160
rate

Killzone 2 "Half a War Won": Only the Games Review

March 29, 2009 in Reviews comments 14

In its review of Killzone 2, Only the Games cites the game's singleplayer as being deficient (lacking in context and a good sense of pace) compared to its robust multiplayer mode.

But unfortunate for Guerrilla, loosely combined moments and protracted battles never work beyond the online space. There, circumstance can boil down to “run here and shoot this” with little stretch of the imagination. Yet contrary to that relative bluntness, singleplayer needs context and pace to survive: It needs the power of an evenhanded storyteller.
pWheelie via onlythegames.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!
News story attached to:
Additional sources:

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 2
    Red 9 Mar 30, 09
    Conversely, most of my friends, both PSN and real life, tell me that the story campaign is actually really fun.

    *shrug* Not every review is accurate, I guess. I suppose that's why these things are 100% opinionated.
  • 2
    Qwowner Mar 30, 09
    Fun, yes. But the campaign still isn't as good as other FPSs, like Halo or CoD.
    • 2
      Shattered Mar 30, 09
      Are you kidding? Try playing on Veteran or Elite. You'll feel very accomplished once you finally finish the game. It's quite fun.
    • 0
      Red 9 Mar 30, 09
      quote Qwowner
      Fun, yes. But the campaign still isn't as good as other FPSs, like Halo or CoD.
      COD4's campaign was good gameplay-wise, but the story itself was nothing to write home about. Halo's campaign was...something, to be sure.
      • 0
        Seproth Mar 30, 09
        Call of duty 4 had one of the most shocking moments in gaming history. The story was well done, believable, and fun.

        Killzone 2 was sorta just odd. You go to some planet and just *bleep* em' up. I never understood why or cared, so I quit.

        Granted, I didn't play Killzone 1, but neither did most people.
        • 0
          Fatal Error Mar 30, 09
          Uh, what was shocking about anything in Call of Duty 4?
  • 0
    redneonfish Mar 30, 09
    Nuclear bomb going off and killing the yanks?
    • 1
      pWheelie Mar 30, 09
      Experiencing the military coup first hand, that eerie mission that took place from the perspective of the plane, and - as mentioned above - the nuclear blast.

      That campaign has its fair share of problems too (pretty similar to Killzone 2's never ending respawns and tripwires) but it had a great sense of style and pace as its backbone.
      • 0
        pWheelie Mar 31, 09
        Not shocking, just very well paced and directed.
    • 0
      Fatal Error Mar 30, 09
      Uh, nothing about that game was shocking. You seriously didn't expect a nuclear bomb to go off after playing that far into the game? A military coup was "shocking" to you? My god, we have some easily amused people out there.
      • 1
        Seproth Mar 31, 09
        Games rarely kill off main characters, much less you.

        But you you're Johnny *bleep*ing Badass, you see everything coming eh?
  • 0
    Seeker X Mar 30, 09
    Again, Killzone 1's campaign > Killzone 2's campaign. Even Liberation's campaign was more interesting, because it wasn't all "Mission objectives" for cutscenes. I really wish shooter games would just stop that, it was ok with Tom Clancy games because that's how they were. Shooters don't need to have pseudo-military storylines for campaigns. It's pretty tedious to see that the next cutscene is just a way to tell you what to do next.

    However, if the cutscenes were a little more like the "Fall of the New Sun" scene, it would've been a shitload more interesting. Other than that, multiplayer = *bleep*ing Ace; period.
    • 0
      Slumpy monkey Mar 30, 09
      Liberations campaign was pretty awesome.
    • 0
      Red 9 Mar 30, 09
      quote Seeker X
      because it wasn't all "Mission objectives" for cutscenes.
      Are you referring to COD4 or KZ2?

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.