I can't do that, but I can summarize it for you.
Stephen Totilo asks the question if newness or innovation is important to a game. He references Killzone 2 reviews.
Ken Levine says it isn't, going on to say that his wife makes him the same pizza more than once a week, and that's fine with him because it's a great pizza. He says it's the same way with games. If it's fun and cool, then he doesn't care whether or not it does anything new. He said there were some cases where games that did new things (he cited GTA3) yielded so much fun not simply because they were new or different just for the sake of being new and different, but because those new experiences were so much fun.
He went on to say that a game like KZ2 is going to get scrutinized more because there is so much to compare it to, while something like World of Goo may have more flaws but isn't as scrutinized because there's nothing to really compare it to.
Todd of Bethesda agrees, says he hasn't played KZ2 but has seen a lot of videos for it. He compliments the game on its visual fidelity and says he is impressed as a game designer by all the little things like reload animations, bobbing, field of view, and other effects that the game gets right. He continues by saying you can often tell whether or not an FPS game sucks by a "5 second test" of looking at the gun and how it's placed and positioned on screen, and he says the Killzone 2 guns look awesome. He wrapped it up by saying he's excited by the game.
That was pretty much it.
(((((((
