Killzone 2 Getting 3D Update

[JaymesFogarty]

3D gives some viewers migraines and headaches. The side affects are not yet known for prolonged exposure to the images, (which of course the frequent gamer will have) and also, glasses will have to be worn at all times, along with purchasing an expensive television. F this. This seems to be a even worse road to take than motion control. (I can't believe I just typed that!)

 

[Treblaine]

My appologies to the management for the double post.

Do'h!

Only the VERY LATEST HDTVs which conform to a certain standard and are VERY expensive are 3D capable.

I suppose the people with too much money to burn on first-gen 3d TVs are exactly the ones who wasted their money on killzone, no?

I rented killzone 2... it's a solid 7.9/10 and I wouldn't call it a waste of money at the platinum/classics release price $30/£20

Still even $60 on a fairly entertaining 8 hour game and 15+ hour multiplayer is nothing compared to a 3DTV that can easily cost an extra $1000. I mean the move from SD to HD was ALL positive, wheras 3D gives fringe benefits, small applications and LOADS of negatives.

Worse than that, all TVs at the moment use the inferior 120Hz standard which is poorly compatible with feature films which are shot at 24 frames/sec (no common denominator) and only the 240Hz tvs have any kind of life in them and good luck finding a decent sized one for less than $3'000

And this is coming at a time when HDTVs are FINALLY at an affordable price with good quality. It seems some bad businessmen just haven't learned the lesson that "the customer is always right" and they can't get away with selling $3000 televisions forever.

TVs are an INVESTMENT, people buy them and expect to have them for 10-15 years, most of the market has moved to HD, most of the markets have just completed the digital switch-over to allow HD... it is too soon by about 20 years to introduce a new standard.

 

[Asehujiko]

Isn't this going to absolutely murder the frame rate? The minimum requirements for Nvidia's 3d thingie involve dual video cards and if there's one thing consoles aren't known for it's their up to date hardware. And wasn't Killzone 2 only considered "good" because it's a ps3 exclusive, which always get heralded as the best game ever before being forgotten 2 weeks later?

 

[Jark212]

Now we can all go out and get one of those $9,000 3D T.V.s!!!

 

[sneakypenguin]

I hate 3D, it's so damn gimmicky.

The average American, ca. 1920: "I detest motion picture, it such an irritating fad!"

Thing is though 3d even with tech like avatar still looks blurry if your not looking where your supposed to be, or if your sitting off to an angle. And it just doesn't look "right" things stick too far out, or not enough. Until they fix the need for glasses and make it look somewhat natural then it shall be a gimmick imho.

 

[Sixties Spidey]

Make an update fixing the fuck-awful controls and I'll consider it.

 

[Simalacrum]

aw dammit, I keep on getting reasons for regretting trading that game in!

 

[USSR]

If Indigo were here, this would be a really annoying thread.

Shhhh!

..we dare not speak his name D':

 

[EnzoHonda]

I haven't actually seen any movies in 3D, so I can't comment on how it is. However, I like the idea of a new technique that may make games and movies more immersive. It likely just needs some time to come into its own. And like all new technologies, I'm gonna wait for it to get cheap while other people pay the big bucks to have the latest thing.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I was in the minority that apparently liked Killzone 2. I wonder why so many people hate the game.

The biggest complaints I have heard are over the sluggish controls. There is a slider in the controls menu that tweaks the sensitivity. Just wanted to put that out there for anyone who bitched about it.

And I liked that it actually forced you to aim. No lock on feature or sticky controls to guide your bullets. If you can't aim for shit, then you deserve to suck at the game.

 

[chronobreak]

OMG GIMMICKS!

Nah, I can't wait for this idea to take off, it sounds really neat. If you're gonna hate on it, especially because you think it is just a "gimmick", well, whatever. Wait for the reviews, see if the technology is good enough, do your research and then figure out if you want it or not. Can't see why people would be so against something different. Imagine a game like God of War, with huge boss guys in 3D swinging stuff at you. Sounds pretty cool to me, but I guess I'm just a big old gimmick lover who can be sold anything under the sun.

 

[Jumplion]

This is really making me want to play Killzone 2 now.

Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with the update(s), 3D is a nifty feature to have even if most people don't have a 3D compatible TV. I personally don't mind 3D, it can definitely work in some areas. And so long as it's optional to have 3D gaming, I don't see why you can't have it.

Meh, don't care too much, though at least it's there.

 

[Mr. Mike]

This is really making me want to play Killzone 2 now.

Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with the update(s), 3D is a nifty feature to have even if most people don't have a 3D compatible TV. I personally don't mind 3D, it can definitely work in some areas. And so long as it's optional to have 3D gaming, I don't see why you can't have it.

Meh, don't care too much, though at least it's there.

Same here, makes me want to get back into it.

Also, I don't see where all the hate towards Killzone 2 is coming from. The campaign was enjoyable and immersive for the most part, and the online was fantastic as long as you didn't have noob tacticians who didn't know how to throw spawn points. It still has a fairly dedicated community too.

Off-topic question: do the people who still play use the map packs? Like, if I wanted to get back into it, are the DLC maps regularly played? Or is it nigh impossible to find a game with them?

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

I say go for it, I don't have a 3D TV but for those 3 of you out there with one I think you be amazed

 

[Jumplion]

This is really making me want to play Killzone 2 now.

Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with the update(s), 3D is a nifty feature to have even if most people don't have a 3D compatible TV. I personally don't mind 3D, it can definitely work in some areas. And so long as it's optional to have 3D gaming, I don't see why you can't have it.

Meh, don't care too much, though at least it's there.

Same here, makes me want to get back into it.

Also, I don't see where all the hate towards Killzone 2 is coming from. The campaign was enjoyable and immersive for the most part, and the online was fantastic as long as you didn't have noob tacticians who didn't know how to throw spawn points. It still has a fairly dedicated community too.

Off-topic question: do the people who still play use the map packs? Like, if I wanted to get back into it, are the DLC maps regularly played? Or is it nigh impossible to find a game with them?

I dunno, I haven't played it for a long time. Though when I did buy the maps, nobody played them. Pissed me off >_< Never was really good at multiplayer games though. The multiplayer is fun, though the reward system is somewhat flawed. You have to play for a LONG time before you're even allowed to use the sniper rifle which I really wanted to use which put me off of it for a bit.

 

[chstens]

I hate 3D, it's so damn gimmicky.

The average American, ca. 1920: "I detest motion picture, it such an irritating fad!"

Thing is though 3d even with tech like avatar still looks blurry if your not looking where your supposed to be, or if your sitting off to an angle. And it just doesn't look "right" things stick too far out, or not enough. Until they fix the need for glasses and make it look somewhat natural then it shall be a gimmick imho.

And what part of what you just said can't be translated to the movie biz in the 20's?

 

[bob-2000]

I hate 3D, it's so damn gimmicky.

The average American, ca. 1920: "I detest motion picture, it such an irritating fad!"

I bet that the motion pictured didn't give them pounding headaches. Besides, the 3D presents no extra content.

 

[SaintWaldo]

Worse than that, all TVs at the moment use the inferior 120Hz standard which is poorly compatible with feature films which are shot at 24 frames/sec (no common denominator)

I'm sorry, but the common divisors for the whole numbers 120 and 24 are 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24. So, what was your point again?

 

[sneakypenguin]

I hate 3D, it's so damn gimmicky.

The average American, ca. 1920: "I detest motion picture, it such an irritating fad!"

Thing is though 3d even with tech like avatar still looks blurry if your not looking where your supposed to be, or if your sitting off to an angle. And it just doesn't look "right" things stick too far out, or not enough. Until they fix the need for glasses and make it look somewhat natural then it shall be a gimmick imho.

And what part of what you just said can't be translated to the movie biz in the 20's?

True, but 3d is going to need something completely different to have any sort of acceptance into the mainstream. (or at least to where ill like it lol) Your going to have to eliminate glasses, allow any angle/distance viewing, and somehow eliminate the "effect" gimmick of it. Every 3d movie i've been in from a regular digital 3d to a full iMAX 3d theater anytime you refocus it gets unnatural looking. Or the annoyances of depth misapplied.(ie things sticking out too far or not enough, such as something appearing 20ft out of the screen when it shouldn't be). But I'm just a bit cynical about 3d I suppose cause I havn't been impressed by anything that's been put out there with it.