Haze : The official game thread

deepbrown said:
Nah...gets worse as it goes on visuallly. First level is the best looking. Don't see how you can say there are realistic textures - there are none.

There is no AA, so it can't be well applied.

It's certainly not a 4/10 though.
Click to expand...

Realistic surfaces as in the colours chosen and the art work of the textures.They might not have that wet plasticy look that seems to be all the rage,but that effect is most often overdone IMO.
If there is no AA at all why don't I see big jaggies while watching it on my 62" TV? That's usually the first thing I notice,in this game it's just not popping up on my radar.
Every level graphically so far has impressed me in it's own way.
I would give the game about a 7.5-7.8 so far.
Edit: I had read that the game had no AA,but comparing it to my Wii games there is a huge difference in noticeable jaggies. Wii games at 480 have BIG jaggies that are obvious and sometimes distracting.I didn't thjink that less than an extra 200 lines of resolution would account for no noticeable jaggies by itself.You can see them if you look closely in Haze,but no worse IMO than games that are supposed to have actual AA. The apprent lack of AA just does not stand out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ninzel said:
Realistic surfaces as in the colours chosen and the art work of the textures.They might not have that wet plasticy look that seems to be all the rage,but that effect is most often overdone IMO.
If there is no AA at all why don't I see big jaggies while watching it on my 62" TV? That's usually the first thing I notice,in this game it's just not popping up on my radar.
Every level graphically so far has impressed me in it's own way.
I would give the game about a 7.5-7.8 so far.
Click to expand...

There are no depth to the textures - so this "plasticy" thing you talk of is irrelevant. The textures are low resolution, almost flat - go up close and they are all pixelated to the nth degree. I have no idea how you can say the game is impressive on your 62inch screen, especially with pop-in on troopers outfits when you move two feet towards them, the bland environments, the blurriness, the awful gfx.

Let's make no mistake - FR's graphics engine has been continuously downgraded over the last year so they could hit a solid framerate.
 
deepbrown said:
There are no depth to the textures - so this "plasticy" thing you talk of is irrelevant. The textures are low resolution, almost flat - go up close and they are all pixelated to the nth degree. I have no idea how you can say the game is impressive on your 62inch screen, especially with pop-in on troopers outfits when you move two feet towards them, the bland environments, the blurriness, the awful gfx.

Let's make no mistake - FR's graphics engine has been continuously downgraded over the last year so they could hit a solid framerate.
Click to expand...

Weird.I actually think this is one of the better looking games I've played in awhile especially compared to games like Dark Sector that I just finished.
I guess I just find some of these next gen techniques and effects applied to surfaces actually make games a little cartoony looking when overdone.
It definately looks more like a last gen game in that flatter, drier look,but a very tasetefully, polished and well done version of last gen.
I have no problem at all with the look of this game.
 
ninzel said:
Weird.I actually think this is one of the better looking games I've played in awhile especially compared to games like Dark Sector that I just finished.
I guess I just find some of these next gen techniques and effects applied to surfaces actually make games a little cartoony looking when overdone.
It definately looks more like a last gen game in that flatter, drier look,but a very tasetefully, polished and well done version of last gen.
I have no problem at all with the look of this game.
Click to expand...

O.K...technically Haze looks awful ;) It looks worse than launch games on both platforms.

My guess is that they had a problem with getting it to run well on the PS3 - and so instead of refining their engine like most developers (of course involves a bit of "downgrading") they just downgraded their engine - lowering texture resolution, lowering resolution, removing AA, etc etc...until the framerate was fixed (which it isn't all the way through).

The engine would have faired much better if they started on PS3 and actually developed to it, rather than PC to PS3 - they should have also got more help from Sony. And they should have wanted to do it - they didnt care about the graphics.

Dark Sector looked pretty good in the demo....nice water streaming down surfaces.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
deepbrown said:
In relation to which comment Oste?
Click to expand...

I only played 3 levels, but my impression from that was terrible story, ridiculous AI comments and horrible graphics. The Nectar thingy was imo stupid (its basically a wallhack and a total rip off from Far Cry Insticts Predator), it made the game ridiculously easy.

You on the other hand, seemed all postive to this game (after you had tried it on several occasions)....

deepbrown said:
That's both rude and untrue. It's got a great story for a shooter, no loading, 4 player co-op, bots in multiplayer, Haze powers are great fun, as are abusing them...so yeah don't talk against Free Radical unless you've had a go.
Click to expand...
 
Ostepop said:
I only played 3 levels, but my impression from that was terrible story, ridiculous AI comments and horrible graphics. The Nectar thingy was imo stupid (its basically a wallhack and a total rip off from Far Cry Insticts Predator), it made the game ridiculously easy.

You on the other hand, seemed all postive to this game (after you had tried it on several occasions)....
Click to expand...

Aye I still stand by all of that - the co-op, nectar powers, etc. Story - after playing the full game, does not touch upon every area I was expecting it too - what I had seen previously (the serious part when you changed sides) was really good...but after playing the full game, it doesn't see much of that quality again.

I never thought the graphics were great (something I continually brought up with Ubisoft and FR), and the forest graphics did grow on me...until I played the latter levels where it's gloomy, drab, unimpressive.
 
Some levels are ugly like the village and bridge defend,but others like the quarry,hotel,beach, swamp and forest were very nicely done. Artistically they stand with any other game this gen. In particular I thought the design,architecture and colour choices on the hotel level were very strong. The artists did a very good job of walking the line between stylistic and realistic. I still think lighting is very good,especially the outdoor lighting and indoor to outdoor transitions.
Other games I've played and seen are much more drab and bland than this one,but will likely get a pass do to them better meeting a technical checklist of features.
I see where the criticisms have come from,but they seem to have been over dramatized with this particular game for some reason. I don't usually care how a game fairs,but this game IMO has been very unfairly criticized. Anything under a 7.0 is ridiculous,it's a solid AA game that's worthy of at least a rental.
 
ninzel said:
Some levels are ugly like the village and bridge defend,but others like the quarry,hotel,beach, swamp and forest were very nicely done.
Click to expand...
Are there any screenies? Gamespot's selection is lack-lustre, and filled with older pics at higher resolution and much greater clarity than the final game.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Are there any screenies? Gamespot's selection is lack-lustre, and filled with older pics at higher resolution and much greater clarity than the final game.
Click to expand...

These were just taken with my digital camera from my TV.
I liked this level a lot. You start in this cave ad work your way through this small beach.
As you come up to the hotel you see these empty but beautiful turquoise pools,contrasted against this taupe background.
Moving into the hotel you fight your way through the apartments where really nice bright lighting is used. Again it's the use of the natural greys against the terra cotta rooms and the light transitions that make it stand out.

http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze1.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze2.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze3.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze4.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze5.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze6.jpg
http://s164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/MousPotato/?action=view&current=haze7.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK. I've played the game through from start to finish. It's suprising. The story line is half what I expected, no real involvement and to a point boring. The promise hand people repeat the same lines over and over, and so do the mantel troopers (who become so easy to kill late on). The graphics vary from Halo 3 quality to PS2 some times. I hit a few glitches where I had to sit through few reloads before the clipping worked (the observitory level). It was fun to play through. But not the best.

The online has been an absolute hoot though. Brilliant in places. The matched and ranked games are perfectly balanced and the lurning curve is spot on. Nectar versus playing dead. Cool!

Overall I say buy it for online not for single palyer, that would only dissapoint.
 
I played the game last night. One of my budski's meets up with a friend every week to play coop games, mostly shooters. They've gone through pretty much everything on XB360 and PS3, and he bought Haze as the latest fix, so we tried it out in our three-player Tuesday fun-nights (two player of course. No four-player split screen; curse developers!).

It was diabolical!

Seriously, it looked bad, played terribly, had a 'deep story' that we didn't care about, hated the characters, virtual acting sucked, that buggy vehicle thing was a clunky nightmare with the performance of a horse-drawn carriage and a gun with the targeting stabilisation of heavy-weights on elastic. We then tried an online game and it was chaotic and deadfully dull in comparison to Warhawk, which we switched over to playing (friendly fire FTW!).

I don't see any worth to this title in PS3's library - it's superseded on every front by other, older games. And I'm confused how the developers could release something this bad. What went wrong?
 
It has its moments but of the time I played I felt disgusted by the AI, the graphics alright but a bit late so to say generation wise imo. Co-op is fairly entertaining.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iroboto
  • Locked
Are current games less effectively executed than previous generations? *spawn
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
I
The first Evil Within still has remarkably sophisticated lighting
Replies
2
Views
1K
Phantom88
P
B
Game Engine Convergence And The Problem With UE5
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
17K
cheapchips
C
D
CPU Limited Games, When Are They Going To End?
5 6 7
Replies
128
Views
17K
DavidGraham
D
Rys
Reopening Architecture and Products + rules and guidelines changes
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
16K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Back
Top