Haze : The official game thread

Played through the demo a few times now, and decided to preorder. The graphics kind of grew on me (40" Bravia) and whilst some of the techniques used to render stuff seem a little... old (bill board vegetation), it's still absorbing enough.

The story seems very solid like Resistance and could quite possibly be engaging enough to make this into a great game (it not being about just the graphics).

All in all I'm quite looking forward to playing it all the way through now!
 
Played through the demo a few times now, and decided to preorder. The graphics kind of grew on me (40" Bravia) and whilst some of the techniques used to render stuff seem a little... old (bill board vegetation), it's still absorbing enough.

The story seems very solid like Resistance and could quite possibly be engaging enough to make this into a great game (it not being about just the graphics).

All in all I'm quite looking forward to playing it all the way through now!

I can confirm, that despite what's shown in the demo, the story is quite serious (with a dark comic edge) and the presentation is sufficient to portary this in an edgey way. In fact, there's some gameplay sections that are going to get you thinking hard.

I understand how the graphics can grow on you.
 
It was an ongoing trend last generation! Just no-one was counting pixels and reporting it. We run the risk of people being blinded by numbers. All that matters is what's on screen. If it looks good, who cares what techniques the devs have used?! Any complaint should be about results, rather than focussing on numbers, especially when 5 years ago people the same 'problem' existed but people were content to watch upscaled games with nary a worry.

Lack of resolution is a huge problem for people who use large displays. 720p image quality starts to degrade at about 40". This game looks like a mess on my 52" screen, just terrible.
 
Lack of resolution is a huge problem for people who use large displays. 720p image quality starts to degrade at about 40". This game looks like a mess on my 52" screen, just terrible.

I guess it depends on your preferences.. on my 140´sh inch screen it would be playable and enjoyable even if it isn´t 720p. The only problem it has, it´s a FPS.

As a sidenote, the 1080p Wipeout Trailer is incredible and one of the best "demos" i have when i want to impress with "real" HD.
 
I tried out the demo, and was not impressed. It just didn't feel very good to play, when I shot my gun I didn't feel like I was really doing much of anything. Maybe it was just that part of the game, but I think I'm probably not going to pick it up.
 
I read an report on Eurogamer and I like the dev attitude, like ok we did this choice to favor framerate etc.

It's better than straight lies and like they state resolution didn't prevent CoD4 to top the charts.

I mean they did whatever they can given the budget and time they were granted with.
Heh have you played both COD4 and Haze? There's a massive difference in graphical quality. COD4 gets the free pass because (besides the obvious resolution difference) it looks amazing. Haze does not.
 
Hmm... the demo felt like a regular but capable FPS. It's too bad the developer could not deliver a complete and polished experience.

On hindsight, I wonder if they might be better served focusing on just one platform initially.
 
I can confirm, that despite what's shown in the demo, the story is quite serious (with a dark comic edge) and the presentation is sufficient to portary this in an edgey way. In fact, there's some gameplay sections that are going to get you thinking hard.

I understand how the graphics can grow on you.

You must be playing a completely different game than the one i played.
 
I don't find the graphics distracting. According to the IGN review, the complains seem to be game design related (balance, plot, weapons, AI, etc.). I thought the demo was easy too since the Nectar allowed me to see the enemies clearly. However, I find playing with the giant pistol (slow load time but one-hit kill) without Nectar rather entertaining.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

I find it hard to swallow considering it has 4-player co-op and games like Turning Point and Area 51 got higher scores from IGN. Either they are easier on multi-platform games or they really have something against Haze.

Any game in which I can play through the campaign with my buddy is a minimum 7/10 IMO, it makes any mediocre game fun. Maybe they should even review the game co-op with a second office mate in same room with a separate console.
 
Sadly, this review by IGN sums up my fears for the title. Horrid plot, weak presentation and uninspiring gameplay.

What a shame. TimeSplitters was such a good game on the PS2 - it would have been nice to have a multiplayer game to that caliber on PS3 as well.
 
...or they really have something against Haze. ...

well yea... sine they have played it in its entirety and scored it publicly as crap then yea, I'd say they do not like it. ;)


4.5 Presentation
A bland story with weak characters and simplistic commentaries on serious topics, Haze is a generic tale at best about war.
4.0 Graphics
Tons of visual issues abound within the game, from texture tears and non-descript environments to pop-in and odd animation problems.
5.0 Sound
Dialogue is hokey and repetitive regardless of what side you're on. Sound effects are good, but that's not enough to make you turn the volume up once you've hit mute.
4.5 Gameplay
A creative concept hampered by gimmicks, a weak story and poor AI, Haze is a disappointment from a developer well versed in shooter mechanics.
4.5 Lasting Appeal
Two player split-screen and four player co-op helps put a minor spin on the campaign, but it won't extend the replayability of the game much. Nor will multiplayer modes and its useless merit system.
4.5
Poor OVERALL
(out of 10 / not an average)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Damn, it was supposed to be a Halo killer...

http://previews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1618/HAZE/p1/


Four PC’s running PS3-spec code (yeah, we’re a little fuzzy on what’s going on with the Xbox 360 version) were networked together,...

This game is simply poetry in motion (best. Water effects. Ever) running on whatever-spec hardware happened to be crammed into the PC.

it must have run much better on the PCs back then they were able to get final code on PS3 as they said at the time (1 year ago) that it looked great.

I think UBI knew this was gonna bomb when they dropped it to one platform.
 
I wonder whether the score is too harsh (It's lower than Lair, which was kinda unfinished and buggy). They probably didn't live up to the high expectation in the FPS/shooter genre. It doesn't help too when people have just experienced MGS4, KZ2, and R2 gameplay recently.

it must have run much better on the PCs back then they were able to get final code on PS3 as they said at the time (1 year ago) that it looked great.

I think UBI knew this was gonna bomb when they dropped it to one platform.

Early impressions highlighted inadequacies in the graphics department. The flip-flop between different platforms may have caused development difficulties too. The game is still going to 360 right ?
 
it must have run much better on the PCs back then they were able to get final code on PS3 as they said at the time (1 year ago) that it looked great.

What?

This is what you posted yourself from IGN:

4.5 Presentation,4.0 Graphics,5.0 Sound,4.5 Gameplay,4.5, Lasting Appeal , 4.5, Poor OVERALL

I dont see how the most powerfull hardware in the world could make a difference.

Why do i get the impression your happy this game sux? :)
 
Back
Top