Exactly. Killzone 2 has a much steeper learning curve, which may turn off a few who are inexperienced, but it sure keeps the skilled players playing for a long time.kz2 is harder to get used to, thats hwy people dotn play it. U need to have a little bit of skill to play it.
Whereas COD, u just jump in and play. With all these extra perks, etc. Making it too easy for some good players.Ribnarak
Killzone 2.. More hardcore and far superior compared to MW2
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Exactly. Killzone 2 has a much steeper learning curve, which may turn off a few who are inexperienced, but it sure keeps the skilled players playing for a long time. weird controls does not equate to a steeper learning curve. If that were the case, one could argue Alone in the Dark had a "steep learning curve" since the controls were terrible. Im not saying the controls were that bad, but it was some significant input lag, and sluggishness that people mistake for weight. If it were a legitimate, intended learning curve, then why would they need to be patched?[QUOTE="Ribnarak"]
kz2 is harder to get used to, thats hwy people dotn play it. U need to have a little bit of skill to play it.
Whereas COD, u just jump in and play. With all these extra perks, etc. Making it too easy for some good players.Rikusaki
I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Fizzman
You never played Counter Strike or Source did you? I would say consoles have a LOT of catching up to do with mics...
The controls in Killzone 2 can take some time to get used to, and most gamers will most likely find themselves turning the sensitivity all the way up in order to get the control they're used to in other games. Guerrilla Games has heard many complaints, and their answer is simple: the controls are just fine as they are. Killzone 2 is a heavy-weighted, slower, more tactical first person experience that focuses on immersion. It's not a twitchy, split-second gun-wielding experience like some shooters are (CoD).I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Fizzman
Exactly. Killzone 2 has a much steeper learning curve, which may turn off a few who are inexperienced, but it sure keeps the skilled players playing for a long time. weird controls does not equate to a steeper learning curve. If that were the case, one could argue Alone in the Dark had a "steep learning curve" since the controls were terrible. Im not saying the controls were that bad, but it was some significant input lag, and sluggishness that people mistake for weight. If it were a legitimate, intended learning curve, then why would they need to be patched? It's not just the controls. It's the overall design of the gameplay mechanics. I will just ask you to read my response to the quote above this post.[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]
[QUOTE="Ribnarak"]
kz2 is harder to get used to, thats hwy people dotn play it. U need to have a little bit of skill to play it.
Whereas COD, u just jump in and play. With all these extra perks, etc. Making it too easy for some good players.navyguy21
[QUOTE="Fizzman"]
I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Erik729
You never played Counter Strike or Source did you? I would say consoles have a LOT of catching up to do with mics...
I did play CS Source, but obviously the players who actually had a clue used mics, but for the most part i didnt notice too much mic usage in source when i did play it. With just soo many more players though its only natural for less mic usage.
[QUOTE="Fizzman"]The controls in Killzone 2 can take some time to get used to, and most gamers will most likely find themselves turning the sensitivity all the way up in order to get the control they're used to in other games. Guerrilla Games has heard many complaints, and their answer is simple: the controls are just fine as they are. Killzone 2 is a heavy-weighted, slower, more tactical first person experience that focuses on immersion. It's not a twitchy, split-second gun-wielding experience like some shooters are (CoD).I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Rikusaki
What are you talking about? GG patched the game 3 times to fix the controls. They didnt leave them as is, and said ohh thats what we wanted the whole time adapt. Single players controls are still garbage, but precise aiming isnt really a requirement in the SP.
The controls in Killzone 2 can take some time to get used to, and most gamers will most likely find themselves turning the sensitivity all the way up in order to get the control they're used to in other games. Guerrilla Games has heard many complaints, and their answer is simple: the controls are just fine as they are. Killzone 2 is a heavy-weighted, slower, more tactical first person experience that focuses on immersion. It's not a twitchy, split-second gun-wielding experience like some shooters are (CoD).[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]
I wasnt really impressed with KZ2 in the slightest. Controls were awful, and moving like a tank is not realistic. By the time they fixed the controls i had traded it in for Infamous. Graphics never impressed me cause i played Crysis two years before KZ2, and well BF2 is the pinnacle of online shooters so color me unimpressed. Only thing that i really liked in console shooters was everyone having a mic. but mic's have become much more prevelent as of late in PC games.
For people screaming omg game just takes sooo much skill that it made people hate the game i did well for the short period i did play, but i could not get over the god awful controls. You are just deluding yourself, and attempting to spin a negative into some non existant positive. No developer strives for hardcore only gamers, they want the casuals that buy MW2, and hope to emulate those sales.
Fizzman
What are you talking about? GG patched the game 3 times to fix the controls. They didnt leave them as is, and said ohh thats what we wanted the whole time adapt. Single players controls are still garbage, but precise aiming isnt really a requirement in the SP.
It's still pretty much the same. The input lag is still there. This isn't a design flaw. GG deliberately made it this way to make the game more immersive and to force players to be more tactical.[QUOTE="Fizzman"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"] The controls in Killzone 2 can take some time to get used to, and most gamers will most likely find themselves turning the sensitivity all the way up in order to get the control they're used to in other games. Guerrilla Games has heard many complaints, and their answer is simple: the controls are just fine as they are. Killzone 2 is a heavy-weighted, slower, more tactical first person experience that focuses on immersion. It's not a twitchy, split-second gun-wielding experience like some shooters are (CoD).Rikusaki
What are you talking about? GG patched the game 3 times to fix the controls. They didnt leave them as is, and said ohh thats what we wanted the whole time adapt. Single players controls are still garbage, but precise aiming isnt really a requirement in the SP.
It's still pretty much the same. The input lag is still there. This isn't a design flaw. GG deliberately made it this way to make the game more immersive and to force players to be more tactical.Compare the SP controls to the current MP controls and they are night and day. IDK if GG actually ended up patching SP controls too so idk if the comparison is doable anymore. I sold my copyso i cantcheck. Input lag is a bad design mechanic, and does not make the game any more tactical, or immersive in any sense. IDK how you can actually justify what your saying.
It's still pretty much the same. The input lag is still there. This isn't a design flaw. GG deliberately made it this way to make the game more immersive and to force players to be more tactical.[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]
What are you talking about? GG patched the game 3 times to fix the controls. They didnt leave them as is, and said ohh thats what we wanted the whole time adapt. Single players controls are still garbage, but precise aiming isnt really a requirement in the SP.
Fizzman
Compare the SP controls to the current MP controls and they are night and day. IDK if GG actually ended up patching SP controls too so idk if the comparison is doable anymore. I sold my copyso i cantcheck. Input lag is a bad design mechanic, and does not make the game any more tactical, or immersive in any sense. IDK how you can actually justify what your saying.
They are exactly the same. A new patch was released recently. After many hours of gameplay, you will hopefully understand where I am coming from. After playing KZ2, other FPS just feel lightweight and cheap in comparison.
I agree with the OP, KZ2 is a sick game, its far more different than alot of other fps just from its gunplay. It doesn't hold your hand much and I like that alot. It feels different and not arcadey. It feels meaty and real, heavy and thick. Its just so much more immersvie because of that. Those bullets feel like you are shooting live flesh, not a cardboard cut out. Once you learn how to handle a gun in KZ2, it destroys the effect for all other fps...they don't give me that same type of satisfied killing.Impress3Agreed.. all the lemmings will bash it though as they did when it came out and the y whined like little babies over the controls so much that GG had to put out a patch, then most of those lemmings stopped playing a few weeks later... you can see them on this site, all the lemmings with a xbox gamer card and ps3 card with like level 1-4 trophy level... It's sad that a lot of people bandwagon on bunny hoppin, rainbow armor wearing and noob friendly death -streak super auto-aim games. Oh well KZ2 still has a good hardcore community going!
controls are heavy in killzone 2 which is far more realistic, guns can weigh heavy amounts, and when u run u actually dont run so fast due to the heavy gun....so realisticly speaking, kz2 owns mw2 almost in every aspect of realism.....killing in kz2 much more satisfaction....so ppl who didnt like the controls in kz2 just didnt get used to them because thats the reality..not running like crazy and turning abnormally fast..so if they made eevry game controls as kz2 in fps, would people still be hating controls? no because ppl will get used, its as much difference as playing a sim game or arcade game, in this sense gt5p or forza 3 r more realistic than nfs......so mw2 is just arcady, and mw2 is noob friendly like TC mentioned, because anyone can level up fast, and not really have skills....[QUOTE="planbfreak4eva"][QUOTE="johnnyblazed88"]
class system in kz2 are lame and the controls are worse
glad i sold it for mw2
johnnyblazed88
keep your realism
i like smooth controls
You mean the floaty feel like you are a head floating in the air in a 3d modeling program controls..because thats basically what mw2 feels like... I noticed it big time that in mw2 the single player controls are more tight then when you get into the mp you zip around floating almost... i hate mw2 and I have buyers remorse (even though i got it used. ) now i need to sell it.
Mw2 is actually fun for underage and noobie players who needs the assistance of auto aim. For those who hasn't played cs source.... Listen up! auto aim is considered for cheaters and hackers and lastly NOOBS. Lol all u csers know what I'm talking about. That explained it.... Kilzzone 2 n cs are for serious hardcore fps gamers while halo n mw2 r for the noobs. Watever excuses u want to make or to spin it ....it ain't happening the polls n gamers from many threads proved that only fanboys will deny the truth. iwasgood2uumm you have any idea turning off auto aim for console shooters will do?, EVERY console shooter has auto aim enable for a reason.....
KZ2 & MW2 offer a different online experience... KZ2 is less frantic and can get quite tough...
Personally i found MW2 easier simply cause i spent like 2 yrs playing MW1 which is quite similar therefore getting used to MW2 was just a matter of getting all maps memorised, cause knowing your environment (maps) is key to winning team based modes.. As for shooting MW2 is practically the same as MW1 so no extensive training is required to MW1 veterans..
[QUOTE="iwasgood2u"]Mw2 is actually fun for underage and noobie players who needs the assistance of auto aim. For those who hasn't played cs source.... Listen up! auto aim is considered for cheaters and hackers and lastly NOOBS. Lol all u csers know what I'm talking about. That explained it.... Kilzzone 2 n cs are for serious hardcore fps gamers while halo n mw2 r for the noobs. Watever excuses u want to make or to spin it ....it ain't happening the polls n gamers from many threads proved that only fanboys will deny the truth. Led_poisonI'm referrin to auto aim online . Killzone 2 doenst have that at all that's what made the controlls hard n that's why u hear all these noobs complaining . I bet u anything if auto aim exist in kz2 there wouldn't b all these babies whining over how hard it is. They depend on the so called cheap or cheat assistance. just Admit it! umm you have any idea turning off auto aim for console shooters will do?, EVERY console shooter has auto aim enable for a reason.....
KZ2 isn't really realistic or tactical, it's just that MW2 is so arcade and noob friendly KZ2 by comparision almost looks like a tactical shooter
It's still pretty much the same. The input lag is still there. This isn't a design flaw. GG deliberately made it this way to make the game more immersive and to force players to be more tactical.[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]
What are you talking about? GG patched the game 3 times to fix the controls. They didnt leave them as is, and said ohh thats what we wanted the whole time adapt. Single players controls are still garbage, but precise aiming isnt really a requirement in the SP.
Fizzman
Compare the SP controls to the current MP controls and they are night and day. IDK if GG actually ended up patching SP controls too so idk if the comparison is doable anymore. I sold my copyso i cantcheck. Input lag is a bad design mechanic, and does not make the game any more tactical, or immersive in any sense. IDK how you can actually justify what your saying.
Its not a bad design if a lot of people still play it.
Not to mention KZ2 is leaps and bounds better than the first one, while MW2 is pretty much a rehash of COD4. When I bought MW2 I was hoping the gameplay would have advanced somewhat to make the guns feel different and have some weight so as to give it that little bit of extra realism, yet when I first played it I was very disappointed to find outthat it was no different than the first in that regard.
All in all MW2 was a letdown for me and for a lot of others, the noobs will love it though for the obvious reasons such as perks, auto aim, etc but to people that want a bit of a challenge they won't get it.
Thank God KZ3 comes out in 2011, can't wait. If they can improve on some of the weaknesses of the first then it's going to be great!
Just like the Halo series, right? I respect Halo for it's artistic style and story, but it's just like CoD when it comes to gameplay mechanics. It may not be fast-paced like CoD, but it's designed for the mass audience. Halo 3 is accessable without coming at the expense of pure competition. Outside of the aim assist knock, and sure auto aim. It hardly detracts from the other aspects of the game. First and foremost unlike MW2 Halo 3 is balanced. The community has had a ton of experience and is arguably the most competitive on consoles.[QUOTE="clone01"]
i understand your point, but MW2 has been getting great critical scores. honestly, i think people have been taking a lot of shots at it because its popular.
Rikusaki
Vehicles, territory control, and being able to counter weapons is always a part of the game. It has mass audience appeal, but no where near the mass audience friendly appeal of say MW. The leveling system alone is proof of that, it's a freakin pain in the ass to get to General status. Once you hit 40s your playing cream of the crop in that game, and if it's team slayer if you don't coordinate or work as a team...you lose.
Funny how perception and reality can be 2 completely different things :)
so I have been playing MW2 pretty much non stop over the last couple weeks and while i do think its fun its not anywhere near the quality game Killzone 2 is. Aside from the obvious reason which is Graphics in KZ2 trump MW2, the gameplay and gunplay is just much much better in Killzone 2.. When you get a kill in Killzone 2 you feel like you EARNED that kill and it just makes you feel better whereas in MW2 kills are a dime a dozen..
I also like how it takes more time to level up in KZ2 and you level up according to your skill and not just by simply playing matches over and over again.. In MW2 any noob can just play matches over and over again and level up due to "Match bonus" that MW2 just so freely give out.
the weapons in KZ2 just feel a lot more satisfying to shoot and have so much more recoil to them.. I love how one match has 5 game modes and switches on the spot in KZ2 making it a lot more intersting.
MW2 just feels so unbalanced at times, one minute i can kill someone in a split second shooting at their legs, the next minute i empty a whole clip in their face and they dont even die.
I honestly think Killzone 2 is just ahead of its time in terms of console shooters when it comes to graphics, more realistic gameplay and the type of MP it is.. there is still a lot of people that play KZ2 online.
Kennysolidsnake
This is simply due to the TERRIBLE lag in MW2. But instead of people agreeing that it's enforgivable for a FPS to be laggy like this, I get flamed. The least they could have done was make it so you have to choice to only connect to people in your own region. But noooooooooo, that's too hard for IW to do.
This is why when I join a game the first thing I do is hit select and check the ping bar. If I don't have 3 bars, I leave. There's no point in staying in that game...Unless I'm in a party, then I'll suck it up and play.
Anyways, MW2 has NOTHING to do with skill. If you're host, you win. I can actually tell you if I'm hosting simply from my scores. while Host I can easily get 30-40 kills and less then 5 deaths. 3 bars is 20-30 kills and 10-15 deaths. 2 bars I break pretty much even and 1 bar is just BAD. it will often take a fulle clip for the M16 and then a reload and another few burst on someone sitting still to kill an opponent at 1 bar.
Killzone 2 is WAY better if for nothing more then the FACT that it is FAR less laggy.
BTW I'm prestige 1 with a 1.4 KDR in MW2 and in KZ2 I was about a 1.7 KDR with around 15,000 kills, same with Resistance 2. I also tend to not care about KDR as much as I care about helping with objectives, i will ALWAYS be at the front lines defending my territory, not being a wussy sniper camping at the back contributing nothing.
Pretty much the opposite. If you think the controls in KZ2 are bad then yeah, stick to the easy good controls like MW2 cuz Warzone ain't no kid's playground.The controls in KZ2 are pretty bad, so i disagree!
Racer850
[QUOTE="Kennysolidsnake"]Both games are pretty awesome.Could not have said it better.so I have been playing MW2 pretty much non stop over the last couple weeks and while i do think its fun its not anywhere near the quality game Killzone 2 is. Aside from the obvious reason which is Graphics in KZ2 trump MW2, the gameplay and gunplay is just much much better in Killzone 2.. When you get a kill in Killzone 2 you feel like you EARNED that kill and it just makes you feel better whereas in MW2 kills are a dime a dozen..
I also like how it takes more time to level up in KZ2 and you level up according to your skill and not just by simply playing matches over and over again.. In MW2 any noob can just play matches over and over again and level up due to "Match bonus" that MW2 just so freely give out.
the weapons in KZ2 just feel a lot more satisfying to shoot and have so much more recoil to them.. I love how one match has 5 game modes and switches on the spot in KZ2 making it a lot more intersting.
MW2 just feels so unbalanced at times, one minute i can kill someone in a split second shooting at their legs, the next minute i empty a whole clip in their face and they dont even die.
I honestly think Killzone 2 is just ahead of its time in terms of console shooters when it comes to graphics, more realistic gameplay and the type of MP it is.. there is still a lot of people that play KZ2 online.
MortalDecay
[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]
Also, the claims that Killzone 2 is challenging are kind of strange to me. The game is really fairly easy.FPS games that have health that refills in a few seconds are not hard IMO. All you have to do is manage toget out of the way for a few seconds to let itrefill.Although weaker in many ways, Resistance: Fall of Man is a more challenging FPS than Killzone 2 because of way the health is set up, the limited amounts of ammoand the fact that you have to pump alot more lead into the Chimera than the Helghast.
And about the claims that Killzone 2 "feels different". Yeah, sure it does, but all FPS have their different styles of movement and shooting. You guys act like all the other FPS's are all under one umbrella while Killzone 2 has a feel of all of its own. Absurd. The truth is that most FPSs feel different than eachother. The level design and story arcs and characters of FPS games are all pretty typical but most major FPS gameshave their own feel. Halo sure does (which is why so many people love it)just as Killzone does.
Hahadouken
Why are you trying so hard to discredit the game? 4 posts?
You didn't like it, fair enough, move on?
Actually, I did like it.I liked it alot in fact.I just am not delusional about it. And what, do I have to put in a league of its own to like it? All I said was that it's not that challenging and all FPS's have their own feel. What do you want me say, only Killzone 2 does? :roll:
And no, I'm not trying to discredit the game. I'm trying to discredit psuedo-hardcore cows and their delusional claims. It's interesting to note that it is only cows that make these claims. Everybody else seesthe gameas a pretty typical, butwell-made FPS experience.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment