lol well we cant ask for much. At least sites are trying to be nice cus they know they cant talk crap about kz2 lol. That score i know it must of been hard for them to accept how good that game was lol.

This is a truly awesome score.

Remember - Killzone 2 is being scored relative to the hype, whereas many other games with less hype are given higher scores relative to their quality.

See L4D. It got a 9 for graphics from one IGN website (I think AU). Boggles the mind.

3 more days for the freaking demo~!!!!

EDIT: Lol Y did i get 2 disagrees ? If you reserved the game u can dl the demo on February 2

TALENTED PS3 DEVS =AAA

but seriously.....gears got a 9.5 for graphics as well...we all know which one looks better so i'll say their 9.4 is really a 9.6

i can see this year being a harsh one on games, the bar is constantly being raised and so standards are increasing. 9.4 from ign spells a AAA game for me.

congrats to GG, you got there in the end.

KZ3.... has alot to live up to now :X

Very Good Score.

9.4 from Graphics caught my attention. Gears of War 2 scored higher in Visuals, Gameplay and Overall.

Halo 3 - 9.5
Killzone 2 - 9.4

nuf said. Both are equally good games.

not bad for a "broken" game, eh?

"Not only did Guerrilla achieve a milestone of delivering a great exclusive title for Sony's PS3, it delivered one of the better shooters to come along in a long time. Get your hands on this game."

My hands would be all over it right now if I could.

an it wuda had 9.8 but still great score!

@1.11 yeah, but i'm ever so slightly bummed that it's 1 point lower.

For those complaining about the 9.5 graphics, you must realize this. Gears 2 was compared against other THIRD PERSON SHOOTERS and in that graphical department for that genre it is by far the best. Killzone 2 is being compared graphically against other FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS and it is second only to Crysis/Crysis Warhead. You have to remember FPS doesn't equal TPS and they are not likely on the same graphical reviewing scale. But regardless good review for a sure to be great game.

I don't care for that review really. It's like IGN was scared to give any part of Killzone 2 a 10. I'm not talking about the overall score but look at things like gameplay and sound. Why so low on sound? I haven't read the review yet but I'm sure at least a couple sections could have been given a 10.

Actualy Ramant, that just shows how unfair the scoring is against PS3. They dont measure the Xbox360 against the same standards as they do the PS3.

Its almost like if a game like Fifa was on XB1 and on PS3. Both could be great games, both might get the same score of 9. But one would be better. If the PS3 version looked like the XB1 version, it wouldn't get nine and thats fair enough, but that shouldn't be taken into account for 360, they are both current gen consoles. The fact one is more powerful shouldn't give the weaker a handicap when they're current gen, competing console. If one is better the score should reflect it.

And please Halo 3 isn't in the same league as Killzone. like it all you want. My favourite 360 game is Tenchu. Note I said favourite which means I like it. I never pretended it was the best.

*Accident Post*

am i the only one who actually compared the claims you made ?

IGN UK
----------------------------- ------------------------------- --------
Gears 2 | 9.5 Presentation | 9.5 Graphics | 9.0 Sound | 9.5 Gameplay | 9.5 Lasting Appeal | OVERALL 9.5

KZ 29.5 | Presentation | 9.5 Graphics | 9.0 Sound | 9.0 Gameplay | 9.5 Lasting Appeal | OVERALL 9.4

IGN US
----------------------------- ------------------------------- --------
Gears 2 | 9.5 Presentation | 10 Graphics | 10 Sound | 9 Gameplay | 7.5 Lasting Appeal | OVERALL 9.4

KZ 29.5 | Presentation | 9.5 Graphics| 9.0 Sound | 9.0 Gameplay | 9.5 Lasting Appeal | OVERALL 9.4

i say WIN WIN WIN

Seriously, people... It's 9.4.

Yeah it's not 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 or 10

It's still a very excellent score from a huge publication.

let the hail of AAA scores rain down upon Killzone 2!!!! MUAH HA HA HA

Here's a CRAZY idea - how about actually PLAYING the whole game before trying to discredit reviewers' scores and recycling the media-bias conspiracy theories.

Ultimate Game of 2009

"how about actually PLAYING the whole game before trying to discredit reviewers' scores"

I actually agree. There is no argument about Killzone 2's graphics, but people never know about the actual game until you play it.

And it goes for ALL games. There's usually something not to like about it. Could be small minor concerns. However that won't stop it from being a great game, I'm just saying.

I'm going to the Killzone 2 midnight launch event in SF, so don't hate me for being open minded.

They Gave Resistance 2 9,9,9, 9.5,9.5 they game Killzone 2 9.5,9.5,9,9,9.5 KZ 2 is higher on average but Guys stop ranting they said its the best shooter in a long time so maybe that means better than What your ranting against anyway

Closing comments ign.com

Closing Comments
Killzone 2 is only a short month away from hitting shelves, but the game will definitely be worth the wait. The single-player experience is a truly enjoyable campaign across the Helghast home world that will test your skills, particularly on the higher difficulty levels, and the game simply looks phenomenal for a console shooter. But perhaps the strongest segment of the game is the extremely deep multiplayer, which gives seven basic classes with which you can create your own customized super-soldier after performing your class-specific duties. Not only did Guerrilla achieve a milestone of delivering a great exclusive title for Sony's PS3, it delivered one of the better shooters to come along in a long time. Get your hands on this game.

Great score. But I do wish the scoring was CONSISTENT, for f*ck sakes.

9.5 for Gears. Gears is a wonderful game...no doubt. But it had broken, glitchy multiplayer and a crap story.

According to this review...Killzone 2 has a good story, GREAT multiplayer, is about as long as Gears 2. Then it does things graphically that no game has ever done...not even Crysis.

Yet it gets the same to lower points in graphics and then overall scores a 0.1 lower. I mean, nothing major but still consistency would be nice with the scoring.

they gave a 9.5 on graphics because of some issues with shadows.. F'ing shadows, man. shadows during cutscene.. WTF

gears but framerate issues and a lot of real grapical glithces but we all now they over look any flaws, check out 1up's review

I hate it when people compare the score to other games' scores, the score is good whichever way you look at it. And comparing it to games like GeOW and Halo is ridiculous, cos those games scores were affected by hype, bias, and the fact that the games were already established IPs (obviously not for all review sites, but people cannot help putting their own subjectivity into reviews).

Although if IGN says the game is good, it must be good.

I'm pretty much a FPS noob, so in CoD:WaW all I play is Deathmatch and 4 player split-screen when my friends are around. I'll wait for a patch (if they ever release one) before I get this.

I didn't expect this score. Have fun with this PS3 owners.

Killzooowned! :D

Awesome, Already pre ordered anyway. 9.4 tells me that it lives up to the hype :))

"didn't expect this score. Have fun with this PS3 owners"

I expected a 9 or higher from IGN for Killzone 2.

KILLZOWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bu... bu...but Guerrilla hasn't made a good game before, LOL, all you crazy Killzone doubters and Killzone haters have officially been silenced.

lmao im dying so when did ign change gears 2 graphics to 9.5

all that matters is that the game is fantastic...its not perfect, as any realistic person understood...but it easily stands up to competition...and is a must own for any PS3 fan...

visually...who cares...One look at it for me easily puts it at the top of the best looking games list...while fanboys can argue 'its not as good as Gears 2 because of that 9.5)...what...ever...if you are truly that blind that you think Gears 2 stands up to the hundreds of subtle tech details flawlessly implemented into killzone 2's engine...than you are simply easily impressed...and thats fine...

lack of Co-op is something this game should have been hit for...no denying that...not sure why it was overlooked or not included...but there is no denying that co-op would have added to the overall value of the game...

the point is though..GG succeeded...I guarantee killzone 2 is going to cut out its own fan base, alongside CoD, and halo...it will easily stand with any title in those franchises now...and that is the point...that was what was 'impossible'...there is a new first person shooter franchise at the very top of the list...killzone 2 will have many saying its the best...many saying its not...and its the end user that has to decide that for himself...you can quibble about which has better graphics (regardless of this review, there is simply no argument in my opinion), quibble about which has 'better' gameplay...whatever...it doesn't matter...it only matters that GG defied all the odds...and PS3 owners are about to get one of the best shooters of this generation exclusively...

Yeah I just watched review. The game got pretty good score, but what really was amazing, was the music. I thought the beta KZ 2 music would be the real Helghast March, but it seems that it's not.

This sounds 10 times better and going to definetly buy the soundtrack!

gives it a zero i am pretty sure most PS fans here on N4G will still buy KZ2. I know i would.

The score is lower than expected but still its a great score from my number 1 site for reviews.

KZ2 from what i have seen will set a new benchmark for FPS.

Halo 3 got a 9.5. Killzone 2 got a 9.4. Eat it up fanboys. You can post post post but it wont change anything. Halo 3 scored higher, will sell more, and will still have more online players than KZ2. These are cold facts.

opinion is a different matter. If you like KZ2 better fine. It wont make me enjoy Halo 3 any less

@1.16

GeoW2 is not the best looking 3rd person shooter. MGS4 and Uncharted trump it. Also it is easier to make a 3rd person game look good because you are looking at everything from farther away. It is like in R2. When you look at a fight going on ahead of you it looks great, but once you get up close to everything it just doesn't look as good. More detail has to go into the textures of a FPS.

If the game had Co-op and longer vehicle sections, then it would have gotten 9.8

OK SO THE REVIEWS ARE IN, PLEASE STOP WITH THE KILLZONE 2 HYPE. Resistance 2 and Gears of War 2 both scored better on IGN. Killzone 2 this, Killzone 2 that... everywhere I f*cking look on N4G. You guys have had your time to shine, now lets move on. It did well, your game triumphed. Congratulations. I wish the Xbox had it, I really do.

Now let's f*cking move on.

Gears got a 10 for graphics because IGN were probably comparing it to other 360 games and Gears has tapped the 360 to the max. KZ2 is on the superior platform with room for improvement (incredible I know) so didn't get quite as good a score. Really though, who cares? 9.4 is a great score and I can't wait to play it on the 27th.

Wow, this is crazy. Why did I lose my bubble!

TGSI

"PM
Track
Ignore
1.39 -
Halo 3 got a 9.5. Killzone 2 got a 9.4. Eat it up fanboys. You can post post post but it wont change anything. Halo 3 scored higher, will sell more, and will still have more online players than KZ2. These are cold facts."

LOL LOL LOL

First of all, it is moronic to compare scores of a 360 to a PS3 game since they are not scored against each other.

Secondly reviews work like this. They are scored based on how it goes AT THE TIME OF RELEASE.
Halo 3 was considered a 9.5 when it was released 3 years ago (?) going up against other 360 releases at the time.

Killzone 2 is scored against PS3 games released as of now.

If Halo 3 was reviewed again now, considering the releases of other top quality 360 games, it would not get a 9.5.

So I'm neither here nor there with their score...

I know they apologized, but still... no actual public apology.

I don't know about the game play or any of the other factors IGN takes under consideration when they review games simply because I havent played the game yet!

To give Gears 2 a 10 for graphics I understand. Based on the standards of the day it got released. But and I say But! how in hell did GTA4 got a 10 with that crappy graphics????? WTF IGN????

I knew they were a bit biased but common you can do obvious mistakes like this exposing your true intentions when you hold the title of the most creditable game reviewer (or so some miss leaded people like to think)!!

They tried to justify the lower score they gave by saying it had some issues? What issues? Was gears 2 perfect from start to finish? Common!!

GTA4 got a 10 on graphics???!!! I can sit here all day coming up with games on both the xbox and ps3 that looked better than GTA4 but did not get a 10! That game is the absolute king of glitches, crashes etc. They even released 2 patches to fix its stability issues! Check on you tube for GTA4 issues you will see what I am talking about!.

In any rate this game by today's standards its the best looking game on a console, by far! And when a console game is near the level of the powerhog called Crysis that most PCs even today cry and sweat just to pull 60FPS (frames/second) that says a lot!

Good try IGN keep it up!

Another great review score!

I do have to feel somewhat disappointed with the inconsistency of game reviews, though. It makes the whole review score thing kind of pointless. To give games like Resistance 2 and Gears 2 scores of 9.5 only a few months ago and then give Killzone 2 a 9.4 doesn't seem very consistent. I know I haven't played through the single player campaign, but just based off what I saw in the beta I find it very difficult to believe that Resistance 2 or Gears 2 deserves a better score.

Nevertheless, a very good score and a must-have game.

congrats to Guerrilla. Just shows that you should never count a developer out just because they have never made a good game before game.

I'll be playing this when my friend gets it. I dont have the ps3 yet. One day!!!

I have all 3 next gen consoles. I opened up the xbox 360 experience last night to see IGN dedicated linked pages..... Um... DUH!!!

I played GOW2 and finished it.

Let me say this.. HONESTLY.. Not like DISHONEST IGN who has their hands so deep in microsofts pockets they are afraid to give any PS3 game its real scores...

KZ2 BLOWS AWAY GOW2...!!!!

There is no comparison. GOW2 had horrible screen tearing, slowdown, bland boards (only high rez textures) nothing with much detail. The game only had at most 4 bad guys * WHO ACTUALLY FOUGHT AT YOU at once.....

This is a travesty!....

I want to start a website called.. BAN IGN DOT COM!!!!

Jake

Great score and review from IGN.I can't wait to pick up Killzone 2 next month!!

"Not like DISHONEST IGN who has their hands so deep in microsofts pockets they are afraid to give any PS3 game its real scores..."

Well this rates up there with dumbest posts ever.

"Dishonest" IGN gave Metal Gear Solid 4 a 10. In case you didn't know, MGS4 is a PS3 Exclusive.

As for Killzone 2 being better than Gears 2, how can you be honest about it when you have never played it before.

but i am starting to get the feeling that MS is trying to sabotage killzone 2 image with the american media. MS = $$$ + no business integrity + lack of innovation + monopoly style business + no attetion to quality. Something is fishy. Graphics are not a 10? to WHAT are they comparing it to.

I will stop reading anything KZ 2 related, gonna buy the game day one, and enjoy a true masterpiece.

9.4 is an awesome score.

Chains of olympus got this score too.

The biggest problem of this generation is not on the consoles or the games, they are fine, the problem lies in the media, and their relation to the voicer minority of fanboys.

This review by IGN just show the tip of the iceberg. How can anyone seriously give KillZone 2 a graphics score under Gears 2? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Gears look bad at all, but even a chimp can see KillZone too not only look much better but also is tech heavier compared to the Unreal Enguined Gears. We could argue that they strictly prefer Gears art direction, ugly aliens over basically armored humans, maybe they don't like glowing eyes. But do we know it? We don't even know how that bigger number come, remember the "Overall, not an average".

And from there comes our problem. Reviews never had been that much descritive about the reasons behind their numbers, without holding much responsability to it, we could much proper call those number of gut-feelings. But since gut feeling (review scores) are measureable, people will use it to compare games, even when they shouldn't (actually, there isn't nothing to choose here, a minority have both consoles and most of those have always been set to get both games, not to say Gears came some good months ago, if you wanted it, you probably already got, Killzone isn't the reason holding it, if anything is holding it).

And with a watching fan base (be it for the game or the console) being so vocal about reviews (the nearest thing to science of measure in games) those little incoerences just jump from the page to everybody that follow the media.

The time has come to reviewers and review specialized sites to decide if they will drop scoring and stay glued to opinios or if they'll try to overhaul the system to make it more technical (that if they ever decide to make anything).

For me, I say they should not only re-think the review system, but the totality of the media in this industry, it's just unprofessional, I know I was one of those guys that always followed the gaming journalism, now it don't carry half of the relevance it used to have (part because it got lamer, part because i grow in other interests and have learn what real journalism is), with this lame system and more and more biased journalists/reviewrs (I know nobody is or should be completelly impartial, but it's past the obvious favouritism, when we keep seing console A is doomed, game B won't match the hype, bash, bash and more bash) the only way I see things are going, if they stay the way they are, is down.

where are people getting this info that gears 2 got a 10 for graphics?

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

It's a 9.5, they didn't change anything, I read the review the day it was made.

And they gave KZ2 a 9.5 in the graphics because there were some technical issues that marred it. They don't go by best graphics but by the Overall graphical presentation.

They gave it a 9.4 because it "borrowed" heavily from COD4. IGN doesn't make up things to get more viewers or subscribers. Just the only thing that really puzzles me is that R2 was rated higher than KZ2.

So according to IGN, COD4>L4D>Halo3>R2> Gears2>KZ2 (yes COD4 got a 9.4 also but they nominated it for GOTY 2007, and it won best xbox 360 game, and L4D scored lower but was nominated for GOTY 2008 over R2 and gears 2. There you have it, that's IGN's opinion.

I think they are talking about Gears 1. This one get 10 for graphics if I remember right.

I was talking Gears 2, my bad and I take it. But still, Killzone 2 graphics are better, not even. Spcially for games releasing just months away one from another.

But this don't cover another incoerence, the time factor, I think Gears 1 has graphics better than Killzone 2 and even to Crysis... There should be a way to fix it, or at least clarify it in a policy warning or something.

And you just bring up another one, the awarding thing. How can a game they technically said (scored) lower win a award as best game over those they said was technically (scored) better?

People should just get past review scores now it's obvious they don't work that well now a days.

no gears 2 was 10 for graphics IGN changed it

What you mean people are still playing Halo 3. Wow, that game sucks monkey nuts.

And btw, Halo 3 was reviewed by a different person other than Jeff at IGN. Opinions of 2 different people 18 months apart cannot be compared. Especially when there is 1% in it

*sigh* Once AGAIN the reviews ARE NOT reviewed against cross platform games.

They review GAME PERFORMANCE vs other CONSOLE RELATED GAMES.

Gears of War 1, 2 or 568 have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REVIEW OF KILLZONE 2.

The problem is you fanboys are (aside from being idiots) never satisfied.

Whatever the score, it is not good enough.

9.4 should be 9.5

9.9 should be 10.

10 should be 15.

Get a brain, get a life and do something constructive. We're all sick of this sh!t.

Nice score. Cant wait to play the game! Its getting close! Im really hoping to like the multiplayer. Please be good.

If IGN says so, then so it is : Resistance 2 (as sh!tty as it is, the GOW 2 killah) is a better game than Killzone 2. How much did Sony pay them, hum...? Anyway I guess Holy Sony couldn't afford a 10 this time around (probably saving the cash for God of War 3).

must be tough living in denial fox01, i'm sorry for your family

Yeah Fox, because SONY totally sent out Halo 3 swag bags with Elite 360's and free games worth $1000 to secure their Resistance 2 review scores.

Oh wait, that was Microsoft. Whoops!

Seriously, grow up.

Just like Resistance 2 & Litlle Big Planet, Killzone 2 is over hyped and I doubt it'll live up to it. Call me a Fanboy if you want but I own a PS3 (PSN : MANO-FR) and played both games. Killzone 2 is just another shooter with good graphics, get that into your head and maybe then you might be able to enjoy the game for what it is : "you aim, you shoot", it's a FPS with really good graphics that's it.

You havent played KZ2 yet, how do you know its better thant RE2?

Jeff Haynes reviewed both games, that is his opinion.. 1% different is nothing at all.

In my opinion they overated RE2.. It should have been a solid 9

uh^...I played 40 hours of the killzone 2 beta...and I own R2...killzone 2, competitive multiplayer at least, absolutely trashes R2...not even comparable imo...R2 is like a cartoon filled with cheese compared to killzone 2...

in fact...IGN's 9.5 for R2 was drastically friendly imo...I truly feel that the R2 and Gears 2 9.5's where just to keep everyone happy...as the place would have exploded if one was better than the other according to them...I simply don't think R2 was a 9.5 in anyway...8.5?...definitely...

the co-op in R2 saves it entirely...but a rather forgettable single player campaign...extremely corny competitive modes (go protect this beacon, go attack this beacon, go back and save this beacon, etc.)...do not a 9.5 game make...imo at least...

so I totally agree with what the OP said...i find it pretty surprising that R2 is overall higher than killzone 2...

Or maybe they're both great games?

"If IGN says so, then so it is"

Wow...congratulations on lack of free-thought.

Change your name to Sheep, you clearly just follow the crowd.

"In fact...IGN's 9.5 for R2 was drastically friendly imo...I truly feel that the R2 and Gears 2 9.5's where just to keep everyone happy...as the place would have exploded if one was better than the other according to them..."

sorry buddy they said that R2 was better than gears 2 because of the online problems. here's a link to prove it.:)

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Ban Jake.com