Forums > Submission Feedback > zippdementia's Killzone 2 review

A very interesting approach to the review. Not seen anyone gloss so quickly over SP before, but I think it's effective here. Good work.

I spoke to Pete at Reso yesterday, who's reviewing this for us. Asked him what he thought. "Very disappointed," he said.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

Good review. But did you not criticise me for taking almost exactly the same approach with my Perfect Dark Zero review?!

"fuck yeah oblivion" - Jihad

Where is your PD:Z review? I can't see one!

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

It's here. Janus has the unfortunate habit of writing really good reviews and then arbitarilly deleting them. I can find this one still because I cleverly linked to it when I wrote my own PD:Z review at the start of the year.

I have Janus' address. One day I shall turn up on his doorstep and pelt him with water ballons until he puts them all back up. He's only about an hour away from someone I visit every other month, anyway. Hmm...

For us. For them. For you.

It's funny, Janus. I thought of you a lot while writing this one.

In my defense I'll say that I was dissapointed in your PD review because I think ANYONE can see that RARE put a lot of time and effort into PD's single player. Levels were expansive and drastically different from each other, there was over twenty guns to have fun with, objectives were complex and interesting, there were well-scripted events, and the story had some nice twists.

Killzone 2's single player, on the other hand, feels like multi-player without the fun.

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/NewsCom-294802.aspx?CT=1

Enjoy.

For us. For them. For you.

Not very honest gamers at all. its getting sad how these unknown sites give out 'low' ratings to high profile ratings just to cause a bit of controversy on N4G and get some hits. at least take some pride in your work dimwits.

This is probably the funniest thing in there. Tons of inane, nearly incomprehensible rants... then the one guy who CAN put two sentences together, smashes Zipp for daring to give the game a lowly... EIGHT?!

//Zig

Unlimited Zig Works!

Whoa... the internet is scary.

Honestly, that's the most random bunch of comments I've ever seen. My favourites:

After putting in 70 hours in (50 hours online/20 hours campaign) I can say I enjoy the single player much better.

Really? That's why you put twice as much time into the online mode, right moron?

Cool review,good thing your review means nothing.

I honestly can't tell if he liked my review or not.

I enjoyed the single player much more but to me the single player wasnt all that fun.

Er... what?

SEV

RICO

TEMPLAR

GAARZA

VISARI

RADEC

STILL FORGETABLE ?

TRY PLAYING THE GAME. NICE TRY WITH THE MISCONCEPTION THOUGH.

Yeah. They were all pretty forgettable. This guy's funny, though.

I would like to see what would happen to honestgamers & co. if N4G ceased to exist...

We'd stop getting snarky comments from idiots?

Yeah, these were really enjoyable to read. Thanks, EmP!

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

Ah, the joy of aggregate sites.

The problem being, of course, that they don't take into account discrepancies between scoring systems, so where an 8 for KZ2 elsewhere may have been slightly underwhelming, here's it is of course very good.

Don't worry about it, man. Have a look at the Edge review on there for some serious anger. A seven?! CONDEMNED TO HELL!

I remember when Martin reviewed Resi 5 at Resolution and gave it 82% in what was, for the most part, an incredibly glowing review. Someone commented saying "It deserves nothing below 90, and that's not just my opinion... that's fact." Stupidly, I replied, calling him on his idiocy and pointing out that, by our scoring guidelines, 80-90% means there is very little wrong with the game. Loads of people hit the "disagree" button. Say wha?!

Anyway, my favourite one from this thread is the guy that claims to have done his research and discovered you're 42! Bloody hell, you age quickly, Zipp.

Your integrity is always going to be called if you go against the grain with a review, no matter how slightly. We've gotta deal with it. It's happened to us all before and it will happen again. Just keep on writing what you think is a fair appraisal, and no one important will ever care. That's what matters, right?

(Not that it is against the grain. Your review mirrors what pretty much every review under the sun said. The only thing that might be a tad lower is the score, ie. the arbitrary numbers, ie. the stuff that's totally dependent on each site's system, ie. the thing all the sensible people hate about sites like N4G.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

Wait, what? Who thought I was 42???

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

Someone on the comments there says, and I paraphrase, "I looked this guy up and he's some 42-year-old still trying to talk about games."

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

Here we go. From the "open zone" comments section:

"i checked his profile out and the guy is seriously depressing. hes like 42 years old trying to be a game reviewer. sorry buddy, go get drunk and beat up."

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

..the truth hurts. (42 years old, zipp.. *tsk, tsk*)

I don't know.. Since some of the scenarios in the SP come back in the multiplayer, you recognize the setting, and that makes the multiplayer deeper and easier to come back to, imo. But on the other hand, it's not really necessary to have played the SP to appreciate the MP level- designs. The Tharsis refinery. Radec's Academy. The bridge crossing. There is a separate backstory on all those levels that stands on it's own.

And the SP is a lot like that, too - scenarios with a narrative, like the underground trekking, Visari Square, the Cruiser intercept. The assault in the dam - it doesn't try to actively tell a story, or amaze the player with.. er.. great dialogue, and so on. Jippidi- ****ing doodaa. Instead the "story" is just stuff happening.

While the real narrative is in the scenarios that you just happen to be a part of.

But I like the approach, because you point out what a terrible smear the entire campaign story- line really is. :D The main plot- devices, the nuke and the role Visari plays - they get about thirty seconds out of it. The rest really just is.. stuff happening.

..I'm still not sure that's a bad thing, though. I mean, let's face it, this is not Shakespeare we're talking about here.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.