Share this article:
 Digg.com Facebook Google Bookmarks N4G Gamerblips del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot.org StumbleUpon If they can pull this off then good on 'em. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Halo 3s online 'stuff' is amazingly polished - certainly enough to make ANY other online game envious. While I prefer CoD4's multiplayer, I have always absolutely loved Halo 3's matchmaking and sat tracking systems. The heatmaps and kills-per-weapon things are just amazing and I think more games should do stuff like that.
Yes, I'm a stats junkie. It's my problem and I'm dealing with it :)
I'm not sure what else they could add that would improve matters. More options, being able to choose map-specific modes? I dunno. Can't go wrong there. Without a doubt Halo 3's Matchmaking and Lobby system is the best there is on a console, Ive often wondered why Bungie dont sell it like other Devs sell their Engines.
I suppose they dont want the competition to be catching up to them anytime soon, good luck to Guerilla though in trying to do it. CVG, a serious question:
Did you actually include multiplayer in the review? It's just that you never mentioned the cool, game style swapping feature of the multiplayer, the one that changes from CTF to TDM, amongst others in the same game. Not to mention these stat tracking features.
What else has been missed, I wonder?
Surely sites should only review a game when they have the full game to review, or at least have given the game a thorough play, especially one as hyped as Killzone 2.
Not a dig, just a genuine question. And it makes me wonder how many other sites have not played the multiplayer... I mean, Halo 3 was praised more-so for its multiplayer, than the singleplayer. cod4 is better I can't comment on whether they did or they didn't, but you have to give some consideration to the length of time these things take. Every review site wants to be first out with the review, and yet to fully explore the single player campaign AND put a healthy amount of time into online stuff would delay that significantly. Not to mention that these places review the games before general release, so it is possible that online servers weren't up and running *shrug*
Also, what one person holds in high regard, another may not be impressed at all by it - which could also be the reason it wasn't mentioned... It's a better game, definitely - but the stat tracking and options Halo 3 gives you is second to none. CoD4 doesn't even allow you to select which map you play on... so the review they made for this game is invalid then? pretty much!
meh who gives a f**k, i thought the Q&A with the producer was tidy though, they should defo do it more than just let gamers post comments on a forum of what chould be improved and all tha jazz »
yes but you can vote to change the map in cod4 »»
you can do that in Halo as well. You could be right, but in hindsight, I remember Halo 3, COD4 and Gears (amongst others) all recieving praise for their multiplayer aspects in reviews.
As multiplayer is the most important (and most played) part of any fps, I find it a little disappointing that nobody seems to have given Killzone 2 the time it (or at least those looking forward to it) deserves.
And not many fps would gain decent marks on single player alone.
I could be wrong, CVG may have played multiplayer and incorporated their views into the review - but I have my doubts. As I have doubts about a lot of the other reviews as well.
It is just as wrong to give the game a perfect review if you haven't played everything it has to offer. »»
ai you can vote once, and what pissed me off the most was when you joined a game and didnt like the map so you leave and try and join another game but end up back in the same game again, annoyin stuff!
oh mart i still avent baught the dlc for cod4 yet lol You can set up the multiplayer maps offline in Killzone and populate it with bots. Which while fun, really isn't the same thing as a good online battle. I'm looking forward to mixing up a few of the classes. »»»
i think everyone in this forum can agree that cod4 multiplayer is better. »»»»
Nope. »»»»»
Oh sigh... Looks like it is crimbo after all... :roll:
FFS - genital warts are less persistant (and less annoying) than this guy.
So I've read, ahem. nah i fink cod 4 is better!
aslong as we can go online on cod6 pick what map we want to play on and get involved and get on with it, sound! »»»»»
edit:some people on this forum can agree »»»»»»
nope CoD4 is, for me, a better game, no doubt, but the options that Halo 3 lobbies give you are phenominal. »»»»»»
That reminds me of a bloke who I used to work with. Everyone used to call him "Thrush". I asked why, and was told it was because he was an irritating c**t. LOL, that's brilliant.
If/when flake gets banned, he should totally have the username 'thrush' next :) We all complain about how annoying he is. But lets be honest, this place just wouldn't be the same without him. »»»»
Nope, I prefer Halo’s by a mile. Got ranked up quickly in COD, got bored, never went back. Halo I still play regularly to this day, it’s much more fun.
If Killzone do match the matchmaking process from Halo then they’ll have achieved something that no-one else has done to this day, and well done to them if it’s the case.
Bungie.net does rule for stats though, I’m such a geeky stat slut but I don’t care, bath me in the knowledge of how amazing I am. thats a bit extreme i have only just got here and you lot are already trying to ban me for no reason at all »
Agreed.
It might actually be fun to come to :) I jest.
I don't mind people having wildly opposing views to me, far from it in fact, but he adds NOTHING to any conversation (EVER) and just manages to turn every thread he posts in into an arguement. Clearly this is his aim, and we (I) should know better than to keep responding - but he's such a moron I can't help it. »»
I know what you mean. You know ignoring him is for the best, but he makes it so hard not to argue with him. It's actually quite impressive. Having played both Halo and COD extensively I would agree that In game COD offers a far better experience, Halo seems slow and less immediate by comparison IMHO. Statswise there is only one winner. Halo. However I love both games so I'm a winner either way.
I am looking forward to seeing what KZ2 can do tho. Sounds very promising BALLLLLS
the good thing about halo is that they have the weapons exacly right
all of them are useful i cant see that in killzone really so their would not really be a point in having the same matchmaking
NO point @ Flake
Your right, COD4 plays better than Halo 3 does online, but that has never even been the point...
What COD4 doesn't have is Halo's mighty matchmaking and stat tracking features, which is what this entire article is about... How it seems more and more that Killzone 2 was designed just to 1 up the features of other FPSs?
I disagree with the assertion that Multiplayer is the most important part of FPSs because believe it or not FPSs existed before internet use was the norm. Multiplayer is a bonus in most cases and should be treated as such. You say that, but network-multiplayer has been around since the original Doom. And networked Doom was AWESOME too. »
really? Different strokes and all that... I'm mainly interested in SP but for a lot of people it's the opposite. The only FPS games I've played throughout are Deus Ex, Half-Life 1+2 and the Halo Trilogy (Just got Bioshock). As you can guess, I'm a sucker for good Sci-Fi stories. Well maybe bonus is the wrong term but Multiplayer is a lesser component of the games. But reviewing games mostly on their online multiplayer seems to me to be like looking at a cars CD/MP3/Digital WAV radio and saying "Great quality of sound, 10/10 for the car!" The question is where would you draw the line at seeing multiplayer as a "nice-to-have" rather than an essential component? What about Left 4 Dead where the online co-op is the core of the game and the SP is the nice extra? What about stuff like UT or MMOs? To you maybe, but to a great many others I'd say the opposite were true. I've spent HOURS on CoD4 multiplayer, yet only played through the campaign twice - and the second time wasn't all that enjoyable either, was purely for achievements... :) As I said most, TF2, UT, MMOs and Left 4 Dead should be judged by taking Multiplayer into account. See a lot of FPSs are supposed to be campaign games(look at stuff like Halo, CoD 4 definately) but they get kind of lazy with the campaign because they know a few decent multiplayer maps(and decent mechanics) will ensure them good reviews and sales.
But as you say, it's all subjective. This is just my opinion on it. Going to agree with that, Halo 3 was alright as a single player game but brilliant online. There's no way anyone would think the online section was a lesser component of the full game. Bioshock was a great single player game but how many people are still playing it? Today, Chrimbo will mostly be called 'flake'.
*shuts barn door* Tomato's! :wink: »
A solid point there Voodoo - I loved Condemned when I played it through, but the lack of any multiplayer component has pretty much stopped me going back to it. There are three main reasons most people revisit games - multiplayer, achievements and actually loving it.
And the last point only comes into play when the game is exceptional I've found. lets see how long this one lasts.
i really hope Killzone2 does have a great matchmaking service because CODWaW's is terrible. even though it says that it limits the ranks to certain rooms i've seen people ranked up in the 30's in bootcamp which is supposed to be limited to under rank 8. it's incredibly unfair to be fighting against people who have much better equipement than you and seem to just plow through everyone who comes up against them.
if KillZone 2 can even come close to matching Halo's matchmaking service it'll certainly be a contenter for top FPS on the PS3 In't Crimbo brilliant?! »
BRILLIAAAANT!! yep, dont play bioshock no more, i havent played it in a long time. anybody want to buy the PC version off me?
seeing as though some reviews were released in January how come the stats news hasnt been released yet or mentioned in reviews? are the reviewers playing a finished product? i love doing this. this game is going to be the same as every other fps out there. i don't care if the company making it claims that they are building it from the bottom up, it's just going to be the same as stuff like goldeneye (best FPS ever) and halo before it. it looks drab, and the other thing: it is on the ps3. exclusives on this expensive paperweight have a habit of either being crap or moving to the xbox (MGS4 will soon i swear). square enix made the right decision moving FFXIII to the xbox, they'll probably make loads more now Don't you mean Halo and Goldeneye before it? I'd bet Goldeneye was out for some time before Halo. He means Goldeneye and Halo before Killzone 2. Not Halo before Goldeneye.
Although I do agree it's a good move to put FFXIII on the 360, the multiplatform games the more people play them. I see what you are saying about multiplatforms selling better, but understand this: If FF going multi-p' means that the quality isn't as good as previous games, then not as many people will buy it anyway. And going by Squares previous track record on the 360, I am not building myself up. Every single release thus far has been truly average, to say the least. Not a single game has come close to the quality of the PS2 games. Bad framerates, long loading and flawed mechanics are just a few of the things that I am looking forward to the most.
Let's put it this way: If the next FF is as average (can't see it) as the previous games this gen, then RIP Square.
But back on topic, at least Killzone 2 looks better than any Square game this gen. No arguments there. Did you see the trailer? Looked in good shape to me. Also, IGN just reviewed Star Ocean 4 and gave it an 8. No bad performance issues there. FF13 will be fine. Game Informer said that Star Ocean 4 was plagued by a number of problems and gave it 7 out of 10. Square can't use the Unreal engine, FF13 only hope is it's the first game to use Squares new game engine. »
I like IGN, but you have to admit that their 8/10 is everybody else's 6/10. Star Ocean will be flawed. Trust me on that one. | 
