Guerilla: No "Lean And Peek" Mechanic In Killzone 2 Multiplayer
Killzone 2Well now, here's an interesting "did you know?" factoid.
If you weren't already aware, Guerilla is implementing a "Lean and Peek" system in Killzone 2, which should be most reminiscent of the cover mechanic found in many third-person shooters like Gears of War and even Grand Theft Auto IV. However, as a first-person shooter, this "Lean and Peek" thing is pretty original. It will be available in the single-player campaign, but did you know it won't be part of the multiplayer experience? According to PSU, Guerilla QA Manager Seb "MotherH" Downie said "Lean and Peek" doesn't work very well in the full 360-degree combat environment of online multiplayer. Here's the quote:
"It didn't work too well in the 360 degree combat environment that is multiplayer. In single player the path is more linear and the action is usually ahead of the player. In MP levels are more arena based and you are more susceptible to flanking and being attacked from various angles."
We found that the L&P system didn't add anything in that scenario and that players often actually took a step back from cover objects to give themselves a little more freedom to move, so they were actually working against the system, so we ripped it back out. Crouching was deemed sufficient."
Welcome to the inner machinations of a developer's mind, and the decisions he/she is faced with on a daily basis. In this explanation, it's clear Guerilla was taking feedback from those who had already tested the game, and made a judgment call based on that feedback. We have no problem with that whatsoever; it's the express purpose of QA and beta testers, isn't it? Anyway, it'll be interesting to see the differences between the single-player and multiplayer gameplay in Killzone 2 now, and we can't wait for February.
Related Game(s): Killzone 2
10/31/2008 Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Subscribe to Ben Dutka on Twitter
Comments
Joe_III
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 10:54:22 AM
Reply
I've yet to see a good cover system in an FPS...aside from PDZ maybe, where it zoomed out into 3rd person when under cover. So that's kinda good.
On the other hand, having campaign and multiplayer controls that play differently is kinda ghey. It shows you can't build a balanced game.
0 up, 1 down
xtreme
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 11:21:26 AM
Reply
I don't understand your logic at all?
They have found that playing online with other humans will make you more prone to being flanked and smartly killed and therefor the feature was removed as it was deemed useless. where in single player it works rather well, this doesn't mean its a unbalenced game. You'll have to explain where your comeing from because i can't see any evidence behind that sentance.
0 up, 0 down
Ed_Wayne
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 12:00:09 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Joe_III
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 1:10:13 PM
Reply
FTFA: It didn't work too well in the 360 degree combat environment that is multiplayer. In single player the path is more linear and the action is usually ahead of the player.
The following can be deduced from those two sentences:
1. That clearly indicates that their look and peek system is not a good all around system.
2. Users will have to learn how to use look and peek in campaign, but then break themselves from that habit when going to play multiplayer.
3. It also indicates that the look and peek system is more of a gimmick than actual functionality. If it only works in one situation, then what good is it?
4. It also indicates that levels are designed to use this gimmick, but there are times you are going to have to break yourself of that habit.
Last edited by Joe_III on 10/31/2008 1:11:28 PM
0 up, 1 down
seismictech
Monday, December 22, 2008 @ 5:15:02 PM
me and him have both played the beta and i love it and he doesn't seem to complain about the lack of leaning and peaking. he said that the cover button is the same crouch button son in the beta, you can still crouch behind objects and it has it's own natural feel or whatever he said./
whatever the case, the game is awesome so far.
0 up, 0 down
djjake
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 1:58:49 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
crapreviews
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 2:03:33 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
timster118
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 2:13:36 PM
Reply
The only game that does cover right is RSV. Goes to third person when "sticking" to cover but releases when you release the cover button. Brilliant!
NO AUTO COVER....should have to hold a button to use cover....sticking sucks.
0 up, 0 down
King James
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 2:36:14 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Joe_III
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 2:43:50 PM
People tend to forget that multiplayer is supposed to be a way to extend the campaign feel to a medium shared with other gamers, not a seperate addition because its expected or because it will possible boost sales.
1 up, 0 down
Wage SLAVES
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 6:23:10 PM
Reply
They cut it (online) for a reason to make a BETTER Gaming experience. Concept isn't that hard now is it?
Last edited by Wage SLAVES on 10/31/2008 6:23:50 PM
0 up, 0 down
Joe_III
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 6:58:15 PM
As for them cutting it to make the multiplayer "better" that kinda proves my earlier point. I'm not saying that it isn't going to make it better, I'm just saying that they are doing their game and themselves a disservice adding a multiplayer that is hastily thrown on and doesn't fit the feel of the game.
You wouldn't put in a RSV cover system in CS/TF would you? No. Because that feature isn't designed for the type of game CS is.
Guerilla is having to pull campaign gameplay features from its multiplayer because it doesn't fit the MP experience. Based on that, one can assume that they did not build the MP experience to "extend the campaign feel to a medium shared with other gamers" to quote myself.
0 up, 1 down
Zaben
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 6:37:26 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
BigT_1980
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 8:47:20 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
mk ultra
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 9:52:21 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Wage SLAVES
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 10:11:21 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
LightShow
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 10:30:23 PM
I'm thinking Pseudo-Elitist. You know, just as irritating, but not as smart.
Last edited by LightShow on 10/31/2008 10:32:23 PM
0 up, 0 down
Joe_III
Saturday, November 01, 2008 @ 12:14:08 AM
Reply
there is little difference between hastily and poorly added. take your choice.
@light
splooge is a word. I assume you were talking about splooge, because even you can't be dumb enough to believe that retarded or monkey aren't words. Google "Define: splooge" and learn something
0 up, 1 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, November 01, 2008 @ 12:26:49 AM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
shaydey77
Saturday, November 01, 2008 @ 8:39:01 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
King James
Saturday, November 01, 2008 @ 10:04:46 AM
Reply
What is this the G4 blogs? Calm down guys. I'll pwn u all on Killzone 2 w/ or w/o a L&P feature.
0 up, 0 down
AntDC
Saturday, November 01, 2008 @ 11:28:51 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Joe_III
Sunday, November 02, 2008 @ 11:05:55 AM
But look at RSV. It has cover system that works equally well in mp and campaign. But then again, enemies come at you from all sides in both mp and campaign, so they had to create a cover system that covered both angles.
Look at GRAW. They had a campaign and MP that played very differently. But instead of porting the campaign controls over, they had a whole seperate team to work on the MP.
What Guerilla did was try to port campaign controls over to MP, but it didn't work well, so they had to pull features. That's lazy development, imho.
0 up, 0 down
Daedusian
Sunday, November 02, 2008 @ 11:27:22 AM
Reply
I have absolutely no clue where you're coming from at all. They decided to take the feature out of MP because it_did_not_work_well. In fact, it's the exact opposite of "lazy dev."
I think you're just taking this too far. Or maybe you're just trying to throw your opinion out there and see what happens. To me, it makes no sense whatsoever if you want my feedback.
1 up, 0 down
CH1N00K
Reply
Friday, October 31, 2008 @ 10:47:06 AM