Anyone tried Haze? It's terrible!


Recommended Posts

Unfortunately not all of us can afford every game on the market to play before judging. You can see the flaw in your suggestion now, yes? ;) This is why we have demos :yes:

If they didn't take the time to make a decent demo, can I really be arsed giving them my good money for a game they probably treated with the same manner?

Thats fair enough. May I suggest pension day in the local post offices as a way to assist in buying all the games that are made available? They rarely fight back. ;)

Wait for the reviews to come in, I think this will be a 8/8.5 type of game.

Thats fair enough. May I suggest pension day in the local post offices as a way to assist in buying all the games that are made available? They rarely fight back. ;)

Wait for the reviews to come in, I think this will be a 8/8.5 type of game.

I think that's a little high. From what I hear, it's more like a 7.

After the demo I was ready to write off Haze as another dull, generic FPS. I then spent some time checking out videos of the campaign and the multiplayer on IGN (they've got tons of Haze media on their site). I'm actually starting to look forward to it. I'll gamefly it, it's not an automatic buy after that crap demo. The multiplayer looks fairly original and pretty decent, but it all depends on how well it runs on PSN. I'd prefer an xbox version so I could play it on Live, but i'm still planning on checking the game out. I know it's rare that a game will have a crap demo and not be a crap game, but it does happen from time to time. I'm not using the "old code" defense, because that's just retarded, in this case it looks like a last minute "let's throw together a demo real quick" type of situation.

After the demo I was ready to write off Haze as another dull, generic FPS. I then spent some time checking out videos of the campaign and the multiplayer on IGN (they've got tons of Haze media on their site). I'm actually starting to look forward to it. I'll gamefly it, it's not an automatic buy after that crap demo. The multiplayer looks fairly original and pretty decent, but it all depends on how well it runs on PSN. I'd prefer an xbox version so I could play it on Live, but i'm still planning on checking the game out. I know it's rare that a game will have a crap demo and not be a crap game, but it does happen from time to time. I'm not using the "old code" defense, because that's just retarded, in this case it looks like a last minute "let's throw together a demo real quick" type of situation.

Same thing really.

Review from the Swedish Gamereactor,

Score: 6/10

http://www.gamereactor.se/recensioner/1386...5986ccd3ae5a3d8

Must be that darn old code!

You sound almost happy.

2 other reviews have given it much higher scores, so I guess as we have said all along its down to personal taste.

I hate Halo (2&3), but the reviews are all good.

Yeah, Happy :rolleyes:

Stop with these petty remarks every time something doesn't go your way. Also, let's see these reviews then so we can see the other side of the coin. :)

Things not going my way?? Sorry you have lost me. I really enjoyed the demo, and I've really enjoyed watching all the HD clips of the game. A 6/10 review is going against what I think.

Ironic that you tell me to stop with the petty remarks when your post contained one. I was simply pointing out that reviews don't always mean anything (GTA anybody?)

The reviews are from Famitsu and PSM Italy. No actual link to the reviews as they have not been scanned as of yet.

I was simply pointing out that reviews don't always mean anything (GTA anybody?)

I'm not sure what you mean by that, I think GTA deserved all the praise it's gotten, it's an amazing game. If it's about the gamespot changing their score thing, well that's gamespot. After the Kane & Lynch fiasco I don't think anyone takes them seriously anymore. Haze, on the other hand, looks to deserve a solid 7/10 based on the demo and the videos I've seen. The demo feels like a 6/10 game but the multiplayer vids I've seen bump it up another point. 4 man co-op helps a lot also.

popisdead, you seem to be taking this kinda personal, relax, the interwebs shouldn't anger you!

I'm not sure what you mean by that, I think GTA deserved all the praise it's gotten, it's an amazing game. If it's about the gamespot changing their score thing, well that's gamespot. After the Kane & Lynch fiasco I don't think anyone takes them seriously anymore. Haze, on the other hand, looks to deserve a solid 7/10 based on the demo and the videos I've seen. The demo feels like a 6/10 game but the multiplayer vids I've seen bump it up another point. 4 man co-op helps a lot also.

popisdead, you seem to be taking this kinda personal, relax, the interwebs shouldn't anger you!

Not at all mate.

Just for information, like so many games these days, Haze isn't true HD either.

It's running 576p according to Kotaku

That explains a lot then!

Next-Gen's blog on this:

Haze Not in True HD, says Free Radical

By Tom Ivan

BLOG - Contrary to a PlayStation blog post which suggested that PS3 exclusive FPS Haze ran at 720p, developer Free Radical has said that it natively runs at 576p, leaving the PS3 to upscale.

“We prioritize a nice smooth framerate over a different res,” Haze creative lead Derek Littlewood told Ripten.

“Personally, I don’t really buy the whole thing. People did the same with Call of Duty, they did the same with Halo, and they say with those games ‘It’s not running at true HD!’ And it’s like, I don’t care. If the game looks good and it runs smoothly, those are the important things to me.

“I always say, judge it [Haze] by the whole experience. Sit down with it and enjoy it. If people come away from that saying ‘Yeah, the resolution was a bit lower than I was expecting’ then I hope people wouldn’t, because it has other things it does really well.”

I get what Littlewood is saying, but were consumers rushed into buying expensive early HD TVs on the promise of HD games that haven't materialized too often so far?

The Haze demo looked fine to me and I’m still pretty intent on picking up the full game later this week. How have you found it?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!