Killzone 3 Will Be The Halo Reach Killer?

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

Killzone 3 has about as much chance of killing Halo: Reach as Killzone 2 did at killing Halo 3.

Killzone has always been a generic shooter with generic character and a bunch of unimaginative bad guys that all look the same.

Halo games only come out around every 3 years or so, but at this rate there's going to be more Killzone games than Halo in another couple years. PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

Theres Halo 1-3, Odst, Halo Wars, and soon to be Halo Reach. Plus a film in the works plus a possible anime unless it was released already I'm not sure. Plus books and the canceled mmo. Meanwhile the Killzone series has Killzone 1-2 plus the psp version with Killzone 3 in the works. I do not know what you are talking about.

lol what are you taking about?

Main Halo games come every 3 years.That is including Halo Reach.Halo ODST is an expansion to Halo 3 and Halo Wars was created by esemble studios,not Bungie.How is that milked?

The series overall, also if ODST was an expansion, 60 dollars is quite pricey for a short expansion.

It was still an expansion.Just an overpriced one.

So just because Halo has lots of novels,comics and an anime means it is milked?Yea right

Novels and comics dont take a year to make.So MS could have 1 novel or comic a year and it wouldnt be milked

if Halo was milked,is quality would be low and MS would still keep producing it.But that isnt the case.Millions of 360 gamers constantly want more Halo.

So your saying MS should deny what we want and stop making Halo?Not to mention that Halo sells very well,and liek all companies,MS want $$$.Sony,Microsoft and Nintendo want $$$

If Mario is milked,then MGS,Mario,Zelda,Metroid,star trek,starwars ect is milked.and I highly doubt you think that

No, I'm saying that Guilty Spark is wrong for saying Killzone is milked when it's similar to the structure of the Halo Franchise. Which is why I stated what each franchise has done up to date. Also I spelled Sparks name wrong on my previous post I think

He never said that it is milked. He said that the direction that Sony and the developer are taking this franchise looks like they are trying to milk it and I totally agree with him.

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

He never said Sony "looks like" they are trying to milk it. He said they are desperately trying to milk it.

A desperate "attempt" to milk Killzone. Evident by the seemingly minor upgrades from Killzone 2

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

Killzone 3 has about as much chance of killing Halo: Reach as Killzone 2 did at killing Halo 3.

Killzone has always been a generic shooter with generic character and a bunch of unimaginative bad guys that all look the same.

Halo games only come out around every 3 years or so, but at this rate there's going to be more Killzone games than Halo in another couple years. PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

Theres Halo 1-3, Odst, Halo Wars, and soon to be Halo Reach. Plus a film in the works plus a possible anime unless it was released already I'm not sure. Plus books and the canceled mmo. Meanwhile the Killzone series has Killzone 1-2 plus the psp version with Killzone 3 in the works. I do not know what you are talking about.

lol what are you taking about?

Main Halo games come every 3 years.That is including Halo Reach.Halo ODST is an expansion to Halo 3 and Halo Wars was created by esemble studios,not Bungie.How is that milked?

The series overall, also if ODST was an expansion, 60 dollars is quite pricey for a short expansion.

It was still an expansion.Just an overpriced one.

So just because Halo has lots of novels,comics and an anime means it is milked?Yea right

Novels and comics dont take a year to make.So MS could have 1 novel or comic a year and it wouldnt be milked

if Halo was milked,is quality would be low and MS would still keep producing it.But that isnt the case.Millions of 360 gamers constantly want more Halo.

So your saying MS should deny what we want and stop making Halo?Not to mention that Halo sells very well,and liek all companies,MS want $$$.Sony,Microsoft and Nintendo want $$$

If Mario is milked,then MGS,Mario,Zelda,Metroid,star trek,starwars ect is milked.and I highly doubt you think that

No, I'm saying that Guilty Spark is wrong for saying Killzone is milked when it's similar to the structure of the Halo Franchise. Which is why I stated what each franchise has done up to date. Also I spelled Sparks name wrong on my previous post I think

He never said that it is milked. He said that the direction that Sony and the developer are taking this franchise looks like they are trying to milk it and I totally agree with him.

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

He never said Sony "looks like" they are trying to milk it. He said they are desperately trying to milk it.

A desperate "attempt" to milk Killzone. Evident by the seemingly minor upgrades from Killzone 2

I never played a Killzone game myself so I have no idea how they upgraded it. But on Metacritic Killzone 1 has a score of 70 meanwhile Killzone 2 has a score of 91. Would minor upgrades bump the score up by 21 points?

This game might make AAA but seriously, itll be just as forgettable as KZ2, and wont make a market splash like Halo reach will.

case closed.

the only thing killzone 3 will kill is Helghast

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

Killzone 3 has about as much chance of killing Halo: Reach as Killzone 2 did at killing Halo 3.

Killzone has always been a generic shooter with generic character and a bunch of unimaginative bad guys that all look the same.

Halo games only come out around every 3 years or so, but at this rate there's going to be more Killzone games than Halo in another couple years. PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

Theres Halo 1-3, Odst, Halo Wars, and soon to be Halo Reach. Plus a film in the works plus a possible anime unless it was released already I'm not sure. Plus books and the canceled mmo. Meanwhile the Killzone series has Killzone 1-2 plus the psp version with Killzone 3 in the works. I do not know what you are talking about.

lol what are you taking about?

Main Halo games come every 3 years.That is including Halo Reach.Halo ODST is an expansion to Halo 3 and Halo Wars was created by esemble studios,not Bungie.How is that milked?

The series overall, also if ODST was an expansion, 60 dollars is quite pricey for a short expansion.

It was still an expansion.Just an overpriced one.

So just because Halo has lots of novels,comics and an anime means it is milked?Yea right

Novels and comics dont take a year to make.So MS could have 1 novel or comic a year and it wouldnt be milked

if Halo was milked,is quality would be low and MS would still keep producing it.But that isnt the case.Millions of 360 gamers constantly want more Halo.

So your saying MS should deny what we want and stop making Halo?Not to mention that Halo sells very well,and liek all companies,MS want $$$.Sony,Microsoft and Nintendo want $$$

If Mario is milked,then MGS,Mario,Zelda,Metroid,star trek,starwars ect is milked.and I highly doubt you think that

No, I'm saying that Guilty Spark is wrong for saying Killzone is milked when it's similar to the structure of the Halo Franchise. Which is why I stated what each franchise has done up to date. Also I spelled Sparks name wrong on my previous post I think

He never said that it is milked. He said that the direction that Sony and the developer are taking this franchise looks like they are trying to milk it and I totally agree with him.

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

He never said Sony "looks like" they are trying to milk it. He said they are desperately trying to milk it.

A desperate "attempt" to milk Killzone. Evident by the seemingly minor upgrades from Killzone 2

I never played a Killzone game myself so I have no idea how they upgraded it. But on Metacritic Killzone 1 has a score of 70 meanwhile Killzone 2 has a score of 91. Would minor upgrades bump the score up by 21 points?

Killzone 1 came out in 2004 and Killzone 2 came out in 2009. Obviously you would think that 5 years would have a substantial upgrade. It's just that Killzone 3 has a lot shorter development cycle that the other 2 it would seem like they are trying to milk it.

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

ghost23 wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

HellJumper wrote:

Alice wrote:

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

Killzone 3 has about as much chance of killing Halo: Reach as Killzone 2 did at killing Halo 3.

Killzone has always been a generic shooter with generic character and a bunch of unimaginative bad guys that all look the same.

Halo games only come out around every 3 years or so, but at this rate there's going to be more Killzone games than Halo in another couple years. PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

Theres Halo 1-3, Odst, Halo Wars, and soon to be Halo Reach. Plus a film in the works plus a possible anime unless it was released already I'm not sure. Plus books and the canceled mmo. Meanwhile the Killzone series has Killzone 1-2 plus the psp version with Killzone 3 in the works. I do not know what you are talking about.

lol what are you taking about?

Main Halo games come every 3 years.That is including Halo Reach.Halo ODST is an expansion to Halo 3 and Halo Wars was created by esemble studios,not Bungie.How is that milked?

The series overall, also if ODST was an expansion, 60 dollars is quite pricey for a short expansion.

It was still an expansion.Just an overpriced one.

So just because Halo has lots of novels,comics and an anime means it is milked?Yea right

Novels and comics dont take a year to make.So MS could have 1 novel or comic a year and it wouldnt be milked

if Halo was milked,is quality would be low and MS would still keep producing it.But that isnt the case.Millions of 360 gamers constantly want more Halo.

So your saying MS should deny what we want and stop making Halo?Not to mention that Halo sells very well,and liek all companies,MS want $$$.Sony,Microsoft and Nintendo want $$$

If Mario is milked,then MGS,Mario,Zelda,Metroid,star trek,starwars ect is milked.and I highly doubt you think that

No, I'm saying that Guilty Spark is wrong for saying Killzone is milked when it's similar to the structure of the Halo Franchise. Which is why I stated what each franchise has done up to date. Also I spelled Sparks name wrong on my previous post I think

He never said that it is milked. He said that the direction that Sony and the developer are taking this franchise looks like they are trying to milk it and I totally agree with him.

343_Guilty_Spark wrote:

PS3 fantards like to say Halo is milked, but if they really want to see a desperate attempt to cash in on a popular genre they need look no farther than Killzone.

He never said Sony "looks like" they are trying to milk it. He said they are desperately trying to milk it.

A desperate "attempt" to milk Killzone. Evident by the seemingly minor upgrades from Killzone 2

I never played a Killzone game myself so I have no idea how they upgraded it. But on Metacritic Killzone 1 has a score of 70 meanwhile Killzone 2 has a score of 91. Would minor upgrades bump the score up by 21 points?

Killzone 1 came out in 2004 and Killzone 2 came out in 2009. Obviously you would think that 5 years would have a substantial upgrade. It's just that Killzone 3 has a lot shorter development cycle that the other 2 it would seem like they are trying to milk it.

Actually Guerrilla Games didn't get their ps3 dev kits until summer 2006.

Halo is a better series overall we have had 3 AAA games so far and 1 AA Killzone has had 1 AAA game and 1 A game and its in PS3 fanboy nature to say Killzone is a Halo killer but meh they can keep saying that.

Bluenose wrote:

Yea just ignore the fact the neither of the games can be compared since they both arent out yet...

true

Master_Chief wrote:

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. wrote:

I'm not agreeing with Bluenose, however MLD even said on that vid where he convinced a customer at his store to get a 360 for his kid instead of PS3 becuase it had more games that are suitable to a younger audience and his pro PS3 colleague couldn't argue that fact.

All that means is that 360 has a wider variety of games and has something for every demographic. Surely youre not trying to imply that the 360 is a kiddie console are you? PS3 has its share of games for a "younger audience." LBP and Mod Nation Racers for example.

yeh i kinda thought that the ps3 had more variety but the 360 has more cool shooters which i like

Yes Killzone will beat it.

Halo is kind of boring and too many colors looks like a rainbow game Killzone is fun.

NOTE: I am not saying the PS3 is better, all hail the Xbox.

Of course Killzone will kill the gaijin devil's creation. Its coming to our kawaii console either way.

I have played the killzone 2 and had a blast with, what seemed to me (i.e opinion) a balanced class system. I had fun playing the game. It did feel a bit weird to control at first, but like any good player, I adapted to the controls.

I have to say I'm looking forward to this game.

Halo Killer? Nah

The only thing Killzone 3 will kill is my erection after playing Halo Reach.

I am a huge Xbox lover but Halo is a retarded game, regenarating health? Bahh, Halo 1 had good nonregenarating health.

Jumping twenty feet? Bahhh.

Grenades that sick on your enemy? Bahh.

Killzone is much more hardcore.

Pickles wrote:

The only thing Killzone 3 will kill is my erection after playing Halo Reach.

Why?

Because he is a fanboy, who doesn't realize Halo turned into shit after Halo CE.

I do have to admit that Halo CE was pretty fun, I liked the way they did health regen. Halo 2 and 3...

I heard reach is better, shame I couldn't get a code

Media wrote:

I do have to admit that Halo CE was pretty fun, I liked the way they did health regen. Halo 2 and 3...

I heard reach is better, shame I couldn't get a code

That health regen eh

umad wrote:

Because he is a fanboy, who doesn't realize Halo turned into shit after Halo CE.

I think Halo is a good series.

That shows how much you know about video games and partially explains your stupid fanboyism.

Halo is terrible, Xbox has many better exclusives I don't understand why Halo is the first argument.

Halomaster wrote:

That shows how much you know about video games and partially explains your stupid fanboyism.

Halo is terrible, Xbox has many better exclusives I don't understand why Halo is the first argument.

Every major Halo fps is AAA............

Halo might not be your taste. Thats fine. But you loose all credibility when you say AAA = trash.

So what you say is just because all the fucking 13 years olds loved the OH SO MATURE HALO LOL XDD GUNS ALIENS AND ONLINE MULTIPLAYER means the game is good?

Do you seriously rely on critics and reviewers?

Many people liked Avatar, is it a good movie now?

Actually critic reviews are opinions and sometimes just plain wrong

for instance with the Avatar movie. Critics loved the movie

yet they hated the game, now you may be thinking, of course, game adaptations of movies do suck. But my point is this, the critics claimed that the story of the game was horrible.

Which you know, was the story of the movie...

AssEffect wrote:

So what you say is just because all the fucking 13 years olds loved the OH SO MATURE HALO LOL XDD GUNS ALIENS AND ONLINE MULTIPLAYER means the game is good?

Do you seriously rely on critics and reviewers?

Many people liked Avatar, is it a good movie now?

Halo 3 was unimanamously reviewed AAA.

BUT WAIT! THERES MORE!

It has been #1 or #2 on LIVE since launch. Thats gotta mean something.

Sold 11 million. i mean cmon...........bad games dont sell that well.

GeneralMLD wrote:

Halo 3 was unimanamously reviewed AAA.

BUT WAIT! THERES MORE!

It has been #1 or #2 on LIVE since launch. Thats gotta mean something.

Sold 11 million. i mean cmon...........bad games dont sell that well.

But that doesn't mean that all good games sell well. There are a lot of games that sold poorly that are really good.