While reading this review, I'm not so sure they played the game, or know much about games to begin with. I'm okay having them give Killzone 2 a 7/10, but at least give valid reasons to justify the score.
I quote from the review....
"To be specific its relatively slow movement, realistic damaging modelling (i.e. one or two shots and you're dead) and an emphasis on cover is most reminiscent of Black or F.E.A.R."
--Really?! Black or F.E.A.R did not have a cover system that was implemented. Black/FEAR feel nothing like Killzone 2 does. And yes, they spelled modeling wrong in the review. Also they said....
"It's as devoid of personality as the bald space marine you play.."
--REALLY?! Sev, is who you play as, and he is not BALD! What were they playing?!
"But as impressive as the visuals undoubtedly are, with a laudable attention to detail, it's all of things we've seen a hundred times before."
--REALLY?! So they are saying that "its one of the best games they have ever seen," but they've seen it 100 times before?
Dude, just read the review. It's a train wreck of biased journalism
View
