiculous reviews which shouldn't even count towards the metascore; including that laughable 5/10 'not worth $60' one which the reviewer himself later said was way too harsh just two weeks after posting it.Ninja-Hippo

I mean magazines/sites like, MS Xbox World, Planet Xbox 360, Totally360, Official Xbox Magazine UK giving the game 10/10 (100/100). Or other so called impartial magazines and sites like, TeamXbox, Official Xbox Magazine US, XboxAddict, giving the game 9.5/10 (95/100). More than offset that 5/10.

The game is better than a 5/10 for sure, but also it's nowhere near a 10/10 game either. IMO of course.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="ducati101"] As oppose to many so called "official" XBOX magazines giving the game 10/10?ducati101

There is a difference between better reviews and better scores. Games can have much more positive reviews than a similar game, but have the same, or even lower, score.

It's tough to compare scores when the reviewers are different, and it's tough to it then because people naturally prefer one style of game over another. This is really true when talking about Halo and KZ, very different styles of game.

I honestly don't get the comparisons. If anything, compare Halo to Resistance, as they are far more similar. If you like one, you will likely enjoy the other. In that respect, it's easier to compare because the person prefers that style, they can more objectively (as much as possible) choose one over the other.

[QUOTE="tbolt76"]

COD says hi.

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

If they change the title to "Killzone 3: The Rico Murder Simulator" and the game actually lives up to that title? AAAAE on lockdown

I mean magazines/sites like, MS Xbox World, Planet Xbox 360, Totally360, Official Xbox Magazine UK giving the game 10/10 (100/100). Or other so called impartial magazines and sites like, TeamXbox, Official Xbox Magazine US, XboxAddict, giving the game 9.5/10 (95/100). More than offset that 5/10.

The game is better than a 5/10 for sure, but also it's nowhere near a 10/10 game either. IMO of course.

ducati101

10 is not massively different from 9.

[QUOTE="EliteKitteh"]

[QUOTE="tbolt76"]

COD says hi.

tbolt76

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

COD is terrible.

Campaign is monotonous action, mutliplayer is filled with imbalanced perks, and the whole game is filled with ridiculous regenerating health. I love that Treyarch are trying to be creative with Wager Matches and Zombie Modes, but the core gameplay is just bad. Generally, whoever sees the other person first wins. That's just boring compared to DMR matches in Reach and midair rocket battles in TF2.

Lol no. Killzone will never be the Halo killer, its as simple as that.

Stringerboy

[QUOTE="EliteKitteh"]

[QUOTE="tbolt76"]

COD says hi.

tastetheacidmil

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

[QUOTE="tbolt76"][QUOTE="EliteKitteh"]

This is system wars. Multiplats can't be king of anything :P

Plus Black Ops only has 88 Meta :(

Head_of_games

COD is terrible.

Campaign is monotonous action, mutliplayer is filled with imbalanced perks, and the whole game is filled with ridiculous regenerating health. I love that Treyarch are trying to be creative with Wager Matches and Zombie Modes, but the core gameplay is just bad. Generally, whoever sees the other person first wins. That's just boring compared to DMR matches in Reach and midair rocket battles in TF2.

At first this is defnitely the case. When you play for a while, not so much. Obviously it cant be the case when alot of people get K/Ds well above 1.

[QUOTE="Head_of_games"]

[QUOTE="tbolt76"] yeah, it scored only an 88, yet for every person on these boards that hate/dislike/pan COD, there are 10,000 people putting hours upon hours in a game they feel is fun and complete. Multiplats can't be the king of anything? W/E. KZ3 will be forgotten in 2 months just like KZ2 was. People will make countless posts on these boards, but there will be barely 10K people online at any one time. If you can't keep people playing your game, you can't be the king of anything.h575309

COD is terrible.

Campaign is monotonous action, mutliplayer is filled with imbalanced perks, and the whole game is filled with ridiculous regenerating health. I love that Treyarch are trying to be creative with Wager Matches and Zombie Modes, but the core gameplay is just bad. Generally, whoever sees the other person first wins. That's just boring compared to DMR matches in Reach and midair rocket battles in TF2.

At first this is defnitely the case. When you play for a while, not so much. Obviously it cant be the case when alot of people get K/Ds well above 1.

[QUOTE="ducati101"]

I mean magazines/sites like, MS Xbox World, Planet Xbox 360, Totally360, Official Xbox Magazine UK giving the game 10/10 (100/100). Or other so called impartial magazines and sites like, TeamXbox, Official Xbox Magazine US, XboxAddict, giving the game 9.5/10 (95/100). More than offset that 5/10.

The game is better than a 5/10 for sure, but also it's nowhere near a 10/10 game either. IMO of course.

Ninja-Hippo

10 is not massively different from 9.