Killzone Shadow Fall Review Thread

@EatChildren

Would it be fair to call this the PS4's Perfect Dark Zero?

only if the final game looks like someone vomited KY jelly over everything. PDZ wasn't even a good graphical showpiece for the new consoles. It did a lot of technically impressive things in about the ugliest possible way.
 
Killzone name was always lukewarm but damn was thinking this would be the game to do it. Maybe the online makes up for it hopefully because GG seriously should step it up.

Idk bout Sony cutting them but they will probably be pit on the back burner this gen

if you dismiss polygon and kotaku (which is like tossing infowars and the onion from world news feeds) I thought the reviews were good? no?

...i think the reviewers were all a little pissy about the review event in general...hell even knack ranges from garbage to pretty good...its all a crap shoot with these reviews, like movie reviews..if you like it you like it, not every game or movie hits the same buttons for people.

keep an eye on gaf for feedback, and if you like a genre, play it.


edit - these reviewers are not even professional critics in the truest sense..they are mostly the equivalent of a Yelper, and enthusiast, and even michilen starred restaurants get bad reviews there. maybe killzone sucks, but Im certainly not drawing that conclusion based on geese and saysler
 
I wonder if any of these sites will do a second look at the game once they are in a normal review environment and have time to pull apart the multiplayer components of these games. It's sad to hear they only got about 3 hours of play with KZ multi here, though getting a better grasp of MP might not change any impressions.
 
And yet Killzone Mercenary, which was super well received by GAF, has a user score of 9.1 on Metacritic....has an average Metacritic score of 78. That should tell you everything you need to know about reviews, in context more so with the Killzone franchise.

I understand that the Killzone brand is tainted by the awful outings on PS3 but I am really not surprised by average scores for Shadow Fall, it just ups the ante on graphics but sticks to the same "tight corridor" structure as previous entries and it probably carries the horrible gunplay forwards as well since that is a consequence of how their engine is built (which prioritises pretty over gameplay).

That Gies scored it down because he died a lot is bullshit though, no need to score a game down because he is crap at gaming. That he gave Dead Space 3 a 9.5 is quite telling in that sense, he is definitely one of those "this game is great because it makes me feel awesome at gaming" (and vice versa) reviewers. Which Polygon should clamp down on. If the game is too hard then he needs to set the difficulty to easy or normal, not rag on it because he died a lot.
 


M%C3%A9lanie-Laurent-Is-Awkward-In-Inglorious-Basterds-Reaction-Gif.gif
 
It doesn't matter what COD or battlefield 4 because almost 100% of people buy those games for thier multiplayer (which lets face it, you can't trust a reviewer to review)

You guys gotta realize your the less than 1% that buys FPS games for the campaign. And I really don't understand why?
I suggest people that just play these games for the single player is much higher, especially considering the average age of gamers goes up each year. I no longer play online as my reflexes now suck and 13 year old's easily kick my ass, so I look for a decent campaign as most, if not all my time will be spent on single player.

I passed on BF4 (although I heard the campaign can be done in 3-4 hours) because I know to hold off on newer EA games and see if they Ubisoft the PC port (they did), Call of Duty: Ghost because Activision is the new EA (a crappier looking Ubi port with PC issues)... so I had high hopes for Killzone Shadowfall.

Like others, I thought the open world part of the game was the norm, not the exception. If this game reviewed well (and opinions here from a few I trust matched this) then this game would have had me buying a PS4 the day Infamous dropped.
 
People are surprised that Killzone is a pretty but average shooter? The whole series is a procession of 5/10 games. Totally average.
 
Gemüsepizza;89666273 said:
Ridiculous. Killzone = 5, but CoD:Ghosts = 7 (only on Xbox One of course)? Yeah right.

Again, Polygon gave Forza Horizon a whopping 6/10 which goes against this "Xbox bias" that everyone keeps throwing around.

Perhaps they just use the 0-10 scale properly. Although that still doesn't sit well with me considering both FH and TLoU were exemplary games. Still, opinions (and hits).
 
750,000 reasons in the form of US Dollars from Microsoft's pockets?
The whole staff has to favor anything Microsoft shits out because they paid for that bad documentary? That's a pretty black and white way of looking at the world.
 
All the people expecting Killzone to be a good game and not just a fantastic graphical showcase was in denial.

Bought a ps3 in preparation of owing a ps4 and the Killzone games are all average.

You are horribly misinformed. Please see this thread. Many regard KZ2 as one of the best shooters of this generation, namely for the sublime multiplayer (which sadly is barely being touched upon in the reviews).

NeoGAF | Best FPS games this gen
 
I'm not saying Polygon has a Xbone-agenda...

... but Polygon has a Xbone-agenda. I know, I know, people are going say that this is just fanboy rage or whatever, but I'm actually as impartial and unbiased as you can get seeing as I only own a PC and Wii U. I got no stakes, but it's pretty obvious to me that a couple of gaming journalism outlets are just out to shit on the PS4 while hype up the underpowered Xbone.

Perhaps they've been moneyhatted (Polygon has been financed by Microsoft for $750,000), or they're trying to be CNN-style "balanced", or maybe they're just a bunch of fanboys.

Not pointing any fingers here, but some fingers kinda need to be pointed.
 
Soo... you're saying that I cant wear Killzone avatar and be reasonable?

Dont play dumb. Polygon was ever like that. Almost any PS exclusive is by them undescored (The Last of Us is another GREAT example, but it have many more... almost all of them).

Im not complaining about no other reviews here. But polygon is pure joke!

Yet on the same day Resogun gets 8.5 and the day before Ratchet and Clank scores 8.5 too, both PS exclusives and both scored higher than the Metacritic average for those two games (also, they scored Knack higher than most outlets too).
 
Everyone says that 'no one likes Killzone', so I'm fine with Gies hating on it. It looks sort of like Syndicate, which I really enjoyed.

Also, what the hell is wrong with that PS4 'review'? I can't read a paragraph without the page animating in some way.
 
I understand that the Killzone brand is tainted by the awful outings on PS3 but I am really not surprised by average scores for Shadow Fall, it just ups the ante on graphics but sticks to the same "tight corridor" structure as previous entries and it probably carries the horrible gunplay forwards as well since that is a consequence of how their engine is built (which prioritises pretty over gameplay).

That Gies scored it down because he died a lot is bullshit though, no need to score a game down because he is crap at gaming. That he gave Dead Space 3 a 9.5 is quite telling in that sense, he is definitely one of those "this game is great because it makes me feel awesome at gaming" (and vice versa) reviewers. Which Polygon should clamp down on. If the game is too hard then he needs to set the difficulty to easy or normal, not rag on it because he died a lot.

Awful outings on the PS3? Have you even played a Killzone game? Killzone 2 is sitting at a 91 and Killzone 3 at a 84-85 I think? Uhm yea. Not even close to "awful".
 
Can we please please please ban Polygon?
Also I don't get the logic of "it's all the same stuff we've seen before" but rating COD higher, isn't that the same stuff as well? At least KZ brings next gen into the mix.

You don't think stagnation is the ONLY reason the scores are what they are, do you? Maybe CoD got a higher score because of Extinction mode or the changes to the unlock/progression system in MP. There are 3 modes in CoD (SP, MP, Extinction) so maybe it got a higher score because there's more content there.

Who knows??
 
This has been proven false. It's been repeatedly stated that almost half of the COD buyers never even touch the multiplayer.

Dude that is such, such bullshit. Anyone got anything to back this up with? Derrick you are seriously off your rocker if you think 5 million people are buying COD for the campaign.
 
Can we please please please ban Polygon?
Also I don't get the logic of "it's all the same stuff we've seen before" but rating COD higher, isn't that the same stuff as well? At least KZ brings next gen into the mix.

That's good news, because I liked the syndicate shooter too.

can we please ban Polygon from review threads? its ridiculous how sony games repeatedly are getting low scores from arthur gies.

Are you guys serious ? Ban them because you are mad that they gave a game you were hyped for, an average score ?

 
Can we please stop talking about Polygon? That site should have been banned after that Sim City fiasco.

Going back to KZ:SF, I really think Sony should cut ties with GG, they've proven they're no Bungie and I feel the studio doesn't add much to Sony as a whole.

Every complaint I had about the previous Killzone games (lifeless, lacks personality, generic, linear) seems to be popping up for this game as well. I though SF would be a departure for the series, a mini reboot so to speak, but alas, Guerilla Games is still Guerilla Games. Very disappointed so far.
 
I'm not disagreeing with the overall premise of that quote - but Crysis 1 remains an excellent AND gorgeous game.

i thought this would be the crysis 1 of the killzonw series with all the talk about the more open levels and the owl gadget, but if it actually goes back to a more corridore design i might actually have to agree with arthur gies's looks like the future but is stuck in the past
 
if you dismiss polygon and kotaku (which is like tossing infowars and the onion from world news feeds) I thought the reviews were good? no?

...i think the reviewers were all a little pissy about the review event in general...hell even knack ranges from garbage to pretty good...its all a crap shoot with these reviews, like movie reviews..if you like it you like it, not every game or movie hits the same buttons for people.

keep an eye on gaf for feedback, and if you like a genre, play it.
I kind of liked 3 so well see how it goes
 
Again, Polygon gave Forza Horizon a whopping 6/10 which goes against this "Xbox bias" that everyone keeps throwing around.

Perhaps they just use the 0-10 scale properly. Although that still doesn't sit well with me considering both FH and LToU were exemplary games. Still, opinions (and hits).

I don't think I've ever disagreed with reviews more than Polygon's. Gies aside, I think the calls of bias are mostly unwarranted. It just seems like a site composed of a lot of people who have different tastes than I do.
 
i thought this would be the crysis 1 of the killzonw series with all the talk about the more open levels and the owl gadget, but if it actually goes back to a more corridore design i might actually have to agree with arthur gies's looks like the future but is stuck in the past

I don't want to disappoint you, but linear homogenous shooters are still going to be a very big part of the future.
 
Awful outings on the PS3? Have you even played a Killzone game? Killzone 2 is sitting at a 91 and Killzone 3 at a 84-85 I think? Uhm yea. Not even close to "awful".

I've played them both through to the end. They are not good games. Linear, the gunplay is horrible and the controls were all over the place. Killzone on PS3 was very, very pretty and it looks like that tradition has continued on PS4, but the gameplay never reached the heights of BF or even COD. It was just all over the place, and since I buy games to play them, not watch them they were horrible, for me at least.
 
Top Bottom