"While multiplayer was a huge focus for Sony, I just couldn’t get the same adrenaline rush from the multiplayer aspect compared to the games that it is trying so hard to be better than." Most of this review has complaints about the single player, then a little paragraph at the end that finishes with: If you're going to write reviews and want to be taken seriously learn to check your grammar unless you want people to think you're a 12 year old. It's hard to take this review seriously when almost every single comment reply this guy has posted about this has had typos and bad sentence structure.
Nobody has had any illusions or tried to convince anyone that Killzone is even remotely similar to Halo since the first game. If Sony themselves ever even said it, it was just a term used to say "Hey, those guys are coming out with this game everyone's all excited about? Well, we have something in the works that just might interest you!" Nobody even knew if this European game would come out in other territories of the world! Nobody who called it a Halo Killer had ever even played Halo. So before anybody had even played Halo, someone (not even sure if it was Sony themselves or just the media) made some comments about how they're commissioning this European developer to make a game that they could consider their answer to it exclusive to the PS2. This article from 1-Up previewing Killzone in January 2000 makes an early reference it as being a "Halo killer".
Back when Halo was just a theoretical smash hit, and not an actual one. Let me give you a little history lesson: the Halo Killer tag was attributed to this game *BEFORE HALO EVEN CAME OUT*. This is the fourth console game and the 6th game overall in the series, and we're still criticizing it for not be a "Halo Killer" when that isn't even what the developer is going for with this franchise? That tag was used to describe the FIRST Killzone game, and hasn't been used since. Calling the game / Sony out for referring to Killzone as a "Halo Killer" is just silly and pointless and borderline unfair. The gaming community on the internet wants inflated scores for everything because god forbid their favorite game (that they're going to buy anyway) gets a low score on the internet.Ĭome on, Aaron. I find it interesting you blaming the industry for inflating scores while replying to a comment saying anyone rating this game below an 8 is an idiot. So if you're reading a 6/10 review and he/she is bagging on the story, then you know yourself to probably not take that part of his review into consideration because you love the lore. Some people might find Killzone's story to be crap, while you love the lore. The best part about that high and low score is seeing the reasons why those people thought the game deserved that score. Maybe to one person Killzone is a 9, and to another it's a 6 or even a 5.
Why? Because not everyone's opinion is the same, and it's nice reading different point of views on games rather than "It's a POS, or GOTY". What's the point of reviews if they're all consistent? Personally, I think games with mixed reviews aside from obvious pick ups (like TLoU & GTAV) are the best.
0 kommentar(er)
