Killzone 2 - Gen. Discussion & Info

[quote name='Thongsy']I think it's a little cheaper on Amazon also, a few bucks. Better virtual clothing than a demo I can probably get off the European PSN store.[/quote]


Indeed. It's $56.99 and no tax. Good enough for me.

[quote name='yukine']Who cares? GOTY is a bunch of bullshit anyway.[/quote]


You are correct sir.
 
[quote name='aznguyen316']@ Ecofreak - I think you make a great case for a KZ2 bundle. I know there are ppl waiting for a price drop AND waiting for KZ2 to drop, so in turn this will help those people and anyone else on the fence wanting to get a PS3. And with the value out the box, which many forget to see, this is a great deal.[/QUOTE]

I wish people actually knew about the PS3's value and then simply forgot. I studied the PS3 before buying it and it wasn't until ~1 month after buying it that I realized how comprehensive the system was. Granted, I bought the MGS4 bundle so the online community had a few years to develop and XMB released a few weeks later.

Once the next price drop happens, I would hope Sony start a marketing strategy focused specifically on value to educate consumers (esp. parents) about why spending more up front will be in their best interest. Kind of along the lines of the PC Vs. Apple commercials. Who knows, MS to make Live free in response (and all consumers win!).

[quote name='manthing']NOBODY in the U.S. is demanding a KZ2 PS3 bundle.

To believe otherwise is fallacy[/QUOTE]

Zuh? Perhaps there are no active petitions to get a bundle released, but it you must agree that it would be an incentive for some prospective PS3 shoppers to get off the fence and pick-up a system rather than waiting for a price drop.
 
[quote name='Maklershed']I could see people wanting a KZ2 bundle. I could see more people just wanting a PS3 with backwards compatibility.[/QUOTE]

Probably. But hopefully people will be more focused on PS3 games given the line-up this year and not think about BC too much.

Maybe Sony should include a $25-$50 voucher for a PS2 (or cost of including BC in the PS3), and keep it out of the PS3. So people who want to get a PS2 can do so relatively expensively while Sony saves money by not including the necessary components in the system. In the long run, I think it'd be a better financial option as there are too few games coming out of the PS2 (and thus, diminishing royalty stream) to justify the cost.
 
[quote name='Ecofreak']I wish people actually knew about the PS3's value and then simply forgot. I studied the PS3 before buying it and it wasn't until ~1 month after buying it that I realized how comprehensive the system was. Granted, I bought the MGS4 bundle so the online community had a few years to develop and XMB released a few weeks later.

Once the next price drop happens, I would hope Sony start a marketing strategy focused specifically on value to educate consumers (esp. parents) about why spending more up front will be in their best interest. Kind of along the lines of the PC Vs. Apple commercials. Who knows, MS to make Live free in response (and all consumers win!).


[/quote]

I'm glad you agree with me, b/c I knew of the value of the PS3, but to really realize it, it took a purchase of a 360 lol. My GF likes it though to play in the bedroom so it's all good here. I like your analogy of the PC vs Apple, b/c I myself am an Apple convert for a few months now, and it is very similar to this case with the PS3 vs 360, hell the resale value of my Apple is tremendous even after a year compared to any PC I've ever owned.
 
I hope there is no collector's edition after all.
I know Europe has some coming in just a tin case or something.

Just getting tired (of getting tempted by) that crap.
 
Collectors editions is one of the biggest bullshit money grabs ever. They all end up $20 less than what the game alone sells for within a month or two
 
yeah, CE are always bullshit IMHO unless you get something else with it as good as the game (ie. like the SFIV one with the SFIV anime). Most just have a shiny case and an artbook...
 
CE are always overpriced now, and well lame. $20 extra for a bonus content dvd of interviews and a tin case. Only rarely are they worth money, usually when the game already has a very large fanbase such as SFIV or MGS4. I wish they did real limited editions and included something people might actually want. Those trailers and making of videos and interviews can all be found online and probably should just be included on the game disc if there is enough space for it. Just like DVD always include some kind of bonus content.
 
I collect art books, and am pretty sad at how a lot Western publishers don't release good quality art books for their games. I so really, really want a good, hardcover, thick art book for Killzone 2.

There was one actually made for PoP2: Warrior Within done by one of my favorite artists, sadly it was only an internal thing.
 
To let everyone know, SCEA will probably never bundle KZ2. Except for MGS4, SCEA tends to bundle old games with consoles. SCEE on the other hand does bundles all the time. There was a GTAIV, LBP, MotorStorm: PR, etc. bundles in Europe.
[quote name='manthing']NOBODY in the U.S. is demanding a KZ2 PS3 bundle.


To believe otherwise is fallacy[/QUOTE]Not true, I know some who are waiting for KZ2. No where near as many as MGS4, but some.
[quote name='near']Need to get a DS3 in time for this, then the experience will be at it's PEAK![/QUOTE]The DS3 is very much worth it. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']yeah, CE are always bullshit IMHO unless you get something else with it as good as the game (ie. like the SFIV one with the SFIV anime). Most just have a shiny case and an artbook...[/QUOTE]

Why the hate about CEs? If people are willing to pay the extra dough for useless goods, that's their choice and, by extension, the beauty of capitalism. Shouldn't we be cheering for companies when they make more money?

I've learned long ago to skip CEs because, as noted later, they usually drop in price to same as regular edition within a month and generally not worth the price. For those who think otherwise, more power to them. Flex your consumer muscle! :boxing:
 
[quote name='Ecofreak']Why the hate about CEs? If people are willing to pay the extra dough for useless goods, that's their choice and, by extension, the beauty of capitalism. Shouldn't we be cheering for companies when they make more money?

I've learned long ago to skip CEs because, as noted later, they usually drop in price to same as regular edition within a month and generally not worth the price. For those who think otherwise, more power to them. Flex your consumer muscle! :boxing:[/quote]


I can see where you come from, but I like it when the CE actually feel like they put an effort behind them instead of just giving a shiny cover and a DVD full of trailers.
 
[quote name='Ecofreak']Probably. But hopefully people will be more focused on PS3 games given the line-up this year and not think about BC too much.

Maybe Sony should include a $25-$50 voucher for a PS2 (or cost of including BC in the PS3), and keep it out of the PS3. So people who want to get a PS2 can do so relatively expensively while Sony saves money by not including the necessary components in the system. In the long run, I think it'd be a better financial option as there are too few games coming out of the PS2 (and thus, diminishing royalty stream) to justify the cost.[/quote]

I think Sony should just suck it up and put BC back in. In the next couple of years a lot of PS2 owners will be going to the next round of systems. I'm really pissed that my PS3 doesn't have full BC since my PS2 broke. People say "oh it's not a big deal just play PS3 games" don't seem to take into account what a person is supposed to do with all their old PS2 games. What am I supposed to do with them? Just stare at them on my shelf?

I don't think anyone is dying for a system bundle. I think people want a price drop. All these bundles and different models are completely retarded.
 
[quote name='Blackout']I think Sony should just suck it up and put BC back in. In the next couple of years a lot of PS2 owners will be going to the next round of systems. I'm really pissed that my PS3 doesn't have full BC since my PS2 broke. People say "oh it's not a big deal just play PS3 games" don't seem to take into account what a person is supposed to do with all their old PS2 games. What am I supposed to do with them? Just stare at them on my shelf?

I don't think anyone is dying for a system bundle. I think people want a price drop. All these bundles and different models are completely retarded.[/quote]

Get rid of them.
 
[quote name='Blackout']I think Sony should just suck it up and put BC back in. In the next couple of years a lot of PS2 owners will be going to the next round of systems. I'm really pissed that my PS3 doesn't have full BC since my PS2 broke. People say "oh it's not a big deal just play PS3 games" don't seem to take into account what a person is supposed to do with all their old PS2 games. What am I supposed to do with them? Just stare at them on my shelf? [/QUOTE]Unfortunately Blackout, Sony is trying to cut their PS3 loses. PS3 consoles are still being sold at a small loss. Adding PS2 BC is NOT free, I repeat, not free, and is actually somewhat costly (They need to add the GS chip along with other PS2 components. Only the EE is emulated). Since no PS2 components are used in the newer PS3 consoles, it also allowed for the main PCB to be reduced (which also saves money). There's PS1 BC because it's a 100% software emulated that requires zero PS1 components to run off of. Until Sony can figure out a solution (if they ever do) for a similar 100% emulator software for PS2 games, all PS3 consoles won't have PS2 BC until they can figure it out (Let's just say, the EE can easily be emulated. It's the GS that's the problem, because it's actually being said to have a higher fill rate than the RSX within the PS3). Sony removed the PS2 BC to get the PS3 within the $400 pricetag (and cutting it actually reduces the cost much more than people think). If Sony never removed it, PS3 would be costing at least $450 right now. Sony is already losing too much money on PS3 and will never bundle a headset, HDMI cable, or even PS2 BC (by putting in some PS2 components) because they are trying to keep PS2 at the $400 pricepoint (WiFi is actually cheaper to implement than PS2 BC, and was placed since PS3 does not currently work with USB devices for WiFi (The firmware team said making USB WiFi adapters work is very difficult). PS2 BC isn't needed to play PS3 games (bluetooth, Blu-ray, Cell + RSX, etc. are needed), which is why it was ripped (and it definitely saved money).

I'm just getting tired over and over again of explaining this. We'd see one of two scenarios right now:
-PS3 with no PS2 BC selling for $400
-PS3 with PS2 BC selling for over $400 (most likely $450. 100% hardware BC is even more).

People already complain PS3 is too expensive, and just adding that is going to make it more expensive. Sony just isn't going to add more features to PS3 and sell at the same price (they switched to an 80GB HDD because the difference between 40GB and 80GB HDDs is $1, and most likely into this year, 40GB HDDs will be more expensive since they need to be ordered special. SIXAXIS is no longer produced and it's just DS3 for now). Howard Stringer isn't too happy about the $3+ Billion losses in the PS division (although loses are way, way less now compared to launch and the 2nd PS3 year), which is why he is NOT letting SCE cut any of the prices regardless of how the competition is doing (He basically wants to see (which is why other SCE Presidents are saying the same thing) until they are profiting on PS3 hardware and can cut the cost to reach a wider range of people. Sony just isn't going to price PS3 very low to stay competitive and lose billions (like MS did with Xbox). One reason FFXIII, Tekken 6, etc. went multi-platform is probably because SCE told them they don't plan to do much to cut the price until hardware cost really cut down. You better bet Stringer would cut the PS Brand off if they continued losing too much money, which is why they are trying to profit on hardware at least even if they come third place in the end. Even if PS3 lacked blu-ray and WiFi, it would still cost more than the 360 produce (PS3 uses pricey components, especially the Cell + RSX). In a way also, if someone only wants to play PS2 games, Sony rather have them buy a PS2 right now anyway, since the profit on every PS2 console sold (while every PS3 console is sold at a loss. If someone buys a PS3 to only play PS2 games, Sony isn't exactly going to make their money back on the console (since most PS2 games out there are used, and very cheap new which Sony doesn't get much cut from). If someone buys a PS3 for blu-rays and/or PS3 games, Sony does get some cut (especially if a first party game and Sony Pictures movie is sold, where most of the profit goes to them).

Also I'll add, while SOME people might be turned off by the lack of PS2 BC (and SCE knows this), they've also gained some people just because they wanted a PS3 for PS3 games and in some cases blu-ray movies, but didn't want to spend over $400 for a game console ever (or couldn't. Some of those people already had a PS2). I know many who jumped on to buy a PS3 because the 40GB was much cheaper (they knew it has no PS2 BC, although SingStar games technically work now in every PS3 SKU, but you need a PS3 SingStar disc). Also, PS3 sales were at its highest when SKUs were available with no PS2 BC (During the months of Jan. 2008 - May 2008, when only the 40GB PS3 was around, PS3 was actually the 2nd highest selling console). All PS3 consoles will never be PS2 BC until:
-Sony Computer Entertainment gets a 100% software emulator working (right now, there's no software emulator that plays every single game without issues. Most PS2 emulators I believe require a very powerful PC to run it). Only way they'd consider putting the GS chip back in is if it were to drop in price way more (although it's towards the bottom of an exponential cost curve most likely) and many PS3 hardware components drop in price greatly.
-PS2 is completely killed off. Right now PS2 still has a market share, and Sony is profiting from it when they buy PS2 hardware and accessories.
[quote name='Ecofreak']
bundle.jpg

[/QUOTE]The bundle definitely looks hot. But like I said, it will be Europe only. David Reeves likes doing bundles in Europe for various games as a way to get some people interested in buying a PS3 (without a price-cut since bundling a game is pretty cheap, and most consumers will look at it as getting a $50-$60 game for free). I wonder if they'll still keep the LBP bundle.
 
PS Nation Podcast Ep. 95 - Killzone 2 Review Code Impressions

"Every expectation I had of this game, was blown away. It's that good. Awesome from beginning to end."

"I love Call of Duty 4. And like I said, that's the one that many people use as the litmus test against other fps. I would take Killzone 2 over COD4 any day of the week".
Click to expand...

http://psnation.org/podcast/files/PSNation-Ep95-Gushing%20Paranoia.mp3

Just trying to add more to the already tremendous hype =D
 
He doesn't say much except that he loves it. They don't have much embargo experience so I think he was trying to be as vague as possible. This is where the 1up podcasts would have been very useful since they are used to determining what can/can not be said. Hopefully Nick and some of the other rebel fm guys got a copy to talk about next time.
 
I don't see why COD4 has to be the universal benchmark for all FPS. I mean, Killzone 2 is quite a different game than COD4. I actually think that it's unfair to each game to compare them in such a way.
 
[quote name='primetime']I don't see why COD4 has to be the universal benchmark for all FPS. [/quote]


Well, it is the best console multiplayer FPS. Might as well be the universal benchmark. :lol:
 
[quote name='Maklershed']Well, it is the best console multiplayer FPS. Might as well be the universal benchmark. :lol:[/quote]

Well, yeah I understand it's popular and well received and all that good stuff, but I'm just saying that not all FPS are created in the same style. I don't think COD4 has to be the only game that first person shooters are compared to.
 
Well before CoD4, there were games being compared to Halo. It goes on and on, people compare because those games before that set the mark. These are great games. Things are often borrowed and we must compare what game. You compare to see how it stacks up. It may be unfair, but that's how things work in terms of the video game market especially.
 
[quote name='primetime']Well, yeah I understand it's popular and well received and all that good stuff, but I'm just saying that not all FPS are created in the same style. I don't think COD4 has to be the only game that first person shooters are compared to.[/quote]

hmm I agree with prime here. COD4 represents a very specific genre of shooters, from where I come from we call them "CS Clones" because that's what cod4 feels like regardless of how good it is. But there are many different other genres of FPS games like your L4D, TF/2s, Quake/DM/UT3, etc.
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Unfortunately Blackout, Sony is trying to cut their PS3 loses. PS3 consoles are still being sold at a small loss. Adding PS2 BC is NOT free, I repeat, not free, and is actually somewhat costly (They need to add the GS chip along with other PS2 components. Only the EE is emulated). Since no PS2 components are used in the newer PS3 consoles, it also allowed for the main PCB to be reduced (which also saves money)

I'm just getting tired over and over again of explaining this. We'd see one of two scenarios right now:
-PS3 with no PS2 BC selling for $400
-PS3 with PS2 BC selling for over $400 (most likely $450. 100% hardware BC is even more).

.[/quote]

Then don't. You don't need to type out a book every time someone criticizes Sony. Frankly I don't care if they're losing money. They have the money to spend on dumb shit like Home, Qore, movie store, internet browser etc. That's stuff that's IMO is a complete waste. Now I know it's not all on the hardware side of things, but still. All that stuff isn't free right? They're obviously spending money to make sure all that stuff gets out there. I'm not exactly sure how much, and mostl liley that point is invalid, but still. I would at least like to think they could try to put BC back in.

I'm not excited for the Killzone MP. I'm more looking forward to the single player. From what I've seen it looks pretty epic. I'm not going to get my hopes up though.
 
Last edited:
i am considering getting this game, though I'm not much of a fps guy, just cuz it looks fuckin beautiful lol. I bought Resistance and only played a few missions of it before selling it, but man...watchin the CES videos got me pumped up.
 
[quote name='Blackout']Then don't. You don't need to type out a book every time someone criticizes Sony. Frankly I don't care if they're losing money. They have the money to spend on dumb shit like Home, Qore, movie store, internet browser etc.

That's stuff that's IMO is a complete waste. Now I know it's not all on the hardware side of things, but still. All that stuff isn't free right? They're obviously spending money to make sure all that stuff gets out there. I'm not exactly sure how much, and mostl liley that point is invalid, but still. I would at least like to think they could try to put BC back in.
[/quote]Adding Home, Qore, and movie store makes them money, because people are paying for it (well, Home is a free service, but Sony makes money from the clothes and other things people buy. They also receive money from advertisements within Home). Sony has already made quite a bit of money just over that. Qore makes them money since people are paying. Movie Store makes them money because people are paying for downloads. PS2 BC costs money to implement and they don't get any money back. Web Browser is an easy add which didn't require any special hardware component to implement (which PS2 BC does require). Let's say for an example implementing PS2 BC costs $30 (and they priced PS3 at $400). Multiply 5 million consoles sold by $30, and that's an extra $150 million in loses. None of the things you mentioned cost anywhere near that much combined, and you can actually make profit back on each thing (PS2 BC you cannot, unless everyone was buying tons and tons of brand new PS2 games to make up for it). If there was already a PS2 BC software emulator out which works well on PS3 and doesn't require a single PS2 component, then it could be added (but right now they aren't there yet. I would not be surprised if Sony was working on it). I guarantee SCE didn't really want to remove PS2 BC and do the same thing they did last gen (Fat PS2 required some PS1 components for BC. Slim PS2 was 100% software emulation for PS1 BC), but with tough competition, pressure from the CEO of Sony Corp. to decrease loses, along with being pressed to get a PS3 at $400, it was removed (if things were going better for PS3 early on, it probably wouldn't have been cut, but PS3 would have been priced higher).

You need to care about Sony losing money because if they were losing a lot of money, Howard Stringer is likely going to cut off Sony Computer Entertainment and the PS Brand (meaning your $500 PS3 purchase would go wasted), meaning you might never see another Uncharted and other games they publish. Sony's situation is very different from MS. MS can deal with loses in the gaming division due to having almost a monopoly in the OS market (where they continue bringing in large profits from that). Sony has tough competition in every market where they could gain money, or lose it at any time, which is why they have to keep the PS Brand a profitable business, and Stringer is heavily pressuring SCE to make it profitable. Now the main reason I replied to your post not because I'm tired of you cricizing Sony on anything, it's because I know very well Sony isn't going to add pricey features to the console (which aren't 100% software related) and sell it at the same price, unless PS3 hardware costs decrease greatly, and I mean greatly (which is why like I said, they'll never bundle an HDMI cable, headset, ethernet cable (new PS3 consoles don't come with it), etc. with a PS3, in order to save money, kind of like how MS doesn't include WiFi and other things with the 360 to save money).

Anyway, back to KZ2, I'll probably play single player, but I'm mostly looking forward to multi-player. I mostly enjoy playing games online, so I should enjoy it. I look for it being my competitive time multiplayer (while R2 is my co-op multiplayer). R2 for an example, while I enjoyed the single player (I will admit it had flaws and it was very short), I enjoyed playing it online way more (it was fantastic). Same thing applied for other FPS like CoD4. I need to get into Halo online though, since I mostly played that single player (mostly because I tried to play it online, but it wasn't updating for some weird reason in H2).
 
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Adding Home, Qore, and movie store makes them money, because people are paying for it (well, Home is a free service, but Sony makes money from the clothes and other things people buy. They also receive money from advertisements within Home). Sony has already made quite a bit of money just over that. Qore makes them money since people are paying. Movie Store makes them money because people are paying for downloads. PS2 BC costs money to implement and they don't get any money back. Web Browser is an easy add which didn't require any special hardware component to implement (which PS2 BC does require). Let's say for an example implementing PS2 BC costs $30 (and they priced PS3 at $400). Multiply 5 million consoles sold by $30, and that's an extra $150 million in loses. None of the things you mentioned cost anywhere near that much combined, and you can actually make profit back on each thing (PS2 BC you cannot, unless everyone was buying tons and tons of brand new PS2 games to make up for it). If there was already a PS2 BC software emulator out which works well on PS3 and doesn't require a single PS2 component, then it could be added (but right now they aren't there yet. I would not be surprised if Sony was working on it). I guarantee SCE didn't really want to remove PS2 BC and do the same thing they did last gen (Fat PS2 required some PS1 components for BC. Slim PS2 was 100% software emulation for PS1 BC), but with tough competition, pressure from the CEO of Sony Corp. to decrease loses, along with being pressed to get a PS3 at $400, it was removed (if things were going better for PS3 early on, it probably wouldn't have been cut, but PS3 would have been priced higher).

You need to care about Sony losing money because if they were losing a lot of money, Howard Stringer is likely going to cut off Sony Computer Entertainment and the PS Brand (meaning your $500 PS3 purchase would go wasted), meaning you might never see another Uncharted and other games they publish.

[/quote]

Yeah I figured those things were making money. Still. I didn't ask for any of those features. I doubt most people buying a PS3 are looking for those features either. It's a video game system first, everything else second. I didn't buy a PS3 to download movies or watch a virtual magazine. Home just seems like a waste of time that has zero to do with games. I still got hope for it, but at this point, it just seems like a way for Sony to sell lame virtual clothes to suckers.

I highly doubt the PS brand is going anywhere. If it does, so be it. My $500 PS3 purchase won't go to waste because 1) Sony isn't going anywhere and 2) by the time it happens, PS3 will be at the end of its' cycle. I'm sure if the PS brand did die, Naughty Dog and others would find a nice home somewhere else, so I'm not too worried.



[quote name='RelentlessRolento']I do hope multiplayer holds up though, since the last FPS to hold my interest in online multiplayer was Team Fortress 2.[/quote]

I hope there's not huge problems with the online. It seems like for a month or two after a game is released there are still problems with the online component. I really haven't looked into the multiplayer but if it turns out to be good I'll definitely check it out.
 
[quote name='Blackout']Yeah I figured those things were making money. Still. I didn't ask for any of those features. I doubt most people buying a PS3 are looking for those features either. It's a video game system first, everything else second. I didn't buy a PS3 to download movies or watch a virtual magazine. Home just seems like a waste of time that has zero to do with games. I still got hope for it, but at this point, it just seems like a way for Sony to sell lame virtual clothes to suckers. [/QUOTE]

You never know how good something is until it's arrived, and how important it is until it's gone.

I agree with you that Home is a product that makes many consumers go :whistle2:k, even those who are Sony fanatics. But after seeing the demo of the EA Sports arena, I am starting to see some great potential as a way to build brand loyalty and market products outside of traditional media (websites, print, videos, etc) in a more cost-effective manner.

And for the movie downloading/renting program, I also thought I'd never use it. But after renting from Red Box ($1/day until returned) and getting annoyed w/ the hassle of returning to my grocery store (thereby spending sometimes $5-6 and stressing over it), I am looking forward to using the Video Store as an alternative. The movie will be downloaded by the time dinner is eaten and cleaned up.

Only after consumers give the many capabilities of the PS3 a chance do they understand its value. Sony's been listening them since the system's birth, but being able to effectively communicate is so hard when people have no frame of reference to build on.
 
Just because you're not excited about Killzone's MP, doesn't mean that you won't end up enjoying it. I'm looking forward to both, becuase for this game to be a success, SP and MP has to be good. Killzone needs to be good all around, or else people will try to dismiss it.
 
Longer dev time certainly doesn't hurt, but it surely doesn't guarantee a better game by any means.

My comment was mostly based on my opinion (as loosely based on "facts" as possible) that KZ2 looks like it is going to be the FPS that R2 should've been.
 
R2 needed about 3-6 months more of development time to do more focus group testing on the single-player. As it stands, I'm pretty sure it was rushed out the door to meet the Holiday shopping season. After all, Sony needed some sort of exclusive shooter this year.
 
To this day I still don't get the hype of R and even more so for R2, it doesn't bring anything new to FPS... It's not even a game worth playing and I don't get why people praise it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top