Killzone 2 Kicking Tires, Lighting Fires, but Why Again Exactly?
— -- Guerilla Games' first-person PS3-exclusive shooter Killzone 2 has everyone gabbing, and bloggers in particular panting, gushing, and fawning. According to the developers, it's steeped in "Hollywood realism" that's supposed to make things more "immersive."
Pedestrian yawn-ese like "best looking console game ever" and "surpasses Crysis" should suffice to warn you that substance and/or insight aren't high priorities in much of the press coverage.
Besides, everything looks pretty gosh-darned amazing these days. Who cares if one game looks better than another.
What I want to know is what's it play like? After all, we play games, not "wall textures," "sweat glands," and "destructible milieus."
The first Killzone for the PS2 was similarly hyped before release and emerged a toweringly mediocre shooter anyway, only matched in mediocrity by its toweringly one-dimensional reviews.
The essence of insight then? "To Halo-killer, or not to Halo-killer."
Initial reactions to Killzone 2's gaming principles vis-a-vis CES don't reveal much. You have to shoot bad guys. Turrets help. A building catches fire and crumbles. You employ a rocket launcher to blow open a door.
Hey, the game could be outstanding. But wait for it. Try the upcoming demo for yourself. Don't swoon over rhapsodies in ballyhoo.
And when the game itself arrives in late February, you know what to do with reviews that pony up Halo and Crysis for vacuous visual comparisons.
To the flames.
