"And with the review scores rolling in, we can spot some of this bias still, firstly it seems like some reviewers believe it is their job to review a product based on what it doesn't have, now I have never quite understood this logic, killzone 2 is getting scored down for lacking a co-op mode, sure that would have been a great addition, but the fact is it isn't part of the game, therefore reviewers should not take points away for the lack of the feature, to further my point take a look at the reviews of Call of Duty 4, a great shooter in many ways, with an addicting multiplayer mode, the game did not have co-op, I repeat it did not have a co-op feature, yet it was barely mentioned in reviews, and even in reviews were it was brought up, points were usually not deducted"

----------

CALL OF DUTY 4 DID NOT HAVE CO-OP, SO WHY DOES KILLZONE 2 GET BASHED FOR NOT HAVING IT?

It doesn't matter how much hype the game had, because EVERYONE who knew and chose to pay attention to what GG was saying already should have known the game would not be shipping with Co-Op.

For god sake. so sad.

in others words he the saying the reviers bias because it didnt get want i wanted it to get. So fooking sad.

Get a life. instead of crying over people opinion and 9.0,9.2,9.4,9.6,9.8 and 10 are bias right?

OK 9.0 below are gbetter then above.

I think it is more about making people click on to their website and make a stirr than hating it, which (hate & bias) seems to be present though.

Here come the excuses. Anything to convince themselves that Killzone 2 is the greatest game of all time. Look, the game is kicking ass. Why isn't this enough for you guys? Just because it's not the "Halo-Killer" you were all hoping for, doesn't mean its not great.

As of this hour, it's got a 92% rating on GameRankings. That's pretty good. Stop giving yourselves excuses. Ecspecially when it's from a site that isn't even very popular.

I could start a blog RIGHT NOW, write some sh*t about Killzone 2 or Halo Wars, and whatever I say, someone who agrees would post it on N4G. The fanboys on here are f*cking clowns. Yes, that means YOU.

the double standard is pretty obvious.

one of the guys in the gamespot preview video said the game has above average graphics,,,lool.I mean come on.who are we kidding here?

or IGN gave GTA4 10 fro graphics despite infinite number of low res textures and pop-ins but a 9.5 because they saw couple of low res shadows lool(he actually says in the podcast that he gave 9.5 due to couple of low res shadows in the game)

I almost had a feeling that most reviewers wanted to give it a 10, but didn't because they were concerned with sounding unbias.

KZ2 made them sh*t in their pants, but they don't want you to smell it.

and non of the freaking reviews even mentioned it.

how is that for double standard?

Who cares either way, you don't base your purchases on reviews scores, and even if you did, I imagine you would have a site/source that you know falls inline with your tastes.

People are to quick to label people "bias", it seems to have simply become a new standard expression for "a difference of opinion". Because largely, thats what it is. I'm not suggesting some site/sources dont use underhand tactic to drum up more hits or whatever but not all of them.

Either way, I find it somewhat strange questioning someones opinion/review of a game when they have played it and we haven't.

I just play the games I know/think I will enjoy, whether some dude I've never meet hits it with a 5/10 or 10/10.

but it's not perfect.visually it's great and the gameplay is for sure very enjoyable but just like every good fps game KZ 2 has it's flaws as well. there's just too much hype about this game because visually it seems to be the best ps 3 game,so that's why every negative comment is being understood as ''biased''. don't care that much about reviews.just play the game and if u like it then it's a good one. My brother has a ps 3 so we'll spend many hours playing it...

Sony fans honestly need to take a f**king chill pill already. KZ2 is respectfully getting 9.5's mostly across the board with a 10 here and there. I've only seen like 2 8's reviews, and you guys act as if thats bad and it's the end of the world... dear god man.... Who cares if there are indeed BIASED reviewers out there? (which there are obviously). BIASED reviews DON'T just effect PS3 games, EVERY console get's BASHED because of BIASED journalists and BIASED fanboys. Its been this way since this gen began, at least to this disgusting out of hand degree it has reached. But I feel fanboyism truely didn't come about until the PS2 sky rocketed the way it did. It was a wrecking ball. Now some how all that persona has snowballed and cluster f**ked into fanboyism beyond all beliefs. Then Xbox fanboys delt with not doing jacks#!t to the PS2 market last gen, to this gen FINALLY taking a healthy chunk of PS3's market share... which then justifys the fanboyism of 360 fans, cause they love rubbing it in that the underdog made a comeback and has been successful at sticking around. While Nintendo Fanboys sit back and laugh at the fact that their last gen/next gen release with worse graphics than BOTH 360 and PS3 is totally obliterating them in sales (which is kinda sad). But it's the truth. Fanboyism in general just sucks and it's ruining this hobby/passion for a lot of us that are just out there to play the damn games and enjoy them.

all in all...

Be your own reviewer, not everyone likes the same things... and you're entitled to your own personal taste! and that is all that matters most!

*hands out tissues*

There is total bias in game reviews or at least MS spends alot of money to make sure the reviews are good. When HALO: Odd Street(ODST)comes out it will get 10/10 all over the place. Gears 2 was a shoe-in for 10/10 scores even though it was a broken game.

For the most part I'm happy with the scores I've seen, but its just terrible that the gaming media are so biased.

Highlights:

"killzone 2 is getting scored down for lacking a co-op mode, sure that would have been a great addition, but the fact is it isn't part of the game, therefore reviewers should not take points away for the lack of the feature, to further my point take a look at the reviews of Call of Duty 4, a great shooter in many ways, with an addicting multiplayer mode, the game did not have co-op, I repeat it did not have a co-op feature, yet it was barely mentioned in reviews, and even in reviews were it was brought up, points were usually not deducted."

"neither Halo nor Call of duty 4, revolutionised the genre, yet they were never docked points for it. Reviewers say Killzone 2 is 'samey' with a weak story and cliche FPS techniques, I am sorry to once again disagree but I have never seen a more cliche War story than that of Call of Duty 4, and again nobody felt the need to mention it."

"'Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3 were both great looking games at the respective times of their release, however they still had low-res textures and poor character models in some places, yet reviewers simply ignored them, Killzone 2 however, every low-res texture is spotted and the game is criticised'"

Finally all the B.S. that accompanies PS3 exclusives is displayed all out in the open for everyone to see and understand. The Double-Standards within the media against the Playstation 3 are not a myth, they are FACT!!!

Biggest mass stupidity since the release of Metal Gear Solid 4?

Bias. Bias against/towards what? It's the new buzzword, isn't it? "People are criticising a game I have on pre-order! THAT'S DEVALUING MY DECISION TO BUY IT! THAT MEANS YOU'RE BIASED!" Do people genuinely think that professional games critics are going to get drawn into the 'console wars'? Games critics get paid to voice their opinions about a game. They're also not teenagers who can only afford to buy one console and stick with it for dear life.

(It's why I find it funny when, for example, people accuse Eurogamer of being biased towards the 360, when their writers' list is comprised primarily of people who also work for loads of format-specific mags like PC Gamer and PSX.)

I kind of got it with MGS4. HUGE sequel to one of the best loved franchises in the world. Killzone less so. It's a first follow-up to a *reasonably* well-received title. It's just had a mammoth PR campaign behind it. And all this nonsense just baffles me.

I can't believe we've seen a day when a game with a Metacritic average score of 93% is causing people to call out reviewers for being overly critical.

Anyway, this writer claims to have played KZ2 but he hasn't. You can tell. Firstly, well, Sony have a very strict list of who they're sending pre-release copies to. While obviously I don't have access to their traffic data, I sincerely doubt a site that generates next to no comments on its articles is receiving the 200,000 unique readers per month Sony currently require proof of in order to send you Killzone 2. But ever aside from that, there just no detail in his piece. No reference to any part of KZ2 - just to other games this guy reckons KZ2 will be better than.

It's pathetic. It really is. Just look at yourselves, everyone.

The bitsh said that we have something to spend our money on other than heavenly sword action figures and anti depressants.
Stupid ho is mad xbox doesn't have anything for this year and this game proves ps3 is more powerful which upsets her.
The graphics arent the exact match of what weve seen in earlier trailers but believe us we arent complaining.
Bitsh the graphics are better than the old trailers be mad that the xbox can match those graphics.

Oh boy ... here we go again. PS3 fanboys need to grow up... this is getting embarrassing already. You guys are starting to behave like little brats complaining and whining about everything.

If a game gets a 10 then it's deserved.... if it gets a 9, then the reviewer is bias. No game is perfect. No matter what the game it is, some people are going to like it more then others.

PS. report the story because it's lame... you should do the same.

MGS4 10/10
LBP 10/10
WipeOut:HD 10/10
GT:Pro 10/10
MotorStorm 2 10/10
Uncharted 10/10
Resistance 2 10/10
PJ:Eden 10/10
R&Clank:TOD 10/10
But...I LOVED all of them!!! ;-P
Excellent Gameplay and Graphics to;) I couldn't ask for more;)
People who worship the internet scores are SAD!!! ;-D

And the crying continues.....*

Oh man I love reading these whiny comments. This is rich! Keep them coming boys! :)

so i guess reviewers have set PS3 Exclusives at a higher standard than other games when reviewing them. That explains the criticalness and nit picking.

cry like babies.....

Review scores aren't suppose to matter riiight..but I get the feeling there is more to it than just a review score.

Everything is Bias or conspiracy..delusional some have become.

You can't read a review/score and know it's an opinion just as yours soon will be, when this game hits.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Microsoft had actually something to do with PS3 exclusives getting biased reviews.

I mean such a mediocre game like Halo 3 got perfect 10's from multiple sources even though Bungie couldn't get the ugly graphics run in HD and gameplay is the worst I've ever had to deal with. Don't get me even started with the multiplayer. I don't really dig the whole concept of one clip one kill.

Gears of War was an entertaining game but GeoW2 was literally crap. Socom: Confrontation got low scores because servers didn't work properly during the first weeks but Gears of War 2 got away with it like nothing.

I guess video gaming media is one of the most corrupted lol.

the people who have seen this game in motion or in video or even in text will get it on day 1.. its nothin new that the madia is no accurate now adays..

I think alot of the Xbox360 fans are missing the point here.

I dont think many have a problem with the scores Killzone 2 has been getting, which have been extremely good. What people are complaining about are the points that are getting took off the game not having elements in there that other games don't have either, yet they get far more glowing reviews. Its the consistency that is lacking, and that people do not like. If your scoring a game down for one thing (e.g. the lack of co-op) then every other game should be treated equal, and if that doesn't include co-op, should be docked similar points for it too.

It happens far too much in the gaming media, no matter what piece of hardware the game appears on. Surely, as gamers, we should request at least a little bit of consistency when it coems to reviews?

I do think the hardcore element of both sides (PS3 and 360) need to book into a mental clinic though, the site is becoming unbearable with the amount of sausage jockeys running around doing nothing but trying to wind each other up.

Why in the world is killzone 2 getting knocked down for not having co-op mode? I mean yeah I would like it in but still they never hinted or said it would be there. They didn't give COD4 a con for the lack of co-op.

The game its mediocre at best, its no where near of been high quality, but just another copy cat with bad story lines. So once again f@ck all you sony b!tches.

Ok then, answer me a straightforward question. Is not having co-op a flaw? If so, should games be marked down because they lack 60 players online?

directed to Jenzo @ 1.2

I don't quite get it. Even while some reviewers are saying the lack of coop brings it down in overall score (which i agree with is dumb) the game is STILL getting 9's out the wazoo. Be glad.

Dude.
They've been bias with hella games.
ex.)
-Halo 3 (No way in hell did that game deserve a 10/10. I would accept a 9/10 but a 10/10 come on now.)
-GTA IV (Most overhyped game this gen so far. GTA IV deserves a 8 at best not a 10/10.)
-Gears of War 2 (Gears of War 2 deserved a 9.5/10 not a 10/10. Why? Game reviewers didn't even bother to mention the online issues and the lag.)

However Killzone 2 deserves it's hype cuz they've shown enough to prove that it's gonna be a great game.

It's so weird how when PS3 gets a perfect score game everyone says it's bias buy when a 360 gets a perfect scoring game no one says s***.

the nitpicks are just too much. if killzone 2 were an xbox360 game i am sure there would be a million gloom and doom articles about the ps3. overall the scores are good though. no one complained in halo 3 when you would enter a massive landscape and the enemies didn't fill up the screen or the 640p presentation. if the game was truly only ok-there would be 7's coming out of the woodwork.

the phantom disagree person can't type why he disagrees. 360 only owner wanders into the room.

there is all this fanboyism? maybe the reviewers don't like the ps3. i don't like the xbox360, but i bought one so i would not miss out on games that i want to play. Alan Wake, Star Ocean 4, and Halo odst(i traded in my halo 3, so i will pick it back up). ps3 is coming on hard like a 19 year cheerleader in heat, and some fruit a55 reviewers want to be honest and keep their virginity until marriage. i can already see it now Halo 3 expansion will get a sea of 10's. an expansion for lord's sake!!!

Most highly anticipated PS3 games are reviewed in comparison to an XBox 360 counterpart. Where as XBox 360 games are reviewed without comparison.

Statements like: It doesn't have co-op like...
or The multiplayer is rich but since It doesn't have chainsaw battles it's not better...
the visuals are great but not as action packed like...
and so forth.

when CoD6 releases in Dec; if it doesn't measure up to KZ2 in the aspects KZ does well, then points will be docked. Some people will mention it so chill out.

You guys keep mentioning Call of Duty 4 and how it doesn't have co-op but you forget that first off it's a 2007 game, Second off, it had 4 player local split screen, Killzone 2 doesn't have that, The point of a perfect score is that the game can't significantly get any better, But trust me, Co-op would definitely have made KZ2 much much better, WHy? Go see Halo 3, I friggin hated that game playing single player all by myself, But the moment I played in co-op, the game suddenly became enjoyable, There's really no excuse, you almost always have your squad mates around you unlike other games like Bioshock and stuff,

And if you'd notice, Call of Duty 4 did get knocked for not having co-op in some reviews, That's exactly why COD5 had it, They saw the flaw in not implementing it in a war type game with several team mates moving along, And split screen is a must, It forms the bread and butter of console gaming, It's sad that less and less games are implementing, I might understand that maybe KZ2 is pushing the ps3 real hard so maybe they couldn't render all the stuff at once, but at least they should've had some kind of online co-op, It's 2009 for pete's sake, Even a friggin' Resident Evil game has co-op and a first person war shooter doesn't?

Games get better over time, Visuals do too, It's protocol, You can't be comparing the review of a 2007 game to a 2009 game, Halo 3 got great scores because for its time, it did a lot of new things or at refurbished old concepts, Forge and robust campaign co-op, excellent matchmaking, Tell me how many games back then had any of that as compared to today, Maybe they weren't necessarily revolutionary but many games ended up borrowing alot from games like Gears, Halo, COD, Now can you honestly tell me you think KZ2 will have that kind of influence on the genre? Maybe, maybe not, Gears didn't invent the cover system but it perfected it to the point where we're a seeing a flood of games copying that implementation

If Halo 3 rather came out in 2009 the same way it is today, You can bet your ass, it wouldn't get anywhere near as good scores as it did back then, Same for cod4, It's just not a fair logical comparison, I see some of you talking about sub-hd resolution but I didn't see you guys complaining about MGS4, Double standard, much? Every one is bias in their own way much like you because everyone is entitled to their friggin opinion, Get used to it, Just because you're too overwhelmed in the hype to actually consider that the game might have some flaws doesn't mean they exist, You haven't played the game yet so you can't tell,

And you can't knock reviewers for not calling out Gears 2's broken online because they had review copies and could only play with so many people online at the time to notice the problems, What if God forbid, KZ2 servers go online launch day and go coockoo due to overwhelming numbers and a ton of glitches are found? Would you take back your words? Or will you let your love for KZ2 overwhelm you? Gimme a break, guys, I loved the beta as much as the next person but this is getting really ridiculous and childish

Also maybe some reviewers weren't having orgasms all the over the visuals because the bar was set so high in the first place, I still can't understand how a 9+ score based on personal opinion is bias especially when you yourself haven't played the game yet, Cry me a friggin river, You guys would still be screaming bias as long as they didn't give the game a perfect 10

Now I have both consoles and I gotta admit that my xbox360 (or as I like to call her BoxyTightSnatch)currently occupies most of my time. It has always had a 1 up on my ps3(with regards to gaming & downloadable content). Now as much as I love Boxy I just cannot escape this feeling of fanboyic rage everytime I spot this type of bias that is referred to in this article. Deep down inside,God knows I've tried to deny it, I just want my PS3 to dominate the console gaming market, pathetic I know. The point is not that it scores an outstanding 93 on metacritic, the point is that for some inexplicable reason it scores lower than Halo 3, this continues to make me mad. I hated Halo 3(Personal taste I know, but how did Guerilla Games after years of development manage to score less than that pile of crap). Loved Gears of War 2 (TPS though so I dont really care how scores compare

I beat him to the story. He stole my beef with the review discrepency about Killzone's graphics. I posted the short version here yesterday under the story "How broken is the current Game Review process?". Anyway, since Brad turned my paragraph into 4 paragraphs and expanded on the idea, I give this article a thumbs up :)

Looking at review scores for a game(s) in 06 or 07 and trying to justify them to a game in 09...why not use logic. Today's game (kz2) has surpassed what was done a couple years ago. We all know this. So do you feel the review sites need to go back and re-review those other games for 09?

I think you all are to critical of the points and it is only going to drive you crazy if this site or that site give it a .1 difference from a game in 07. Take it for what it is. An evolutionary step to the genre. Better than the rest before it...yes. Better than anything yet to come...probably not.

So you see that even though it is a better game, there will always be something better when the next wave of systems come along. Just enjoy it now and dont worry about the past games/scores.

I'm speaking specifically about gaming websites like this one that make claims about something but do not provide examples in the form of quotes from other publications. N4G gathers gaming news together, but that article and many others on this website are simply glorified user commentaries. I would like to see a professionally (perhaps academically) done article about the relationships between games, consoles, reviews, profitability, and online gamer reaction. Also I would like to see what percentage of gamers comment online, are we a small or large group? Real studies and real news.

Instead we get this. IF he is right and he provided us with the most basic of evidence then perhaps something could be done, if one console is proven to be getting the shaft when it comes to reviews that might bring the fanboys together, because no one likes being lied to.

Instead we get this another badly written article that will get the worst of us to squabble.

Would you bleating, whining, paranoid clowns cut it out? KZ2 has an average metacritic score of 95!

There is no systematic bias, and if you think there is you are a chump!

retard wearing a beret on the Gamespot video review for KZ2.

********game of the year*********

cry 360 fanboys.... :)

games on consoles allow you to set up clan wars within the game w/o the use of outside applications like websites, phone, email, etc? Oh wait what's that KZ2 innovative...?

Ring teh Alarmz.

This is too funny. Only on N4g will you find so many fanboys going at it like this, and it's great entertainment! Look at all the xbots coming into a PS3 thread crying and biatching about other fanboys crying and biatching.

The results are everyone look like whiny biatches! LOL! Tissues for everyone!! Fanboys lose and Kleenex FTW!

Seriously though it is obvious there is a bit of bias, although I think it is more in line with people's expectations just changing as the games get better and better. And right now Killzone 2 is without a doubt the best FPS in a while!

Damn another 3 weeks to go!

Every body comes on to criticize a game for a system that they think is the best. I will give you this curse and complain all you want but that is the reason why games are the way it is. Always defiant to the core for games even though the games aren't that good. If Halo, Killzone, Gears of Wars, and Metal Gear had low scores;Would people still buy it because these games are good or because the scores need to be higher than the other game? That is the reason why certain franchises don't make it always compared but in the swing of things can't come close.

I COULDN'T AGREE WITH HIM MORE....FINALLY SOMEONE OUT THERE CAN SEE THE TRUTH....CAN SEE WHAT THOSE WANKSTAINS ARE DOING TO THE BEST GAME EVER!

AND BTW COD4 IS THE MOST ANNOYING GAME OF ALL TIME, AND HALO IS THE WORST... EVER!

BUT I HOPE N4G REMOVE THOSE BIASED CUNT OF REVIEWS... CUZ ITS JUST UNFAIR TO SEE SUCH EPIC GAME TO GET JUST 9'S....WHEN ( BAD GAMES )..gow2 GETS A LOAD OF BULLS*$T REVIEWS

thanks the article meant loads>>>>THE IS A 10/10...NO MATTER WHAT THE CUNTS SAY

There's so much irony in the whining and complaints, You yourselves are the most bias of them all, You wanna know why?

Definition

Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, especially when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective.[1] The term biased is used to describe an action, judgment, or other outcome influenced by a prejudged perspective. It is also used to refer to a person or body of people whose actions or judgments exhibit bias. In this context, the term "biased" is often used as a pejorative

By that definition, everybody is bias in their own way, Me included, This word exactly describes the behavior here on N4Ps3 fanboys G, Seriously, when a glowing review of ps3 game comes out, nobody says anything and you guys suddenly place all this weight on such review scores just so you can use it as bragging rights, But the moment someone else disagrees with you in opinion or scores a game lower than you wanted, Switch to Gear 2, ZOMG, It's microsh1t and their big fat paychecks, Sorry to burst your bubble but please take off the tin foil hats and cut the delusion, How does the Sony koolaid taste, exactly what the doctor ordered right?

If the media was so biased against Sony, tell me how LBP and MGS4 got perfect scores across the board, Tell me how MGS4 won best graphics and GOTY on more than 80% of gaming sites out there and even won best visuals on the overly mainstream Spike Video game awards? How is that possible if Microsoft is supposedly running the show with invisible checks which no one sees? Or maybe they are part of the illuminati? Gimme a break

Someone please explain to me how games like Too Human got horrible scores on the 360, I know it was mediocre but doesn't the paycheck theory still count here? Couldn't a Microsoft check have fixed that especially considering how much time, effort and hype was put into the game? Or even Ninja Gaiden 2 which IMO was unfairly criticized for its difficulty because some noobs couldn't even play the d@mn game? Was that bias too in Sony's favor since Ninja Gaiden Sigma got way better scores? If you've honestly played both games, you'll obviously know that NG2 is far superior and expounds on everything that made NG great, Its flaws are clearly overlookable considering how fun and awesome the game is, Yet reviewers jumped the gun and punished the game for being too hardcore, How fair is that? But I won't complain because it's someone else's f#ckin' opinion

And I see most of you raping Halo 3 here on a daily basis, I think it's safe to say that Halo 3 is the most hated game on here, I'd bet 30% of you haven't even played the game and some of you only played it once and never gave it a chance, And some of you have just made up your mind before playing it that you'll never acknowledge it, The fact that it's still selling and able to outsell recent titles like Resistance 2 should tell you something, The numbers online should be proof in the pudding that the game isn't anywhere near as bad as you guys label it to be, Halo 3 is living proof that graphics don't matter, It's not the best game of all time but it manages to strike all the right chords and create a fun experience for a wide range of users from overly pick up play casuals to tweak heavy feature whore hardcores, Oh, noes, but xbots are only still playing halo 3 in huge numbers because they want to make Sony look bad and they're all 12 yr old noobs and idiots who have sh1t taste in games and got suckered into the hype, It can't be even remotely possible that maybe just maybe the game is actually that good and has longevity in the fun factor, Granted there are some people who genuinely disliked the game, it's still no less fun than it is because of that niche

It's ironic that you guys use the argument of "If Y game was on 360, it would've gotten better scores", Yet, if Halo 3 or Gears were ps3 exclusive franchises, you guys would be worshipping them to death and jerking off to those games like there's no tomorrow, We would never hear the end of it about how awesome and legendary Halo/Gears is, It's so sad that even multiplatform games take flack, I'd take a stab in the dark and say that if RE 5 was ps3 exclusive and the same way it is today, We'd have a lot less hate stories and comments about it, FFXIII will never be as good as Versus, right? Out of curiosity, I'd just like to see what would happen if God of War went multiplatform, Suffice it to say, there are rabid fanboys on both sides, so who am I kidding?

In the end, reviews don't mean jack sh#t to me, it's all about fun I have with game, I could care less or give 2 sh@ts if a game got 2/10 as long as I enjoy it, That's why I loved games like Jericho, Warhawk, Ninja Gaiden 2, Last Remnant, Lost Odyssey, Heavenly Sword, Dark Sector which all got less than stellar reviews, Why does it bother you so much if someone else has a different opinion? If we all shared the same view, life would be boring, If no one was there to point out the flaws in games like Killzone 2, the gaming industry won't progress, But I can see how you guys don't want as you're clearly unhappy with the competition that Microsoft is giving Sony, You'd rather they dominate and stay c0cky instead buckling up and trying to make gamers happy

...over KZ2? Is this game really worth it? I mean, look at the original KZ. The ONLY reason the Sony fanboys are defending it to the death is because of the graphics. And they feel very threatened when someone says KZ2 looks ok, but there's better. Which is true. RE5 does look better, and Sony fans are upset about it. They thought for sure that there would never be a game on the 360 that would look as good. I'd be upset too if I bought into the whole Sony promise that the, "PS3 would offer the most outstanding graphics ever seen on a console, only to see that it can barely keep up with the 360." hype.

KZ2 looks to me like a COD4 clone. Nothing more.

Well, I dont't really worry about the scores because that's not what I look at when I read reviews. I look at the context and decide if I agree/disagree with the author. Make up your own minds. I'm pretty sure almost eveyone here knows what kind of games they prefer. Read previews of a game that you are watching out for and decide for yourself. If you're still unsure then there's always a demo or you can rent it first.

As for the article, I agree with the author. Reviewers should review games for what it offers, not what it doesn't. I'm perfectly fine with COD4 not having coop and Bioshock not having MP. Both deserved the scores they got. They both got reviewed on what features they had, not what they didn't. Its not really bias, but just a little bit of consistency is all KZ2 fans (like myself) is asking for. Either way, I know I'll be enjoying this game just by following the previews, videos, and feedback from gamers who were in the beta. I'm more upset of the "waiting" for this game to be released.

@ theox..
fuk sake dude ...its not an essay writing competition....so keep ur comments short and sweet

oh and btw..wat u said is pretty much bullsh*$% coz what we ps3 fanboys say is the truth unlike the biased/scums that are brain washed by M$

we know that killzone 2 is the best fps in the market and arguably the best game ever made!!!..( but ah well we adapted to those fanbots coz they simply outnumbered us.., and also i couldn't care less about reviews tbh...coz i knew that this was gonna happen... fanbots just want to deny every epic thing about this game... ( like their weak console could play something like it ) until now this guy has finally burst their bubble.. i only believe in some reviewers like opm,play... but other than those.. every other site are biased.

SO GO -F*%$K ALL OF YOU SCUMS...AND GET OVER THE FACT THAT KILLZONE 2 LIVED UP TO THE HYPE...BECAUSE SEEING IS BELIEVING -BIT%$'ES

how come no one puts up an article like this when a halo or gears of war comes out?

IGN actually gave COD4's graphics a 10 and KZ2's graphics a 9.5??...HUH?

Offcourse the game is amazing , but some are so excited about the graphics and still give lower than GTA4 for example and some scores are crazy 8.9 for the Best looking console game ever and the gameplay is amazing to, or 8.5 ??? and some other sites just give the game a high score but like 0.1 point below Gears of War , it's all really strange , the reviewers are also people and may have a preference for one console ... so who is objective???

Great article , 100% agree

After seeing trailers from many websites in SD and HD I have to agree!!! It is better looking than Halo 3, Call of Duty series, Gears 2, and Resistance 2 combine!!! These reviewers talk about how short Killzone 2 is, while games like Call of Duty 4 pointed out by Gamespot, was 5 hours short yet it got the free pass. Gametrailers already compare this to Call of Duty 4 in graphics and Killzone 2 won. I say play the demo on February 5th, and the full game on February 27th then ignore these bias reviews. Nuff said.

This is bull crap. Sony is nickle and diming us to death. I mean really, there should be a box of tissues boxed in with the PS3. Its not right that I have to keep buying a new box of tissues every time a PS3 exclusive is released.

I agree 100% with this article.

EH a a eh a a eeh aa WAH wah WAH WAH mommy mommy the intenetz only gavey me killyzony a 9.2 wah wah I wuz pomised a tenzor mommy mommy eh eh eh aa a a wah........................... ........
Grow the fck up you winy little mutants! PS3 gets a AAA fps and you all cry like little babies because of a couple of criticisms! Jesus get a fcking life droids, take these criticisms with a grain of salt or not, don't worry droids I am sure this is going to be a great game.

Lets hold up a sec here...Im tired of this Gears 2 is broken crap. What the hell are you talking about. Sure it had some minor fixes for this or that, but broken? Thats pure BS. We were playing MP from day one with no problems.

Now Gears has some of the hardest MP around, so if youre a n00b, then TS. But not only have I played the MP with no issues. but the Horde mode works beautifully, and has never lagged once when I have played it.

So please stop with the BS, because those of u calling it 'broken' DONT OWN GEARS. Its that simple.

And back to Killzone....

If u ask me, they have been pretty lenient on a game that gameplay is somewhat broken; last time I checked, you couldnt go around in Halo, Gears, or COD stabbing EVERYBODY and pass the game. Not to mention that K2 has too many obvious 'trigger' moments (like CoD, though WaW cleaned it up a bit) in the SP mode, which kills the immersion factor for me personally. Thats what makes Halo, Gears, and Bioshock so good because the battles feel organic. Just IMHO....

i could careless what games I'm interested in get scored, because i'm not going to let some random person i've never met change my mind about getting a game I'm interested in such as killzone 2, everyone has an opinion and everyone has there own brain all i can say is use it! i'll make my own decisions instead of letting random people choose for me i use reviews as references, not to buy a game or not.

I have gotten use to the PS3 game reviews always being somewhat biased against the system. Look at uncharted: this game is so freaking good at everything it does. Gameplay, controls, graphics, storyline, and controls were all spot-on, yet this game received mostly eights. Heavenly sword and warhawk were reviewed much the same way. Everyone said that heavenly sword didn't "innovate" yet this game had a tremendously awesome story and I loved absolutely everything about this game. Warhawk is one of the best online games I have EVER played and this one everybody said "didn't have single-player campaign" so they scored it no higher than eights. Why don't we start rating games for what the game has and does well, not just purely on what it doesn't have. Fact: Warhawk is an online-only game that does just about everything right in regard to gameplay, controls and fun factor and should've been reviewed as such. Heavenly Sword is a game that takes a little of what God of War and Ninja Gaiden have and did it's own spin on those styles of gameplay. It had an incredibly good story and gameplay and should've been reviewed as such. Same thing with Uncharted. Does every single game ever developed have to totally shake up the games industry with innovation to be an incredibly fun experiece? NO!! As long as they can take a few of the well established aspects of a certain genre, do them well, and create a fun or engaging gaming experience, that is all that should be required. Heavenly sword Warhawk, and Uncharted all deserved at least 9's in my book and maybe some tens...

The reviews doesn't matter no longer. We all know that every FPS fan who owns a PS3 will buy this game. so a 9.2 or a 9.6 doesn't mean sh!t. At least not for me. Although I agree with this article 100%.

Read the article and fully agree with it. Still....it is hard for anyone to deny it is a awesome game.

nothing could have been improved
there is nothing in the game that can be criticized
if it does not receive an 11/10 then the reviewer is biased and most likely being paid off by Microsoft
if the reviewer scored an older game and gave it a higher score than than Killzone 2 then they are also biased and being paid off
the PS3 is the cheapest console with the best games
the ps3 has sold the most consoles
the ps3 has the best exclusives
the ps3 brought my dog back to life
the media hates the PS3 because they are racist against the japanese
the media hates the PS3 because they are being paid by Microsoft
you are not allowed to make negative comments against the PS3 or any of it games
game and console numbers given out by the media that dont put the PS3 on top are invalid and suspect
anyone who comments in forums who denies any of the above will be attacked and will be given disagrees
so in the end let me just remind you Killzone 2 is perfect