Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 09/23/2008
Offline
1908 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 17, 2010
Every FPS has some auto aim in it or you would never be able to hit someone from a range. KZ2 has a lot of hip-fire auto aim in it.
Photobucket
Please use plain text.
Message 70 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/15/2009
Offline
4131 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 17, 2010

 


Hungry_Xenomorph wrote:
Every FPS has some auto aim in it or you would never be able to hit someone from a range. KZ2 has a lot of hip-fire auto aim in it.

 

...no, the snap-on aim in killzone 2 only works on short range. The hip-fire guiding never helped anyone hit anything. In fact, the beta didn't have auto-aim. And when the game launched, the auto-aim was added in without testing, apparently - and it was broken for several weeks.

 

So I guess.. everything you just wrote is the opposite of what's actually the case. Why is that?

Please use plain text.
Message 71 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 04/20/2005
Offline
272 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 18, 2010

fleinn wrote:

 


Hungry_Xenomorph wrote:
Every FPS has some auto aim in it or you would never be able to hit someone from a range. KZ2 has a lot of hip-fire auto aim in it.

 

...no, the snap-on aim in killzone 2 only works on short range. The hip-fire guiding never helped anyone hit anything. In fact, the beta didn't have auto-aim. And when the game launched, the auto-aim was added in without testing, apparently - and it was broken for several weeks.

 

So I guess.. everything you just wrote is the opposite of what's actually the case. Why is that?


i remember kz2 beta having aim assist.  i clearly remember hip firing the sniper rifle and easily killing people.

you're saying that the hip-fire guiding NEVER helped ANYONE hit anything??  really?  NEVER helped ANYONE?  so you met EVERY single person that played kz2?

Please use plain text.
Message 72 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/15/2009
Offline
4131 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 18, 2010
I was talking about the snap-on aim.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hllYWpgD8

And yes, I can say with absolute certainty that no one has ever been helped by the guiding crosshair in KZ2. Why? Because if you can aim slowly, which is when it triggers, it puts your aim off. If you snap and twitch around, it triggers unevenly and you miss.

So conclusion: the auto-aim doesn't help anyone.

The snap-on aim specifically ^ see the clip. That's how it was stuck for a while. That only helped cheaters.

Same when they stopped kicking people from rooms if they were lagging too much - that too only helped cheaters.

But that's how it is on consoles, I guess. "Be happy with what you get", and then: "continue to be happy when we ruin a solution that actually worked - because we IMAGINE that the majority wants it".

As usual: the problem is that a lot of the most bombastic feedback (that is much more categorical than mine) insists that there is a silent majority in owning consoles that have a number of requirements:
1. the game should play by itself, because that is fun.
2. the story should be brain-dead.
3. nothing must be out of the ordinary.
4. or so help you god.

And no amount of feedback - like we had on KZ2, while the game still had way over 100.000 people playing regularly - will stop that idea from being the common view.

These changes are done, and the audience shifts, obviously - but it is also smaller than the "only four people" audience that liked the original game. We're talking about a game here that reviewed in an average of about 95%. It's crazy for a ps3 exclusive to get that high - it almost never happens. But the "majority changes" were done, and the game dropped on the amount of online players, even when the game went platinum.

Just get that - the changes that were made to the game didn't - as advertised - increase the online population. Instead they reduced it, even as the game's sales picked up.

But it doesn't matter. Because the "common opinion" is that console-folks want a stupid, easy, simplistic game that looks like COD. And even if the changes that actually are there makes the game more hardcore, broken, and arcade - it doesn't matter: because it's really only the point that something is said that makes the majority opinion true.

So here's what actually happened. KZ2 had a strangely intuitive system that leveled the playing field between gaming veterans and newbies. That was a brilliant thing, because it meant the game was more accessible. Marketing should be ecstatic.

Then, for whatever moronic reason, someone decided that the controls in KZ2 were too difficult for their kill-streaks and strafing sprees - and they were changed.

Result - the game became hardcore, and a tiny, tiny amount of people were left. Example: I've played way too many games. I used to play Unreal tournament - and was ridiculously good. And the fact that I disliked the controls were actually used by certain people to point out that the game now appealed to "casual gamers". Nothing like that happened - but that doesn't matter, because certain people KNEW what casual gamers wanted.

And so we got arcade twitch-controls and meta-gaming trickery that could be used to pawn noobs.

I.e, before the patching, you would be extremely skilled to go something like 1.4 on the K/D ratio. After the patches, the ones on the top of the leaderboard broke 4 and 5 easily.

Now, does that encourage new players to play the game? When there are tricks you can use in the game that there's no way to beat?

Of course not. Any serious developer knows instantly that something like that ruins the game forever. But not GG. Oh, no. Because SOMEONE has gotten it into their heads that they KNOW what the console-crowd wants.

Namely: "anything we say they want". The quality, or how good the actual solution is - that just doesn't come into it.

And why should it? Obviously, "the majority opinion" doesn't change, so there you go. So what if just a few diehard hardcore fans are pissed off, right, as long as the "internet majority" has their way?

lol. I mean, seriously - that's the only place more than two people have ever agreed on that the controls in KZ2 were hardcore - on the official Killzone forum, by someone posting with several different accounts. One of them were a bit careless, passing on tips to people who agreed with him about how to create duplicate accounts, and then coming back to spam the boards. These were the people who predicted GG and the Killzone franchise would end unless the controls were fixed, or the spawn-grenades were fixed, etc.

But that's no problem - because a certain bunch of people got to hear exactly what they wanted. And perhaps the most intuitive fps made was made into crap.

Anyway. So that's been evolved into KZ3. And we'll see, again, if that on it's own helps sell the title, and populate the online. When solutions are copied from other games, and put into some other design without much thought.

Now - obviously some people here believe that anything will sell anyway. That no matter how bad the game is, it will sell, because it's Killzone. And because it's not Halo, it won't have high first day sales, so what does it matter anyway, right?

The other view is that a solid quality title is necessary to produce to promote the console - and that the life time sales are more important for a company that doesn't belive in spending a Hollywood movie budget on advertisment alone.

But with Killzone 3, neither will happen. Just like Killzone 2, the lasting appeal will be horrible, thanks to the changes and solutions that have been picked. And the title still does not have a Hollywood blockbuster movie budget for advertisement - so it won't have first day sales either.

But whatever. Obviously other people, who can find no wrong with any game that's currently being promoted, know best. Just like they did with MAG, and just like they did with Killzone 2.

Alternative opinions might suggest that two very, very good games were ruined, and the sales reduced to a laughable pittance. But that doesn't matter, because certain people knows what the majority want.

And that is all that matters. Being convincingly arrogant, and declaring that other people want crap to eat.

And clearly this works - so really, why make games at all. Why not go back to selling milk-carton designs or something. I mean, that's what Sony should do - sell some other merchandise that doesn't have to deal with ideas and artists complicated stuff like that. Clearly that's where they want to be.

In any case - just remember that I said how it would turn out, and then - like the people at the EU forum - go ahead and ban me when I come back and tell you I was right.

Hell, why wait for that - ban me now instead, and feel superior and good about silencing unwelcome feedback. Go ahead. If you do that, I'm sure the launch will be awesome.

Just think - no one on the official forum are complaining, because they're all banned. That must mean the title is perfect! And it will sell 5 million discs, right?
Please use plain text.
Message 73 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 08/26/2010
Offline
186 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 18, 2010
ill say this again i dont caere what other games have aim assist even kz2 just dont leave it in kz3
Image and video hosting by TinyPicwill YOU be the 500th member o_O
Please use plain text.
Message 74 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 02/13/2009
Offline
1573 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 19, 2010

KZ2 had Aim Assist? 

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Please use plain text.
Message 75 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/15/2009
Offline
4131 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 19, 2010
You would notice on the shotgun. But any gun on short range would have the lock-on aim (it's like the lock-on function they used on the move-demonstration for kz3).

They kept it in because "people" wanted it, apparently. I don't know about anyone.. casual, at least.. who actually played the game and thought it worked, though. Because it wasn't very subtle or smooth..

But I know some of the power-strafers had a lot of good things to say about it, while the exploit was still possible to abuse... like in the clip.. :/
Please use plain text.
Message 76 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 02/13/2009
Offline
1573 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 20, 2010

 


fleinn wrote:
You would notice on the shotgun. But any gun on short range would have the lock-on aim (it's like the lock-on function they used on the move-demonstration for kz3).

They kept it in because "people" wanted it, apparently. I don't know about anyone.. casual, at least.. who actually played the game and thought it worked, though. Because it wasn't very subtle or smooth..

But I know some of the power-strafers had a lot of good things to say about it, while the exploit was still possible to abuse... like in the clip.. :/

Huh, strange, I pull up my sights a lot but I never really noticed that.

 

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Please use plain text.
Message 77 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 05/11/2009
Offline
29 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 20, 2010

How has Guerrilla ruined killzone? I believe it's called a beta for a reason. You can't get mad at a bulldozer for not doing backflips, so don't be mad at Guerrilla for trying something new

Please use plain text.
Message 78 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/15/2009
Offline
4131 posts
 

Re: Killzone 2 > Killzone 3. Guerrilla Has Ruined Killzone.

Nov 20, 2010
..it's just that what they have now doesn't really make sense, even if they were trying to create Halo crossed with COD. It looks like an arcade shooter, and it has the speed of an arcade shooter. But most of the action, and the abilities only really work if the speed of the game is extremely slow. That's when the game looks pretty as well, when the animations look reasonably normal, etc.

It's essentially just more of the same of what they did with Killzone 2 through the patching. Instead of creating a new game that can handle the faster pacing.. because they would want to do "what people want".. instead of that, they've added things from other games into a design they don't seem to mix well with.

So we have things like the slower aiming - good idea. But it's implemented in a way that still encourages you to leap around while snapping the aim-button. Add lag, and the game just won't play well, no matter how the abilities are tweaked.

Had the same thing in KZ2 - they seem to believe that the design of the game is so solid that the game doesn't change character if they add things that only work in a game with insanely much higher speed.

...it's like if they made the dolls in Halo walk at half speed - but still made everyone as accurate and mobile while strafing as before. And then added a one-shot leaping melee-kill... oh, right, that was Halo 2..

..anyway. They had something else that actually worked, though.. that's kind of the annoying thing..
Please use plain text.
Message 79 of 98 (224 Views)
Reply
0 Likes