Lean and peek at this new Killzone footage
by Andrew Yoon 
{ Aug 24th 2007 at 4:00PM }
Straight from Leipzig, the developers at Guerrilla demonstrated some of the gameplay features of the highly anticipated PS3 first person shooter, Killzone 2. While the game is mostly known for its graphics technology, gamers should be most curious about the way the game plays. Certainly, is the gameplay as advanced as the way it looks? Watch this new footage to see the cover and aiming system in work in this new video.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Adam @ Aug 24th 2007 4:06PM
"While the game is mostly known for its graphics technology"
And suffer in gameplay as the likes of Lair and Heavenly Sword reviews are coming along.
Christopher @ Aug 24th 2007 4:14PM
OK.. I hope the game is more exciting than that. Just didn't have any kind of "wow" factor with the Lean and Peek mechanic. I dunno about this title yet..
gullum @ Aug 24th 2007 4:15PM
Way to jump to conclusions, Adam.
Anyway, I love the look of the game and it looks like the gameplay is solid as well. I can't wait to see more of this awesome game. I really enjoyed the first one so I'm definitely it's definitely on my must buy list.
gamingeek @ Aug 24th 2007 4:19PM
Will be a must buy. This game looks insane!
upz @ Aug 24th 2007 4:21PM
It seems like we've been hearing plenty of "Looks great, but is it innovative?" comments regarding Killzone. After all, it's just another FPS, and it's incredibly difficult to innovate in the genre short of throwing in gimmicks like slowing down time or shooting out tentacles that eat people's hearts. I think our take on this, though, should be that being the most immersive warzone simulation ever is an innovation in and of itself. I know I paid for all that processing power so I could have the most realistic gaming experiences yet. What about everyone else?
Kris @ Aug 24th 2007 4:26PM
The one thing people seem to keep forgetting about games in general is the whole picture. Yea, alone, lean and peek seems like a little less interesting. However I highly doubt lean and peek is the only innovation Guerilla has in store for us. They're all about immersion (which the first Killzone did REALLY well) and my take on it is that its yet another way to throw you into a battleground and have you run around intuitively and immersively. The whole point is to make it so you don't exactly have to constantly be reminding yourself to dive into cover, its a tool that allows you some really nice tactics to complement the visceral action.
Ithilis @ Aug 24th 2007 4:26PM
It looks pretty, sure, but that gameplay was pretty stale and unoriginal. Let's hope that it gets better on the gameplay front.
JL @ Aug 24th 2007 4:29PM
@ Adam - I didnt think Heavenly Swords gameplay was bad at all. The more I played the demo, the more I started figuring out the technical moves. If you got to your moves list, I'm sure you will have many ?????????????????? of moves you havent even figured out yet. Once you get the hang of it, the fighting system is pretty deep.
I dont know about Lair, I havent played it.
Kris @ Aug 24th 2007 4:31PM
he one thing people seem to keep forgetting about games in general is the whole picture. Yea, alone, lean and peek seems like a little less interesting. However I highly doubt lean and peek is the only innovation Guerilla has in store for us. They're all about immersion (which the first Killzone did REALLY well) and my take on it is that its yet another way to throw you into a battleground and have you run around intuitively and immersively. The whole point is to make it so you don't exactly have to constantly be reminding yourself to dive into cover, its a tool that allows you some really nice tactics to complement the visceral action.
Also Adam, if you played the first Killzone with a critical mind you would have noticed the issues pertaining to it were mostly technical in nature. Meaning they couldn't exactly create the vision and world they imagined on the even then dated tech. Its a simple imagination to reality scenario, they just didn't have the resources to do so. If the approach they took to developing Killzone:Liberation is any clue, Guerilla may have a richer story in place, something we could all appreciate in a single player experience.
I would assume with the full weight of Sony Computer Entertainment behind them they'd finally have the proper chance to really make real on the fantasy that is Killzone. I mean hell, we haven't even seen the multiplayer yet =D
Lion @ Aug 24th 2007 4:47PM
I think the cover system is kind of "nerfed" in that it seems to allow to much visibility when you are covered. I mean, what's the frickin' trade-off? Shouldn't you have to deal with reduced vision when you're hiding behind something?
Some might prefer to see more ... But I'd rather that the developers made it a bit more challenging and--dare I say it--"realistic" by reducing visibility more when you're behind cover.
wurider @ Aug 24th 2007 5:19PM
The Hype machine rolls again. The graphics are nice but it really doesn't look much better that COD4. Honestly it won't take much for it to be better than Killzone 1 and many of you fanboys are acting like Killzone 1 was the undisputed game of the year or something. All of these shooters are starting to lool alike. Other than Halo can you see a screen shot of a FPS and be able to tell what it is. KZ 2 looks lke Timeshift, COd4, Area 51 and every other FPS that is due to come out. They have got to deliver with a fun and unique gameplay system. Remember no one ever said that Halo 1, 2, or 3 were ever graphic monsters but Bungie nailed the gameplay down cold. That is the most important part of the game and that is why many consider Halo the best console FPS series ever made but they will never say that Halo has the best graphics or sound. The game has got to be fun.
secret @ Aug 24th 2007 5:31PM
This game isn't about fun, it idesn't about gameplay, and it isn't about artstyle (Zelda on Wii or Gears of War).
This game is about one thing and only one thing only. Just like Grand Turismo 5. It's about showing the details and technological raw power of the PS3.
The hair on the human's head or the bricks on the walls might not stylish or artistic. But that's not the point. The point is to show that there are more hair per head that actually sways to the wind according to physics and more bricks with minor details like cracks inside cracks that no one will ever notice. It's not meant to look as beautiful as a ferrari, but meant to show off the pure engine power.
MGS4 is the game that's like a ferrari. It's both powerful and beatiful and fun. Killzone serves only to show a beginning glimpse of what the PS3 can do engine wise. Grand Turismo 5 will seal the deal forever.
secret @ Aug 24th 2007 5:37PM
In other words, this game only serves to say that we have the highest quality paper and pen on earth to artists and writers and creative people to work on, to demonstrate that this is a powerful machine. Sony could care less if it's fun or not. That will come later when good game designers get their hands on it like Hideo Kojima.
a.j. @ Aug 24th 2007 5:39PM
between the "heavenly sword and LAIR suck!" and the "this game isn't innovative" while talking about a FPS, you guys sure know a lot about games you haven't played yet! i love when opposing camp fanboys fight each other over things that they have no idea about. 360 rules! no PS3 rules! Wii rules! lol. go for a walk, get some air.
James @ Aug 24th 2007 5:41PM
@5 upz, I couldn't agree with you more. My favorite aspect of gaming is the sensation of being immersed in the environment, and the sounds and sights of Killzone 2 on PS3 will deliver a pretty intense battle experience. Isn't that why COD 4 is getting so much attention, because of the realism of the visuals, or are people really more interested in the gameplay being offered?
Titty Pink @ Aug 24th 2007 6:49PM
"Killzone 2 doesn't look much better than COD4"
If thats the worst thing you can say about KZ 2 then good, because COD 4 and KZ 2 are the best looking console games I've ever seen...and it's not even close. Considering that I'll own BOTH of these kick ass titles puts me in a position to be envied.
Popfrogs @ Aug 24th 2007 7:13PM
#17 and other doubters:
Yeah, I'm sure the _entire game_ has you walking around casually behind cover while dudes far away shoot at you.
THIS WAS A TECH DEMO. I'm sure the gameplay was *intentionally* relaxed, so the devs could demonstrate without having to battle through swarms of enemies.
Don't forget that this game is still super early. They said at E3 this year, what they showed they considered pre-alpha.
phhowell @ Aug 24th 2007 8:08PM
Maybe the gameplay LOOKS like it sucks because for the first half of the damned trailer the guy playing doesn't do anything... just a thought. Looks badass when he started playing.
DownwardMonkey @ Aug 24th 2007 10:34PM
Jessh the world really does = a lot of stupid people. It's a tech demo, what the hell are you all expecting? The whole damn game on a flash movie of you to watch?!
Oh and the only reason Killzone wasn't a massive hit, was the PS2 unfortunately couldn't handle it as well as one would hope.
John @ Aug 24th 2007 10:53PM
You want my true and honest opinion. Its to colorless...I pray this is due to it being in pre-alpha(been in it for a while though :s) If it perks up in color and the gameplay itself improves ill buy it sure. Till then im fine....And please no one do any pointless flaming you want a nice cool debate about it im up. But pointless flaming is rather childish.
captaingamer @ Aug 25th 2007 1:21PM
People bashing this game don't own a PS3!
Enough said.
James @ Aug 25th 2007 2:17AM
@22Did you just use the phrase "Too Colorless" what are you INSANE ??? How much color do you expect you are in the middle of a dark dreary dirty warzone with bombs and explosions going off everywhere to be seen where the land is torn from death and destruction... yea I expected alot of color in a scenerio such as that... NOT... So please before you speak you might want to take a deeper thought into what your going to speak about ok ? Thanks that would help a bunch.
John @ Aug 25th 2007 3:11AM
*sigh* You see flamers...Childish. Yes it is colorless there would be more then black white and Grey in a war zone every building is pretty much the same color...I don't enjoy this seeing as its not sensible i don't care if my game is realistic but really....All buildings are not Grey. Even in a war zone. I never said the game will be bad...i cant know as i have not played it but from what i saw there the color is no where to be seen and the gameplay looks a bit choppy. It has much room for improvement. If you wish to continue debating do it in a non-childish manor...Ok.
secret @ Aug 25th 2007 4:57AM
You want to know which console is the best? Sell all three at the same price - pick any price whether $100 to $400 to $6000. And let's see which one sells the most. But here's the catch, just list out ALL the fact under each console without hiding anything to make one look better than another. AND put a gag on magazine writers and their opinions (secret hanshakes with Microsoft or secret agendas like "save nintendo" before they become extinct and gone forever like Sega and the Dodo bird (but I like Nintendo's "clean mr. rogers sesame street disneyland atmospther, so that's a good thing). Once all three consoles are at the same price with all the facts fully laid out and nothing hidden, we'll see which console sells more, suggesting which one is truly better.
secret @ Aug 25th 2007 5:03AM
That's the point. One of the good things about the PS3 is that it isn't ONLY gritty shooters - Halo, gears, bioshock? That's why it also has, among Killzone and MGS4, RATCHET & CLANK coming out soon that's of high quality....That's what makes the playstation brand the playstation brand. And Gears and Bioshock are on PC's now anyways. Though I'm not touching those crack heroine drug dealer high school drop out heavy metal death punk rock horror movie games.
I don't think Hillary Clinton would like Gears or Bioshock. But what the hey, you knowd the stereotype they have about gamers, right?
secret @ Aug 25th 2007 5:08AM
The PS3 appeals to a wider audience that could even include educated people. If it wanted to, it can do Wii games with it's SIXAXIS and now the EYETOY. It can obviously do any nitty gritty games the 360 can. And now it can do more - like 4D graphics. 4D graphics makes every object on screen is alive and has it's own life, changing and interacting with the environment. I don't know this tech stuff, but you can read about it on N4G's website.
secret @ Aug 25th 2007 5:11AM
The PS3 has a little of everything for everyone, that's what makes it so good. If you like nitty gritty stuff, there's KZ2, MGS4, Fear, and so on. Bright colorful stuff - Ratchet & Clank...
John @ Aug 25th 2007 6:28AM
Oh yes and your views are in no way biased. :P I think you got the wrong idea from what i posted As i have stated else were (bioshock topic) ALL of the consoles are great. That is the truth also your "make all the console of equal price logic is HIGHLY flawed. The prices DO have to do with the sales a more so logical thing to say is "let them spend the same amount on making each console then see who will win in which the sales would be the same. If your trying to pull the "which console is better" thing then there is no answer each person has there own views maybe someone love the family friendly ways of the wii or the plain greatness of XBls online play to the movie friendly etc ways of the PS3.
Now to move onto you saying only the PS3 has all of the game genres. Each console has one more so then the other PS3 being RPGs X360 Shooters Wii Family. However each has some of all of it. You already mentioned the PS3s so i see no need im me doing it as well. So ill start with the 360 In the family genre they have games like loony toons, lego starwars, viva pinata. RPGs such as mass effect and fable 2, Blue dragon. And shooters Halo 3(duh :P), Gears of War, And Half Life 2 AKA orange box . The wii has family such as wii sports a mario games. Shooters like Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles Far Cry and red steal. And RPGs legend of zelda and im sure Mario galaxy's would fit there.
And just a few side facts id like to mention
1st Halo 3 isnt a "gritty shooter" its allot more colorful then you make it seem.
2nd Bioshock is actually a cross between RPG and FPS.
Again ill say it ALL console are great...Simple
John @ Aug 25th 2007 6:30AM
Also note that i love all my console the same i find each just as entertaining. Fanboisiom is fine....Fanboy wars not so much...Seems stupid and useless to me.
matjet @ Aug 25th 2007 6:41AM
i don't know about the xbots, but if people aren't satisfied with that gameplay here, then i don't know what they could possibly want. Certainly not anything else currently announced and upcoming/available. I read people going on about gameplay this and innovation that, but i really don't see what the **** they're complaining about.
DownwardMonkey @ Aug 25th 2007 8:13AM
If you made all the consoles equal price I personally feel that I'd have leapt on the PS3 sooner than I did (and I had one earlier than most). I use my PS3 a LOT more than I ever did my 360; things like Blueray, Linux etc make it much more worth while even with the smaller number of games out (and frankly right now the 360 only has one game I can't play on PC or PS3 tha tI want and that's Mass Effect). I also don't worry about my PS3 dying because of being left on all weekend with Folding@Home running.
These things all mean a lot to me, I'm not worried about having game after game being thrown at me, I'm happy playing R6V and the odd quick blast on the HS demo again.
calel @ Aug 26th 2007 9:25AM
nnn