**OFFICIAL** Killzone 2 Thread

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure
Ug PSN downloads SO SLOW. It'll be like 4 hours til I can play the demo

It's your network, not PSN. I know this because I had the same problems at my house with Comcast. When I came to my university, my PSN download speeds average 1 megabyte per second, which is faster than what the 360 downloads here. I had the demo within 20 minutes.

Yep, similar experiences. Well, back at home it's a local cable company and I tend to get acceptable speeds based on 8mbit connection and using Wireless-G.

But here at school, PSN downloads often hit 2-3 MBytes/second. It's freaking nuts. Same with Apple.com/trailers, and same with, ahem... other... downloads. And it was NOT like this last year, so I'm in internet heaven. Don't know what OSU did, but damn well better stay this way.

So basically, you have to be hooked up to a school network to get good speeds out of PSN? Sorry, but I don't buy the whole "it's your network" thing. Sony needs to upgrade their servers. I never have problems downloading from Live and it using an acceptable amount of my available speed, but PSN has always been dog slow. A couple of weeks ago, I downloaded the CoD4 map pack on Live, a 450MB file, in about 15 minutes. I'm trying to download the Killzone2 demo, and have gotten to 30% after 4 hours of downloading. Downloading the Battlefield Bad Company demo last night on the PS3 took about 6 hours from start to finish (around a 1.2GB file I think).

I'm glad Sony doesn't charge for the PSN, I don't think anybody would be buying.

I don't know how you got that out of my post.

My point was, if I can have a high speed connection, and basically max out my share or get damn close to it... then it's not a server problem, at least not entirely. This is because their servers can handle pushing out those speeds to the connections that will take them.

I have a feeling the reason some household places get hit hard, may be due to local network systems. If it's at the end of the line from Sony, or somewhere in your ISP, who knows. I don't know how crazy Sony's network architecture is...
But, my point being... it could be a combination, that due to a certain way Sony handles it, gets screwed up while a certain way Microsoft handles it, it does not. When you take the scenario of others and that of my own, it kind of proves it is definitely not entirely on Sony, especially if some homes from major ISPs are still getting high speed access.

Likely, it's the way your ISP handles the packets and distributes their hubs. If you're own an overloaded hub, certain traffic, while not all traffic, but get hit pretty hard. Can't explain it further without knowing the way either end of the data stream handles the packets.

 

[aphex]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure
Ug PSN downloads SO SLOW. It'll be like 4 hours til I can play the demo

It's your network, not PSN. I know this because I had the same problems at my house with Comcast. When I came to my university, my PSN download speeds average 1 megabyte per second, which is faster than what the 360 downloads here. I had the demo within 20 minutes.

Yep, similar experiences. Well, back at home it's a local cable company and I tend to get acceptable speeds based on 8mbit connection and using Wireless-G.

But here at school, PSN downloads often hit 2-3 MBytes/second. It's freaking nuts. Same with Apple.com/trailers, and same with, ahem... other... downloads. And it was NOT like this last year, so I'm in internet heaven. Don't know what OSU did, but damn well better stay this way.

So basically, you have to be hooked up to a school network to get good speeds out of PSN? Sorry, but I don't buy the whole "it's your network" thing. Sony needs to upgrade their servers. I never have problems downloading from Live and it using an acceptable amount of my available speed, but PSN has always been dog slow. A couple of weeks ago, I downloaded the CoD4 map pack on Live, a 450MB file, in about 15 minutes. I'm trying to download the Killzone2 demo, and have gotten to 30% after 4 hours of downloading. Downloading the Battlefield Bad Company demo last night on the PS3 took about 6 hours from start to finish (around a 1.2GB file I think).

I'm glad Sony doesn't charge for the PSN, I don't think anybody would be buying.

I'm not on a school network and it took about 20-25 minutes to download all 1.2gb here at home.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
So basically, you have to be hooked up to a school network to get good speeds out of PSN? Sorry, but I don't buy the whole "it's your network" thing. Sony needs to upgrade their servers.

I think you missed the whole part where I said, "My home connection is FASTER than my school connection outside of upload speeds".

The PSN can push out fast speeds. It's a problem that could start at your ISP or be a problem right up to your home network setup. Like I said, I had heard of a case where a different modem fixed the issues (Linksys).

I used to have Insight at my house for broadband, and the PSN was very fast. After Comcast bought them out, speeds sucked, even with the exact same setup. And you want to tell me that you don't buy my personal experiences, even after a logical connection showing that it's more likely an ISP problem?

 

[dougp]

That was terribly short, but fun.

 

[R Nilla]

Awesome. Still preordered.

 

[DarkThinker]

Thanks for the Demo tip R Nilla.

I downloaded and played the Demo after I got home. To be perfectly honest, I was very impressed by the graphics and detail.
But to also be honest. I think I am not happy with the controls. They should have increased the sensitivity option limit about %20 more I would have hit my sweet spot for sensitivity just like I have it in other games like COD4 and the Orange Box and others ehhhhhh

I get annoyed that when I am aiming, it takes much more than usual to move the aim around.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Thanks for the Demo tip R Nilla.

I downloaded and played the Demo after I got home. To be perfectly honest, I was very impressed by the graphics and detail.
But to also be honest. I think I am not happy with the controls. They should have increased the sensitivity option limit about %20 more I would have hit my sweet spot for sensitivity just like I have it in other games like COD4 and the Orange Box and others ehhhhhh

I get annoyed that when I am aiming, it takes much more than usual to move the aim around.

Why am I the only person who doesn't think this? I feel like it's hard to get precise shots if my controls are going all over the place due to sensitivity.

Oh well...I think it controls fine and feels like I'm moving about a realistic speed if a I slightly adjust the sensitivity.

But really, I think I'm the only person that is like that. Heh.

 

[DarkThinker]

I am starting to have doubts that even COD4 as old as it is, will still be more fun than KZ2. It's true KZ2 Multiplayer isn't out yet and I haven't seen the whole picture, but I have my doubts over this coming out better than COD4 overall. But we'll see.
I am hence canceling my pre-order, I don't think this will be worth my money and at this retail price.

Oh well at least BF1943 is coming to PS3 this summer.

 

[blurredvision]

Played the demo this morning, and here are my thoughts. First up, the visual fidelity is awesome as expected. I think this game is running in 1080p, which is impressive if I'm right. I'll need to check tonight if nobody confirms this. Everything looks spot-on, from character models to textures to level design. I was quite amazed at the detail in the enemies, too. I really like their glowing eyes.

The one thing that I thought looked like shit was the gun textures while in cover. When you go into cover, the gun is raised up like it's against the wall or something, and while I understand that it blurs the gun for a depth of field effect, it looks shitty. For some reason, the textures looks like they were pulled straight out of an N64 game. But when you're not in cover, everything looks great. I only mention this because it was very distracting.

Speaking of cover, what little I used of it, it seemed broken and unusable. At times, I was still highly exposed and received gunfire. Other times I couldn't really get it to do what I want. I'll try it a bit more as I go through the demo a couple more times, but at this very early stage, the cover mechanic seems to have been tacked on, with no thought given to it.

The controls weren't too bad, but I did have a few issues. As far as sensitivity, I'm not really concerned about it, I'll get used to it if I decide to play the game. I did feel they were overly sensitive at default, though. It's like you hit full stride or movement when only pushing the stick to 50% of it's maximum radius. I hate having to click in R3 to zoom when I'm so used to CoD4. It takes longer and isn't as intuitive. Everything else I'm fine with pretty much. I like how the grenades have a visual indicator when "cooking" them.

I don't have any issues with movement speed or anything like that.

I'll definitely play through the demo a couple more times, and I can see myself getting this if I start getting a better feel for the controls.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Thanks for the Demo tip R Nilla.

I downloaded and played the Demo after I got home. To be perfectly honest, I was very impressed by the graphics and detail.
But to also be honest. I think I am not happy with the controls. They should have increased the sensitivity option limit about %20 more I would have hit my sweet spot for sensitivity just like I have it in other games like COD4 and the Orange Box and others ehhhhhh

I get annoyed that when I am aiming, it takes much more than usual to move the aim around.

Why am I the only person who doesn't think this? I feel like it's hard to get precise shots if my controls are going all over the place due to sensitivity.

Oh well...I think it controls fine and feels like I'm moving about a realistic speed if a I slightly adjust the sensitivity.

But really, I think I'm the only person that is like that. Heh.

cause you either work for Sony or are their #1 fan .

but in all honesty, this demo has put me on the fence with this game. prior it was a must buy, but fater playing it i'm up in the air now.

the graphics are not as impressive IMO once you have it in your own hands and playing it on your own TV. i mean they look great, don't get me wrong, but there is something about it. it's almost like there is some kind of smudge filter or something on the game to the point that something just looks off. the color palette is really lacking too which may be what is bugging me, in that everything seems to "blend" together. i dunno.

the controls are just very sluggish. i believe this is exactly what warcrow was referring to in his explanation of the controls in his mini-wrap up. it just does not move to the left as soon as i push left on the analog, and when it does, it moves slowly then all of a sudden moves faster. pushing the sensitivity up helped slightly, however it still felt like there was some kind of delay. and please, using the "it's supposed to feel real and heavy" that I read someone say is a buncha BS, it's just poorly implemented.

also the fact that there is no 100% customization, and the one most closely to what I like (alternative 2) is still whack with L2 being crouch, which also happens to be the button that you use to cover. holding L2 to cover and pressing L1 to aim, then R1 to fire just does not work at all.

i will say however that the sound in this game is epic. the sound of the guns is just badass and nails down the feel 100% imo. i loved every part of the sound w/the exception of the dialog.

i will give this demo a few more goes before I make my decision. i may just end up finding it used for like $40 or so after it's out and give it a chance then since SF4 will soon be taking over, but I am pretty much 50/50 about purchasing this game at this point.

 

[KINGGABBO]

I was very disappointed in the demo. The controls and movement just felt way too sluggish, even when I increased the sensitivity. I mean Resistance 2, COD, Halo 3 all have ultra smooth movement and controls. I think multiplayer may be very frustrating with the controls and movement as is. I may cancel my preorder as well.

 

[warcrow]

Originally posted by: destrekorHowever, sprint has no option of toggle, but while it's on a stick it doesn't bother me at all. Hold the stick while I'm running somewhere, I can handle that, seemed to adjust to that real quick. That then places Melee on L1, which is strange because I prefer that on one of the sticks. I would rather swap Melee and Zoom, but the only presets that had that I didn't like the rest of the button mapping. Oh well.

Doesnt sprint toggle? I'm pretty sure if you click L3 you will sprint until it's interupted. I didnt use it much but I recall clicking L3 and running while removing my thumb from the stick.

Originally posted by: destrekorI must say though, while it's the beginning level... I think... it definitely sets the stage for some amazing gameplay later on, and was pretty fun, though playing it while not quite adjusting to the controls makes it harder than it would have been.

Lighting is absolutely beautiful, and you can tell, while the environment is very drab and bleak, it does have this strange beauty to it. Looking forward to some of the better talked about levels that have different scenery.

The gameplay doesnt change up really. It's basically pop and drop with some new environments throw in--but not enough. Get use to the oppressionistic asthetic.

Originally posted by: blurredvision
Played the demo this morning, and here are my thoughts. First up, the visual fidelity is awesome as expected. I think this game is running in 1080p, which is impressive if I'm right. I'll need to check tonight if nobody confirms this. Everything looks spot-on, from character models to textures to level design. I was quite amazed at the detail in the enemies, too. I really like their glowing eyes.

On my Bravia (supports all HD modes) it runs at 720P.

Originally posted by: blurredvisionSpeaking of cover, what little I used of it, it seemed broken and unusable. At times, I was still highly exposed and received gunfire. Other times I couldn't really get it to do what I want. I'll try it a bit more as I go through the demo a couple more times, but at this very early stage, the cover mechanic seems to have been tacked on, with no thought given to it.

I think this can mostly be chalked up to the controls. I remember thinking the same thing when I first began playing but you mostly get use to it. It does have some oddities to it that make it a bit dodgy.

 

[R Nilla]

Sprint does indeed toggle.

I didn't find the controls that bad or sluggish. Maybe it's just me, but I have the first Resistance and I really don't care for it at all. The controls seem far too floaty. I'm usually pretty forgiving with games and their controls, as I try to adapt to what they present me rather than expect them to match every other game I've ever played.

Killzone 2's controls seemed good enough, my only complaints being that cover seemed awkward like blurredvision mentioned, and that the sensitivity didn't seem fine-grained enough (although maybe I just need to play with the sensitivity more). What I mean is, sometimes when trying to get a Helghast's head in my sights, I found that doing a quick tap to the left went just to the left of his head, then when I quickly tapped to the right, it went to the right of his head, it didn't seem precise enough to let me zone in on his head.

I specifically tested for this accelerated looking people are talking about but I guess I only tried this when in aim mode, where it did not happen.

I also like that when you take the knife out (right on the d-pad) it automatically performs an attack. In that respect it's like COD4, except then it stays out and you can continue to use it like any other weapon.

 

[CKDragon]

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: blurredvision
So basically, you have to be hooked up to a school network to get good speeds out of PSN? Sorry, but I don't buy the whole "it's your network" thing. Sony needs to upgrade their servers.

I think you missed the whole part where I said, "My home connection is FASTER than my school connection outside of upload speeds".

The PSN can push out fast speeds. It's a problem that could start at your ISP or be a problem right up to your home network setup. Like I said, I had heard of a case where a different modem fixed the issues (Linksys).

I used to have Insight at my house for broadband, and the PSN was very fast. After Comcast bought them out, speeds sucked, even with the exact same setup. And you want to tell me that you don't buy my personal experiences, even after a logical connection showing that it's more likely an ISP problem?

Your "logical connection" is not any stronger than a person who simply says that in their experience XBL speeds are good and PSN speeds are bad. Their scenario points to PSN being at fault. Your scenario points to an ISP being at fault.

Neither anecdotal case is enough to prove jack squat.

 

[Thraxen]

I didn't see the sluggishness people are talking about. I knew going in that characters moved at a slower pace and honestly they moved a bit faster than I was expecting from some of the previews. To me they seemed to move around exactly how you would expect people in armour to move and I didn't feel like there were any delays. Movement seemed fairly natural. I found it a nice change of pace from say CoD where all the animations and movement are exaggerated and fast.

Like most people though, I found it took a few minutes to get comfortable with the controls. I think my main complaint would be that using the sights on the guns is a toggle/sticky whereas the cover system is a not toggle and the button must be held down. This is the opposite from many games I'm used to playing (like GoW or CoD) where using the sights is not a toggle and any form of cover/crouching is a toggle (or has the option to be made so). That threw me off more than anything. I kept coming out of cover when I didn't mean to and staying scoped when I didn't mean to.

BTW, most people are likely going to want to use the Alternate 2 control scheme. That's the closest to other shooters like CoD. I'd honestly prefer custom button mapping and don't understand why every game in existence doesn't allow that, but at least KZ2 gives a crap load of presets to choose from... more than most games.

 

[JoPh]

only issue i had was aiming. i felt i took so long to line up my shots...

other than that alt 2 controls are fine. the mapping is fine.... just that aiming was a real issue. i can see that hurting multiplayer in the begining......

 

[dougp]

Honestly, the most sluggish game is Halo 3 - and the controls are much better than that. F'in hate how slow you move/aim in Halo 3 ...

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
I didn't see the sluggishness people are talking about. I knew going in that characters moved at a slower pace and honestly they moved a bit faster than I was expecting from some of the previews. To me they seemed to move around exactly how you would expect people in armour to move and I didn't feel like there were any delays. Movement seemed fairly natural. I found it a nice change of pace from say CoD where all the animations and movement are exaggerated and fast.

Like most people though, I found it took a few minutes to get comfortable with the controls. I think my main complaint would be that using the sights on the guns is a toggle/sticky whereas the cover system is a not toggle and the button must be held down. This is the opposite from many games I'm used to playing (like GoW or CoD) where using the sights is not a toggle and any form of cover/crouching is a toggle (or has the option to be made so). That threw me off more than anything. I kept coming out of cover when I didn't mean to and staying scoped when I didn't mean to.

BTW, most people are likely going to want to use the Alternate 2 control scheme. That's the closest to other shooters like CoD. I'd honestly prefer custom button mapping and don't understand why every game in existence doesn't allow that, but at least KZ2 gives a crap load of presets to choose from... more than most games.

you can make it so the aim doesn't toggle and you have to hold it to aim so it's just like all the other shooters. it's one of the options in the control area. i turned it on pretty quickly after starting.

 

[JoPh]

Originally posted by: dougp
Honestly, the most sluggish game is Halo 3 - and the controls are much better than that. F'in hate how slow you move/aim in Halo 3 ...

you are on crack. halo3 aiming is fine.

 

[dougp]

Originally posted by: JoPh

Originally posted by: dougp
Honestly, the most sluggish game is Halo 3 - and the controls are much better than that. F'in hate how slow you move/aim in Halo 3 ...

you are on crack. halo3 aiming is fine.

you are on crack. k2 aiming is fine.


See what I did there? I hate Halo 3's controls and speed - one of the big reasons why I play the CoD series over it and will now be playing K2 over it also.

 

[VashHT]

I played this last night, the controls weren't more annoying than any other console FPS I've played, felt the same as Resistance or COD (they're all sluggish compared to PC) for me. The graphics are gorgeous, easily one of the best looking games I've played to date. I like the cover system a lot as well, the game seems pretty fun so far I kinda wish the demo had been longer.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
you can make it so the aim doesn't toggle and you have to hold it to aim so it's just like all the other shooters. it's one of the options in the control area. i turned it on pretty quickly after starting.

When you enable this option, is the zoom/aim still on R3? Or does one of the alternate control schemes put the zoom on one of the left triggers? If I can change the zoom to one of the triggers and make it non-toggable like you mention here, then I'll be a happy camper.

I find it weird that everyone is complaining that movement is too slow. Halo has always had the slowest movement of any FPS, and I rarely see anyone complain about that.

In my experience with the Killzone2 demo, I found the movement of walking/running perfectly fine. It didn't feel out of place or anything. It's the aiming that will take me some getting used to. Like someone posted above, it's really, really hard initially to fine-tune your shot. If I try to move it a quarter inch to the left, it moves an inch instead (made up numbers, but you get what I'm saying). It is possible to move it with finesse, you just have to barely push the stick, which I find harder to do on the dualshock than on the 360 controller. If I could replace the analog nubs on the dualshock with ones that are concave, then I'd be much better off.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: purbeast0
you can make it so the aim doesn't toggle and you have to hold it to aim so it's just like all the other shooters. it's one of the options in the control area. i turned it on pretty quickly after starting.

When you enable this option, is the zoom/aim still on R3? Or does one of the alternate control schemes put the zoom on one of the left triggers? If I can change the zoom to one of the triggers and make it non-toggable like you mention here, then I'll be a happy camper.

I find it weird that everyone is complaining that movement is too slow. Halo has always had the slowest movement of any FPS, and I rarely see anyone complain about that.

In my experience with the Killzone2 demo, I found the movement of walking/running perfectly fine. It didn't feel out of place or anything. It's the aiming that will take me some getting used to. Like someone posted above, it's really, really hard initially to fine-tune your shot. If I try to move it a quarter inch to the left, it moves an inch instead (made up numbers, but you get what I'm saying). It is possible to move it with finesse, you just have to barely push the stick, which I find harder to do on the dualshock than on the 360 controller. If I could replace the analog nubs on the dualshock with ones that are concave, then I'd be much better off.

i had alt2 as my control w/the "hold down to aim" feature on. L1 was my aiming button and i had to hold it down to aim, once let go it went back.

in kz2 i don't think the MOVEMENT is slow, i feel that when you turn with the right analog it's sluggish, as in it doesn't respond immediately. whether they wanted it that way for the "heavy armor" feeling or not, i don't like it.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
i had alt2 as my control w/the "hold down to aim" feature on. L1 was my aiming button and i had to hold it down to aim, once let go it went back.

in kz2 i don't think the MOVEMENT is slow, i feel that when you turn with the right analog it's sluggish, as in it doesn't respond immediately. whether they wanted it that way for the "heavy armor" feeling or not, i don't like it.

Good, I'll try the alt2 scheme tonight. I've been reading around that some people say it's very hard to use cover and aim at the same time with that scheme, but if I hate cover as much as I did this morning when I played, then I won't use it much at all. I'll just stand behind stuff for cover, I don't need to be plastered up against it. I've played through CoD4 twice now and haven't once bemoaned the lack of a cover mechanic.

 

[UpgradeFailure]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: purbeast0
i had alt2 as my control w/the "hold down to aim" feature on. L1 was my aiming button and i had to hold it down to aim, once let go it went back.

in kz2 i don't think the MOVEMENT is slow, i feel that when you turn with the right analog it's sluggish, as in it doesn't respond immediately. whether they wanted it that way for the "heavy armor" feeling or not, i don't like it.

Good, I'll try the alt2 scheme tonight. I've been reading around that some people say it's very hard to use cover and aim at the same time with that scheme, but if I hate cover as much as I did this morning when I played, then I won't use it much at all. I'll just stand behind stuff for cover, I don't need to be plastered up against it. I've played through CoD4 twice now and haven't once bemoaned the lack of a cover mechanic.

That's the same setup I used also. It's a pain in the ass to cover and shoot with it but I just said forget it and I would just duck and pop up when I wanted to shoot, and didn't even bother doing the "Hold to cover" option.

I wish that setup allowed R2 to be fire. It seems weird not using the trigger as fire, but it's the best of all the controls so it'll have to do.