There's no avoiding the fact that HAZE is a huge disappointment. It was billed as a PS3 exclusive that would demonstrate what the system's Cell chip could do, but its graphics are well below par. A refreshingly original Mantel/rebel combat dynamic was supposed to offer groundbreaking gameplay for an FPS, but it doesn't. Let's just hope that Free Radical can get Timesplitters 4 right.
Alex S. from Link-Cable writes: "When shopping for new video games you can often trust the name publisher or developer on the box to be an indication of the quality of the game. Names like Nintendo, Square Enix, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Capcom, Xbox Game Studios and Sega are world famous because they helped shape the industry by releasing some of the most defining video games of all time. Though sometimes even these great gaming houses stumble and put out a stinker."
Splatterhouse remake . Loved the og’s at the arcade growing up . Hell the best thing about the remake was the og,s were included . And left alive by Square . That game had so much potential , but the gameplay was worse horrendous .
I'm pretty much certain that any Sonic game that comes out will be terrible, I've not enjoyed one since the original side-scrolling days of the MegaDrive.
Guns, drugs, and unnecessary war. Fun for the whole family.
7/10 doesn't strike me as a huge disappointment but I guess that all depends on what your expectations were.
"It was billed as a PS3 exclusive that would demonstrate what the system's Cell chip could do, but its graphics are well below par."
not true, its real pain that every ps3 exclusiv that isnt that good is used to talk down the ps3, sony itself never advertised or hyped haze, it was the fanboys hyping it into oblivion.
The verdict seems pretty unanimous on this now. Its a mediocre game at best - which given the expectations and the CV of the dev team, is a really disappointing outcome.
I still intend to give this game a go, but at least I know where to expect disappointment!
I would just like to point out that the usage of terms like "run-of-the-mill" or "not-groundbreaking" just needs to stop. I'm still trying to figure out what the hell everyone is talking about when they use these types of insults.
Seriously, what they hell do they mean by "groundbreaking" or "revolutionary" when it comes to FPS games?
It's not like EVERY FPS game I've ever played wasn't almost -exactly- like the other 20 FPS games I had. Hell, the only difference I see between different games is the scenery and characters are different but when you break it down....you still running around some outside forest/city or inside some corridor somewhere blasting foes to oblivion with grenades and whatever automatica weapon you manage to procure.
Aside from graphical and technical polish what else can be done or be expected from the FPS genre?
Sure, Bioshock was different but even so it really fell in line with the RPG-FPS genre but Deus Ex, Stalker, and System Shock already did that and was far more complex with it.
So, I've yet to figure out what is wrong with Haze when people say it's like the other FPS games your familiar with. Especialy if I, well...ya know, LIKED all those other FPS games. I know this is a rant and I usually don't rant on things like that but what I really want to ask is after you take away all the bruhaha of counting pixels and being so anal retentive about the games graphical prowess (or lack thereof) did these people actually take the time to comment on the game and whether it was "fun" or not?
I mean, seriously, I come from a time when I remember graphics literally being a few squares on the screen...and gameplay? forget about it.
So, in closing, I just feel that this reviewing, nit-picking, "I must dismantle the inner workings of EVERYTHING" mentality when it comes to reviewing is just getting old.
Can't we just say to ourselves: "This game is fun. I enjoyed playing it" and leave it at that?