Killzone Shadow Fall Review Thread

It's fairly extraordinary how many people just accept that Killzone must be mediocre because it is getting mediocre reviews. We are talking about game reviews and reviewers here. They're incredibly fickle and highly inconsistent.

It doesn't surprise me that Killzone's single player isn't the best thing ever - I would be surprised if it isn't capable of matching a Call of Duty or Battlefield toe to toe any day of the week. That of course is where the multiplayer element of the scoring tends to come into play.

Reviews of games with significant (or primary) multiplayer components are always, pretty much regardless of the reviewer, totally off base. Sometimes reviews are written on the basis of no multiplayer time, most are written on the basis of highly limited multiplayer time in extremely constrained environments. Most of the rating of the multiplayer seems to be based off hype or history. Call of Duty, with its ever mediocre single player still reviews well because there is a presumption that the multiplayer is high quality. You never see any remotely deep analysis of multiplayer games in reviews - it's all just guesswork.

I don't know whether Killzone's multiplayer will make up for what is probably a fairly run-of-the-mill single player experience. I just don't think the people who've reviewed it really know either. I do know that I don't want to play Call of Duty again, so, my fingers are crossed.
 
Is there something beyond the Killzone review that makes you say this?

There is a sea's worth of shit that likely makes him say this. There's a reason even EviLore (the owner of GAF) called him the most disreputable member of Gaming Journalism, and guess what, it had nothing to do with Sony, or Microsoft, or games reviews. The guy is an out and out corporate lackey and just generally disingenuous even outside of gaming. He has also been wrong, ignorant or misinforming on more things than one could possibly remember.

For me his defence of EA/Sim City, and it's always online features even when his lies were proven to be lies, and even when all evidence was mounting against his claims and defences, was the pick of the bunch for me. That shit was a train wreck to see unfold.
 
Man i was neutral to gies but now.... just :lol:

It's a bloody joke of a review and it's not even because of the score lol

ps: if Anyone has trouble understanding why people say geis is fully of shit, watch their ps4 life stream. You couldn't find better MS PR even inside MS
 
Lolygon giving TLOU 7.5 is more shocking to me than the Shadow Fall score.

I think reading the Eurogamer and Destructoid reviews of the game makes it sound pretty awesome and between this and Battlefield I'll be more than happy for a couple of months at least

That 7.5 still brings tears to my eyes, mean sure it's all "OPINIONS" but Tlou is GOTY for me. I just want to see old Jimmy Sterlings review of KZ:SF.
 
i am with you on that. i even stated that killzone 2 is among best fps current gen.

Point i was making that. Both killzone 2 and Crysis were loved by critics and gamers.
Killzone 3 and crysis 2 had mixed reception. crysis 3 was mostly disliked by both critics and gamers. and now KZ:sf is hated by critics lets see how gamers respong but both are on downward trajectory

You make it sound like this was universal panned game.
 
Any word on if the multiplayer suffers from the weird input lag from other games in the series? That would be a big factor in whether I decide to sink time into the multiplayer.
 
I'm not interested in comparisons. I don't give two squirts of piss about XBone scores. They could all score straight 10s and I wouldn't care. PS4 is my console of choice this gen and I only care what Sony is doing.

As great as the software lineup has been on PS3 this year, its at the opposite end of the spectrum on the PS4 launch.

Infamous - delayed
Driveclub - delayed
Knack - who gave this the green light?
Killzone - ho hum...but its pretty to look at in 1080p and 60fps

Infamous hasn't been delayed. Are you confusing it with Watch_Dogs? One open world dystopian near-future is pretty much as good as the next.
 
This game is sitting 7 points lower on Metacritic than Perfect Dark Zero.

I have no idea how to feel about that. I feel kind of embarrassed for Guerilla, I guess.

I feel pretty confident in saying the campaign in Killzone will be far better than PDZ. I mean it has to be.

As for multiplayer who knows. I had a lot of fun in PDZ for a couple of months but it was my first online console game so I'm sure that skewed things a bit.
 
Arthur Gies is also the author of these essential literary pieces of excellent critical analysis:

unavngivetweze5.png


unavngivet7jpsf.png


polygonlol75u3y.png


This is irrelevant to the matter of the legitimacy of this review, it's just to emphasize that Arthur Gies is incompetent at what his function as a game reviewer and writer actually is.
 
Here is the recap from Evilore himself:



Anyone - and I do mean anyone who listens to anything that blithering idiot Arthur Gies says about any subject has no credibility.

Killzone may be tripe, but nobody will think that due to Arthur Gies stamp of approval, that's for DAMN sure.

Thanks, I do recall all that happening now. I try to not be a negative person but I find it really hard to trust his opinion.
 
This can't be right. Anybody else confirm, he admitted this? Because this would literally DISGUST me.

No need to watch the stream even...check the thread. It's filled with comedy gold material from him and some of his fellow 'journalists' at Polygon

That is how reviews are in general. Nothing surprising about that.

Not taking into account a proper analysis of the biggest aspect of the game into their review/score is how things are done generally?
 
Pass the koolaid, please!

*ahhhhh, refreshing*

KZ deserves 11/10.
F&%$ Polygon!
KZ deserves 11/10.
F&%$ Polygon!
KZ deserves 11/10.
F&%$ Polygon!
 
This can't be right. Anybody else confirm, he admitted this? Because this would literally DISGUST me.
He played multiplayer before reviewing. Reviewers never play that much of it. I mean I don't see any reviewers getting to level 70 in cod before they write a review.

It's a launch game. I know a lot of people were expecting high 80's low 90's but it's a rushed launch game.
 
Shane is awesome has integrity and is passionate about games. He and Luck are similar except operated on other ends of the fanboy spectrum. Comparing either of them to Gies is a massive insult.
 
It's a bloody joke of a review and it's not even because of the score lol

ps: if Anyone has trouble understanding why people say geis is fully of shit, watch their ps4 life stream. You couldn't find better MS PR even inside MS

Can you elaborate a bit? I'm not giving those clowns a clic..

Thanks!
 
Allow me to review Killzone.. Not just Shadow Fall but any Killzone game

Pros - A graphics tour de force - Rock solid frame-rate and good multiplayer - Some Good campaign moments.

Cons - The story campaign is basically pretty average and nothing you will remember.

Why buy it? Multiplayer. It will keep you busy until games like Destiny and Infamous Second Son come out. It will also impress your friends with the amazing graphics.
Imo the killzone sp games had really good level design and memorable setpieces...
 
Battenhousen was a total Sony fanboy (and still is), but he's no Arthur Gies. Arthus Gies is a straight shitty person

I (foolishly) tried to listen to Rebel FM once, and was absolutely flabbergasted at how much of a huge, egocentric prick he came off as.

I had never heard of him before, and looked him up, and was not surprised to see all of the rest of the Internet's opinion of him followed mine.

But seriously, never listen to Rebel FM,
 
Not taking into account a proper analysis of the biggest aspect of the game into their review/score is how things are done generally?

Yes? Lots of reviewers dabble in multiplayer and are done with it. Especially before the game is out.
 
Can you elaborate a bit? I'm not giving those clowns a clic..

Thanks!

I couldn't watch too much of it..it's hard to stomache such blatent fanboyism

For example:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89699786&postcount=32

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89702208&postcount=96

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89702746&postcount=109

and more. I suffered through some of their opinions and comments about remoteplay just now. No more

Yes? Lots of reviewers dabble in multiplayer and are done with it. Especially before the game is out.

Dunno if your claim about lots of reviewers doing it hold any merit or what's it's based on. But for a game whose primary component is the MP experience that should be the most closely examined aspect. If an outlet is not doing so then that review is as useful as 'insert clever comment about something not useful here'
 
He played multiplayer before reviewing. Reviewers never play that much of it. I mean I don't see any reviewers getting to level 70 in cod before they write a review.

It's a launch game. I know a lot of people were expecting high 80's low 90's but it's a rushed launch game.

I am watching the Polygon stream right now, and it's a lot worse then you think...I'll leave it at that.
 
I couldn't watch too much of it..it's hard to stomache such blatent fanboyism

For example:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89699786&postcount=32

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89702208&postcount=96

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89702746&postcount=109

and more. I suffered through some of their opinions and comments about remoteplay just now. No more

Is this for real? It's like a live stream straight from microsoft's shareholders.. WTF!?
 
I will never understand the logic of flipping out over a review of a game before you've played it. Flip out after you have by all means but when you haven't even touched the game you're arguing from a position of ignorance.
 
Arthur Gies is also the author of these essential literary pieces of excellent critical analysis:

unavngivetweze5.png


unavngivet7jpsf.png


polygonlol75u3y.png


This is irrelevant to the matter of the legitimacy of this review, it's just to emphasize that Arthur Gies is incompetent at what his function as a game reviewer and writer actually is.

He has different opinions to me therefore everything he says must be wrong!

His Killzone review may be a load of rubbish. His opinions on the PS4 may be massively skewed, but saying he is useless at reviews because he has highly rated games you don't like is silly.
 
So Titanfall is destined to get a shit review score since there is no single player game?

It... depends on their impression of the game? You think when Warhawk came out reviewers were spending 20 hours playing multiplayer matches before they felt they could make a write up about it?

Dunno if your claim about lots of reviewers doing it hold any merit or what's it's based on. But for a game whose primary component is the MP experience that should be the most closely examined aspect.

Who decided that Killzones primary component was multiplayer? To many people, it isnt.

If an outlet is not doing so then that review is as useful as 'insert clever comment about something not useful here'

I agree.
 
We've been through this many times, with multiple games. Skyward Sword, Uncharted 3, Halo 4, and the Last of Us. It's just one man's opinion, and that's all that it is. Killzone Shadow Fall is the must have launch game, and I am personally super stoked to play it. Some of ya'll are taking this a little too far :), is anyone excited about seeing that 1080p Killzone Gameplay in 60 FPS??
 
You know what, if the game is more stable and more fair then any other shooter this year, it'll be the best (traditional) shooter this year has to offer
 
I've never seen people this butthurt about a review score before. Killzone has ALWAYS been average. Always. If you are a fan, go buy the game and enjoy it. Who gives a fuck about reviews.
 
Top Bottom