Killzone 2

[Valiance]

Quite a few, actually. [http://www.kongregate.com/]

And last I checked, I'm not alone. But that's not the primary point I'm making, although this ancillary point only supports my view even more!

They are great, aren't they? [http://www.jayisgames.com]

Sorry, my point is not games you play IN Firefox, but that browsing the internet isn't a game. Not really the important part of my argument, but I wish more people would take the online flash game community seriously. There is a lot that is done there.

The aiming component in FPS games, just like the HID component in navigating a modern desktop internet browser (along with OS) is 2D. In terms of user interface analysis, they are extremely similar.

As far as pointing at things and clicking on things, sure. But your character doesn't stand in one spot, he traverses through a simulated three dimensional world. moving through a browser uses only one device at a time, either clicking or scrolling, or typing in an address. A 3d first person shooter relies on two simultaneous devices to navigate, constantly. I know I don't take my hand off the keyboard to shoot, or take my hand off the mouse when I am running through the world. Additionally, there is no penalty on the internet for poor dexterity. If you don't click on a website in a certain time frame it doesn't close down the browser and make you start over. Nothing while browsing can be based on reflexes.

Read the thread.

OK, I guess I missed it, I'll go back again.

EDIT: Oh, OK, I see what you're getting at about the movement. I kinda skipped that part because it was already pretty obvious. I will, however, say that Metroid Prime had the most fluid movements of any controller, even a mouse, although that's partly my fault because I'm jumpy when I play FPS's. It has a really nice analog smoothing of the motion that is the only time FPS gaming has felt natural on a console.

It has by far the worst manual-aiming system I've ever seen in a game, and I've played a lot of games, and a lot of terrible ones. I loved Metroid Prime and Prime 2, and I'd play Prime 3 if I ever decide to buy a Wii, but be honest here:

1: You can't strafe without holding down the L trigger or being locked on to something.
2: You can't dodge things you can't lock-on because your strafe only works if you're locked on or holding L, so you CANNOT TURN WHILE STRAFING.
3: If you decide to manual aim, you know, to hit the part of the boss that's the "weak spot" that your game won't lock on to, you need to hold the R trigger. If you hold the R trigger, your joystick used for movement is now for aiming, and YOU CAN ONLY AIM WHILE STANDING STILL.

The reason the above-mentioned flaws worked was because Metroid Prime wasn't really an FPS, it was, like the other Metroid games, more of an adventure game (think Zelda in space, though it's more complicated than that). So it was ok to not be able to play well at a competitive level because, well, it didn't matter and you were expected to get hit by things now and then because of how bad the controls were.

If you found it to be the most fluent, easy system you've tried, well...I just don't comprehend how, at all.

Hopefully Killzone 2 doesn't look for fluidity of movement from first-person action/adventure games.

 

[coldfrog]

The reason the above-mentioned flaws worked was because Metroid Prime wasn't really an FPS, it was, like the other Metroid games, more of an adventure game (think Zelda in space, though it's more complicated than that). So it was ok to not be able to play well at a competitive level because, well, it didn't matter and you were expected to get hit by things now and then because of how bad the controls were.

If you found it to be the most fluent, easy system you've tried, well...I just don't comprehend how, at all.

It's the most for a console to me. All the others I played were too jerky movement, but with Metroid Prime your movements always felt smooth and natural. Of course as you pointed out, Metroid relied less on actual combat reflexes than adventure and boss patterns and so the actual combat was simplified in many ways. Plus, you could lock on to the weak point if you scanned the boss!

I will say, though, that the Metroid Prime 3 feels even more comfortable, and it's the only game for the Wii that I liked the first person shooting aspect. And even then, it was still rather simplified.

Sorry, my point is not games you play IN Firefox, but that browsing the internet isn't a game. Not really the important part of my argument, but I wish more people would take the online flash game community seriously. There is a lot that is done there.

The UI paradigms in an FPS and browsing a complex 2D environment such as found on a modern GUI OS or web browser are essentially identical.

As far as pointing at things and clicking on things, sure. But your character doesn't stand in one spot, he traverses through a simulated three dimensional world. moving through a browser uses only one device at a time, either clicking or scrolling, or typing in an address. A 3d first person shooter relies on two simultaneous devices to navigate, constantly. I know I don't take my hand off the keyboard to shoot, or take my hand off the mouse when I am running through the world. Additionally, there is no penalty on the internet for poor dexterity. If you don't click on a website in a certain time frame it doesn't close down the browser and make you start over. Nothing while browsing can be based on reflexes.

Both 3D movement and reflexes don't improve with poorer controls; they're non sequiturs to this discussion. In fact, reflexes are better assisted by better controls and aiming than inept controls.

Lets get this straight. I feel that a mouse and keyboard are the most comfortable and best equipment for playing a first person shooter. I'm fine with that. I still don't see definitive correlations between using a web browser and playing a first person shooter. The complexity of a web browser changes statically, while a first person shooter features (hopefully anyway) dynamic objects that will affect your play. If the only argument that they are similar is that you move and click the mouse and type on the keyboard, I'm not buying it. At least when I browse a web page, I use almost exclusively the mouse, and maybe use the keyboard to type in an address or, in this case, a forum post. And I'm NEVER using them simultaneously, while I always use the keyboard and mouse at the same time when playing an FPS. Additionally, I'm only using reflexes as a comparison between browsing and playing a game. All of these seem to be rather key differences to me, I just want to understand why you think the two are so identical.

However, speaking of non sequiturs in relation to the conversation, I think we've severely strayed from that of the actual topic which is Killzone 2. It does look very good, but I have still neither seen nor heard enough that convinves me

 

[scnj]

Personally, I would love to be able to use an analog controller stick for movement and a mouse for aiming. That would be pretty freakin' sweet.

Something like this monstrosity I copied and pasted together in 20 seconds?

 

[Vlane]

Personally, I would love to be able to use an analog controller stick for movement and a mouse for aiming. That would be pretty freakin' sweet.

Something like this monstrosity I copied and pasted together in 20 seconds?

The colors don't match.[/stupid joke]

 

[Zetona]

I got a PS3 for Christmas, so I suppose I'll have to get this. I don't really care too much either way, but if it keeps getting 9/10s and above, I'll probably get it.

 

[scnj]

I got a PS3 for Christmas, so I suppose I'll have to get this. I don't really care too much either way, but if it keeps getting 9/10s and above, I'll probably get it.

You don't have to get it. It's not obligatory.

 

[Raptoricus]

Well I loved killzone one, especially the multiplayer, me and a group of my friends used to play it religiously, and I really hope that killzone 2 is just as good, looking at the reviews and videos it really looks like it might be, if not a hell of a lot better. (As much as I liked the first I did have some reservations about it, like any game none are perfect.)
But unfortunately I won't be getting it because I don't have a PS3 and don't really intend to get one, so unless it comes out for PC, which is an impossibility, I doubt I'll be getting it .

 

[Vlane]

I got a PS3 for Christmas, so I suppose I'll have to get this. I don't really care too much either way, but if it keeps getting 9/10s and above, I'll probably get it.

Scores shouldn't matter. Scores are opinions. Some games got really good scores but they are bad and some games got bad scores but they are really good.

Read/watch reviews, look for gameplay footage and play a demo.

 

[Zetona]

I got a PS3 for Christmas, so I suppose I'll have to get this. I don't really care too much either way, but if it keeps getting 9/10s and above, I'll probably get it.

Scores shouldn't matter. Scores are opinions. Some games got really good scores but they are bad and some games got bad scores but they are really good.

Read/watch reviews, look for gameplay footage and play a demo.

I have and will, of course. But if a game consistently gets high praise from critics, then you can generally rest assured that it is pretty good.

 

[TheBadass]

I was just doing some googling and such, and I noticed that people in Europe get it 2 days before, and people in Australia get it 1 day before us Canadians/Americans. (the 27th) If anyone in this thread is from those areas you have to post when you get the game and tell us how it is.

Wow, we didn't get dicked. I'm amazed.