"Future Xbox 360 Exclusives will Surpass Killzone 2" - Microsoft

nero120 · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:04

Kreeeee said:
What are you insinuating? The 360 isn't technically inferior to the PS3, in fact I doubt even the experts could pick a definite leader for power even if they didn't have to worry about bureaucracy.

I'm 'insinuating' that whereas MS went for the safer bet with current tech and dev approaches, Sony tried to play the longer game with cell architecture in the hope that a slow start would lead to a longer lifecycle.

KZ2 could be the first proper example of that strategy.

atpbx · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:34

Shamikebab said:
Way to invalidate the rest of your post

Cobblers, I would sleep with Crysis if it was physically possible.

dannyjo22 · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:42

I have heard there is huge controller input lag in Killzone 2? Is this true? Surely not for such a highly rated game? Or has all the long developement time gone on graphics?

kidloco · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:43

dannyjo22 said:
I have heard there is huge controller input lag in Killzone 2? Is this true? Surely not for such a highly rated game? Or has all the long developement time gone on graphics?

I havent noticed any lag, its a great game. im on the final boss. I just wish I could get to grips with the damn controller.

JUMPURS · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:46

nero120 said:
I'm 'insinuating' that whereas MS went for the safer bet with current tech and dev approaches, Sony tried to play the longer game with cell architecture in the hope that a slow start would lead to a longer lifecycle.

KZ2 could be the first proper example of that strategy.

But they also had older tech than MS by way of GPU.

JUMPURS · 4 Mar 2009 at 14:48

dannyjo22 said:
I have heard there is huge controller input lag in Killzone 2? Is this true? Surely not for such a highly rated game? Or has all the long developement time gone on graphics?

Nope there is not a huge lag. The movement is slower and feels weighted, but then again, watching Ross Kemp in Afghanistan, soldiers can't run around at 200mph and turn in a nano second on a 10p. The character feels weighted, and i think that is what people think is 'lag'

Download the demo mate and give it a go, SP controls are the exact same.

sc(+)pe · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:01

There is defo a problem when making minor corrections in your aim. It feels neither fluid nor correct. I still can't tell if this is from the poor deadzone of my controllers analogue stick or if its to do with the movement acceleration.

IMO all aiming done within the current field of view should be slick and steady. Only when your body has to turn should you feel weighted.

Sheff · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:03

"Future Xbox 360 Exclusives will Surpass Killzone 2" - Microsoft

I should hope so, else what would be the point in buying games if they don't improve on previous games?

What's with all the fanboi comments? :confused:

Nanoman · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:11

It deffo isnt lag, I can make small quick movements easily without any delay, aint sure what some people are doing. :confused:

I think the weight thing is more emphased in single player aswell. Like the first time I played KZ2 I went straight into multiplayer and I wasnt getting on with the game at all as it felt too different to COD. I cant help but compare all FPS' to COD4 well annoying! I then started on single player and in SP I didnt really notice a change in the aiming/weight thing but then when I went back to multiplayer the thing felt like COD lol. I dont know if I was just getting use to the controls or not but MP did feel a lot different to SP. Im loving it now Ive got use to it etc. the game is awesome. + its well funny when you die in SP and an enemy looks into the screen and waves goodbye lol.

Skully · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:14

I keep hearing people talking about brilliant AI and amazing graphics in Killzone but I just don't see it!

I enjoy the game, really do like playing it but I don't think it looks out of this world and the AI is pretty crap in my opinion.

JUMPURS · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:23

Skully said:
I keep hearing people talking about brilliant AI and amazing graphics in Killzone but I just don't see it!

I enjoy the game, really do like playing it but I don't think it looks out of this world and the AI is pretty crap in my opinion.

You not seen the AI running between cover? taking cover as you are shooting? I am sure they where covering each other too.
And it looks great, but on top of that, you can destroy a lot of the environments, i had an AI hiding behind a pillar and shooting at me and was being a pain to kill, so i just shot the concrete off the pillar and then got him. Was stuff like that i loved.

But that's me

Nanoman · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:26

Also if an enemy is behind cover theyll peak up and if you have your crosshair on them they go back into cover. If they see youre not aiming at them then they open fire which I thought was pretty cool.

Shamikebab · 4 Mar 2009 at 15:32

Nanoman said:
Also if an enemy is behind cover theyll peak up and if you have your crosshair on them they go back into cover. If they see youre not aiming at them then they open fire which I thought was pretty cool.

Isn't that fairly common :confused:

Thesnipergecko · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:03

Hitler will be pleased.

T.

Kreeeee · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:09

nero120 said:
I'm 'insinuating' that whereas MS went for the safer bet with current tech and dev approaches, Sony tried to play the longer game with cell architecture in the hope that a slow start would lead to a longer lifecycle.

KZ2 could be the first proper example of that strategy.

You certainly can't state outright that the PS3 is technically superior, only that the design choices and architectures vary greatly. Any consoles graphics improve greatly with time as developers learn to use various tricks with the hardware, it's definitely not a Sony phenomenon.

nero120 · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:24

Kreeeee said:
You certainly can't state outright that the PS3 is technically superior, only that the design choices and architectures vary greatly. Any consoles graphics improve greatly with time as developers learn to use various tricks with the hardware, it's definitely not a Sony phenomenon.

Did I state that? I thought the point of my post was pretty clear. The use of the cell was clearly more forward thinking than ms with their use of current cpu architecture don't you think? What would be the point in using the cell if it didn't have more potential than current architecture, all you would be doing is to make game devs lives harder and marginalise your console.

Sony's strategy probably had more going for it than that.

Kreeeee · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:35

nero120 said:
Did I state that? I thought the point of my post was pretty clear. The use of the cell was clearly more forward thinking than ms with their use of current cpu architecture don't you think? What would be the point in using the cell if it didn't have more potential than current architecture, all you would be doing is to make game devs lives harder and marginalise your console.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(microprocessor)

The Cell is not designed primarily for the PS3/gaming, it's designed for server use and as a new type of processor for Sony to licence for specialised purposes (mostly heavily pipelined computation like encryption, the polar opposite of gaming). Having that many weak processors is actually not that great for gaming but the idea is that they have got the technology now and it is easy to scale up. Incorporating it into the PS3 served 3 main purposes:

1- Hype for the PS3
2- No licence fees for the processor
3- Gets the Cell name out there to generate interest in the processors scaled up versions.

In the PS4 I believe Sony plan to use the Cell for graphics processing too which is where the technology should shine.

Nanoman · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:42

Shamikebab said:
Isn't that fairly common

Examples? I dont think ive seen it many times before tbh, maybe in Crysis, but not where you are aiming without firing and the enemy checks to see where you are looking etc. and then shoot if the gun isnt pointed at them. Or if you are aiming at them they just remain in cover and will keep peaking up every now and again or will move somewhere else under cover. Dunno maybe its something ive only just noticed.

Smit · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:55

Nanoman said:
Examples? I dont think ive seen it many times before tbh, maybe in Crysis, but not where you are aiming without firing and the enemy checks to see where you are looking etc. and then shoot if the gun isnt pointed at them. Or if you are aiming at them they just remain in cover and will keep peaking up every now and again or will move somewhere else under cover. Dunno maybe its something ive only just noticed.

I am sure MoH games have had this for years as does maybe CoD.
Timesplitters 3 perhaps too.
Gears of War does this to some extent also.

Nanoman · 4 Mar 2009 at 16:59

Havent played Timesplitters but never seen it in the others tbh, especially COD and I know Gears doesnt for a fact, not like this anyway. Many a times in Gears have I been able to stand there with the cross hair positioned on where they will stand up and everytime they will just stand up and get killed straight away.