My review of Killzone 3 offended quite a few fans out there. I gave the game a 7 out of 10. That is actually a high score if you consider that a 10 means near perfection and classic status. A game with as many bugs as Killzone 3 should never get a 9 or 10 score. I think with the bugs fixed it could deserve an 8 out of 10. At this time many problems with the game still exist.
Apparently there are many people who actually believe that the multiplayer mode is fine. Lets take a look at why they are wrong.
UNDENIABLE ERRORS AND BUGS:
Killzone 3 had a day one patch. Even with the day one patch hundreds of players still received error codes and many could not connect so that they could play online. For many 10002, 8001, 8013, 1503 are all too familiar error codes. On top of that many people (myself included) have had the game and their whole PlayStation 3 system freeze on them requiring a total reboot.
There is also a problem with regions. Sure you may have selected North America or Europe and expect to play people in those regions but you are probably playing people across the world anyway. Guerilla has acknowledged this problem themselves:
“Due to a bug around 10% of the games are created in the wrong region when the servers are under heavy load. This means that even if you selected Europe as your region your game might be hosted in the US resulting in laggy gameplay.”
– Killzone 3 Developer via Official Killzone Forums
DLC CAUSES MAP ROTATION PROBLEMS
Yes you preordered the game or flat out paid and got those two classic Killzone 2 maps. You downloaded them and now you cant play any other map without backing out and selecting it manually. Oh no! What could be worse than buying a new game only to be stuck in the same map game after game? This is currently the state of Killzone 3 multiplayer for those with the DLC. Is this acceptable? No.
MAP LIMITATIONS
Not only did they fail to include a custom games option. But you cannot even play all of the maps in every mode. I can understand the switch to matchmaking. That’s fine but at least allow for players who like certain modes to be able to experience the other maps on the disk in those modes. You may say that Warzone mode has “death match” but why should players who only want death match have to be subjected to modes they do NOT want to play get to it on a new map? Not a great thing. This is not excellence.
The old custom games feature would fix this but its not available yet an I cannot rate a game based on what a developer may patch in at some point.
NO REPLAY OR THEATER MODE
Really? In a time when just about all the biggest first person shooters have a replay system I just cannot fathom why a game that is trying to ‘stomp with the big dogs’ would not have a replay feature. Matter of fact they even dropped the bare bones online based replay mode they had for Killzone 2.
Halo reach has a Replay mode.
Call of Duty Black Ops has a Theater mode.
Killzone 3 does not.
In this day and age if you want a high review score on par with the competition you need to have all the features a game in that genre should have. Replay mode is one such feature. Hey, even Uncharted 2 had a replay mode.
SUBJECTIVE ITEMS
Here are some things that I found distasteful about Killzone 3 as someone who put in over 30 hours in the multiplayer mode of Killzone 2.
– Some of the multiplayer maps are over stylized to the point of annoyance. The excessive snow effect on Akmir Snowdrift, and over saturated color and slant on Pyrrhus Rise map are both horrible.
– Turbine is a spawn camping nightmare with that elevated Tactical spawn point. Why would you put a spawn point in there and require a jet pack to get to it?
– Multiplayer squad gimping. The lack of an ability to Spawn on team leaders and the overall crippling of what was great about in-game squads in Killzone 2 plain sucks.
– Proximity Chat is gone.
– Certain classes are overpowered or gimped. The marksman is overpowered. Cloaking ability, radar jamming, sniper rifle and an automatic weapon for up close damage? Really?
– Medic class crippled with short revive distance and no indicator to let you know of a medic in your range like Killzone 2. Why would they remove the medic indicator?
VERDICT
At the end of the day Killzone 3 game had a day one patch and yet still two more patches are confirmed on the way. Obviously there are many more issues than those I briefly described. No website should give any game that requires this much fixing a high score. A good score perhaps. I think a 7 with the ability to reach an 8 after the promised patches is a very fair score for Killzone 3.
Woolley
Thank you! Reviewers need to stop being worried about the pretty graphics and look how poorly this game was put together. The online is a mess and for some reason GG doesn’t want to admit that the Marksman class is overpowered or that there is any unbalanced classes at all.
Gamer
I haven’t suffered any error codes other than joining a game and being told right away via an error code that the game has filled up. I have not crashed once and i’ve played the game at least 2 hours a night since release. I don’t doubt some are having problems, some always are. I haven’t suffered any problems with the maps or rotations, that is fine for me. No replay or theater mode is not a reason to subtract from a score. You could always film it yourself if you are that hot to replay old games. Many of us gamers just want to get on to the next round. Replaying old matches should not be considered a mandatory item for a shooter.
Your quote on regions mentions a 10% rate on the problem. That is not catastrophic, and obviously something they will fix. Many shooters, PC or console, have FAR more game crippling bugs and hacks than a matchmaking issue that will be corrected.
I wouldn’t ever crap on someone’s efforts or opinions. To each his own. For me personally, this article is completely removed from the experience I have playing this game. It’s fantastic, and I can’t help but hope they keep dishing out DLC. More Operations maps please!
Just Stop It
Gamer – This comment is directed at you.
Sure, there are several people playing with little to no errors, but the majority of the players are having issues which is the reason for the numerous patches that are incoming. When the majority of the players are having issues, that creates a problem. Just because you can play the game fine, doesn’t mean it’s playable for the majority of the community. You have to see that. I agree that a replay system isn’t needed, but it’s becoming a standard feature with new games. For people that play in clans, being able to watch old matches is essential. Thus, it’s even more frustrating that they took away the simple replay system on their website from KZ2. No idea why they did that. Then again, they have done a lot of things that I don’t quite understand. Yes, they say it’s only 10%, but do you really believe that? I promise you it’s a lot more than just 10%. Maybe it’s not super high, but surely it’s not that low. You can’t trust every quote a company says. I agree KZ3 is a fantastic game in it’s own right, but I believe it’s a major step down from KZ2. It seems very inferior in many ways. In both SP and MP. Not everyone will agree with that, but it seems the majority does, or at least recognizes it.
DOOMTRAIN08
Well ive had the game since launch and have not come accross a single problem that your preaching about, sounds like another butthurt cod fan who got killed repeatedly because he couldnt manage anything but deathmatch……and i bet that even then you got owned…..by a sniper you couldnt get close to. Maybe stop bitching and just go back to call of camp town where you and the rest of the 12year olds can prosper and prestige to your hearts content, sitting in corners and waiting for the next quickdraw encounter………i bet you never played anything more than the demo and your just repeating what other hurt cod players are all complaining about lmao….” im sooooo freakin good at call of duty but this killzone makes my butthyurt”.
this article represents nothing more than a complete joke…….and so fucking what if it had a few server issues at launch…..like seriously.
ive been playing with the move and personally cannot wait to get my hands on the sharpshooter tonight…….seriously immersive!!!!!!
FunnyMan
First off not every game has perfect online from launch. Look at any CoD game. Second, you only see whining articles\reviews like this from people who suck at what ever game it may be they are reviewing. Ill admit KZ3 needs some fixes but it is a great game. Oh all of a sudden KZ2 is awesome? All i remember is hearing people whine about that game. Geez what happen to all the real gamers who can play games as they are and accept that there may be flaws…
lizard
Agree 100%.
In the dozens of reviews for KZ3 floating around the net since release day, the vast majority of them gave glowing 9/10 – 10/10 based solely on the single player campaign.
One more subjective item to add: terrible frames-per-second performance in a 12v12 match. Flame away, but 30fps is barely passable for a competitive shooter; dips into the single digit framerate is simply unacceptable, which happens the majority of any match.
Despite the fact that the technical issues represent only a portion of the player base’s experience, this does not negate the fact that the kz3’s multiplayer deficiencies are frustrating enough, (to enough people who expected to have fun), to deserve a less than a perfect score.
I give the campaign 8/10.
Multiplayer 5/10 (in its current state)
Tweakii
Okay lemme get this straight you gave Mass effect 2 on ps3 a 8 and slamming into Killzone 3. Are you simply a PS3 hater? Anyways, Killzone’s multiplayer is superb online. Most of my mates ( 5 of them) have dropped all things Black Ops and are pouring hours into this game. I haven’t enjoyed a 5 hour fight fest in such a long time! You are simply picking on things just to critise like a screaming child. The dusty snow or sandy levels are sublime and it forces players to fight close combat. The level with the huge power generator causes all sides to be aware of the blast. Choke points are great to battle over and even more so when your team that skirmish. The guns feel right! Each of my friends enjoys their own weapon (I’m LMG) and there’s no ‘super’ weapon like in the other games. The graphics are awesome with tons of things going on making you feel like you are in a real warzone compared to Halo or COD-clones where the maps just feel like simplistic polys massed together. The huge blasts, mechs, jet packs all make each map very memorable and you fight for each corner to own the other side. Then there’s the excitement of gunning down a usurper deep within your lines (who is pretending to be a friend), healing a mate, attacking zones with drones, grenading and protecting a position – running back to ammo crates and repeat the destruction! God I could go on and on with praise. Do you not experience any of this? Are you so fanboy of one style of game that you cannot appreciate new ideas? The last exciting multiplayer game I played was Modern Warfare 2 but Killzone easily trumps it with all the variety and commarderie on each team. If these new emotions are too new and modern maybe you should stop being a games reviewer and go back to Doom 2, ie. run forwards, backwards, look at pretty low count poly wall shoot, and repeat? Yes extra customisation would be cool but to be honest the mass majority don’t care as you can lay into the other side with a knife in their eye socket, strafing and beating them with a assault rifle, gunning down 4 people in a row as you storm a crumbling stairwell or attempting to push through and plant explosives! Peace.
A guy who have read it
I totally agree with those issues, except the errors codes, i never had those.
It really irritates me that everything that was awesome, different, appealing on Killzone 2 online is now gone on the 3rd. I really don’t understand.
On Killzone 2, Before i entered in a room online, i could see what are the guns and classes permitted to play, and so i could avoid them.
Now on Killzone 3, i can’t do that, some times i enter in a room of Warfare and i find myself playing alone on a team, and the opposing one as 5 or 6 players.
I want to be able to chose were I’m going to play online.
Ok, no game can be perfect at launch, but this is Killzone 3, everything that was good on the previous one should stay in a further game. That’s not case.
D.Vader
First off perhaps your basis for your reviews are skewed. Your Black Ops review received no special mentions of the PS3 network issues, but you seem to skewer Killzone 3 for having network issues (most of which were due to traffic and not shoddy development).
I hate it when reviews or opinion pieces bitch about what a game isn’t. So what Killzone 3 doesn’t have theater mode. Neither do a ton of games. So why is it necessary to point it out? I find those kind of statements to be a Freudian slip. You are letting the reader know of your bias towards other game titles when you do these kind of apples to oranges comparisons.
Basically what your reviews tell me is Activision can take a dump into a package and call it COD: Terd Ops and it would still get an 8/10. But Killzone deserves much more scrutiny in your eyes and it’s apparent from the Black Ops vs. Killzone 3 review.
Lets not even mention the flawed 10 point review scale that allows for most of this bias to fester.
darksied
I agree with a lot of what you said. There are some reasons for perfect scores in games, a lot of them not necessarily related to the game itself. A review score can easily be from someone who didn’t play the game, has no interest in playing the game, and is only rating it for another reason. One could be because they’re “fanboys,” and they want to inflate the score so it looks higher and “their” console’s games will get more sales. Other people might give it perfect scores because they KNOW the “other console’s fanboys” will rate it low for no reason, so maybe it’s to balance it out. This of course is only user scores.
Review scores themselves should NEVER give a 10 (5/5, 100/100, etc.). A perfect score means nothing could have ever been better in the game, and everything works flawlessly. This is never the case. But it’s very important nowadays to give high scores for games, because a game that gets a metacritic score of, let’s say, 7/10 will sell very poorly. People don’t pay as much attention nowadays to the details in a game, and only want something that is great and others are playing (i.e. players are getting dumber, it’s true).
Why does a game like CoD: MW2 get an average score of 94? Because it’s meant to sell well, and advertising money pays for a better score, in effect. I wish it wasn’t true, but everyone knows it. If your game gets a 7/10, you will not sell many copies. Even an 8/10 is considered bad nowadays, because people will make a final decision on what to buy based on the rating alone without reading the reviews.
Now, about Killzone 3, I agree with a lot of what you said. I heard all the hype about it, read every article, listed to all the beta feedback, etc. and pre-ordered it for me and my bro (first time pre-ordering a title). What I got was not nearly what I had imagined from all the good reviews and beta feedback. The people who made this game apparently have never played CoD (I’ll explain) because they didn’t learn a darn thing from it.
As much as people will bi**h about CoD and Black Ops, there are things those games do exceptionally well. I can get into games pretty fast (except for that 40 second load time), there’s always people playing, lots of customization options, many weapons, EASY TO READ MENUS, easy to understand communication options, kill cams, theater mode, etc. The basics, pretty much, of what any modern shooter should have (give or take a few things; not every game has to be like CoD of course, I’m just saying nowadays everyone should never mess these things up). But what does Killzone 3 have? Very little in those categories.
I wanted to like it very much, and when I can actually play it’s a pretty fun game (except for the last 3 days we tried to play; connection issues, party issues, playing the same map 8 tmes in a row or something, etc.). How can this be the game that even had a beta, when it has these many problems? To me it seems like a developers first attempt at a shooter because they only got the graphics right. It just leaves me confused how someone who has their experience could have released a product that, really, only does this. It just seems strange and makes me sad.
Hopefully patches will fix it so it will be what it should have, but the damage might have already been done.
Hater player
The multiplayer is terribly unbalanced. Invisible snipers and infiltrators make for confusing play, especially on these large and detailed levels. Other games limit sniping areas for a reason, and making people so easily invisible just makes for lots of pointless deaths. I absolutely love this franchise, but for multiplayer I’m headed back to BlOps.