Haze, not so bad.

Firestreak

Solid Zoid
Adventurer
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
6,456
Location
The Magical Land of Connecticut
Guys I read a lot of hate about Haze, a much of what's said is true. I didn't buy it when it came out, though I was intending to buy it day 1 before all the badmouthing came out. Well for $10 I said sure, why not.

So me and my buddy loaded this up the other night. We were high as shit. Decided to take on the campaign on the hardest mode.

We actually had a hell of a great time.

The graphics are... different. They look bad yet they look real. The art direction maybe is just perfect for the engine, to make it really pop out, and feel more '3 dimensional' than most games, and smoothness makes it look like you're playing a really amazing looking standard def game. If this makes any sense to anyone. There's no detail really but besides that it looks good.

The enemy AI is not really all that smart, especially after playing KZ2. Yet they are interesting. Their tactics, where they spawn, where they go, makes them feel like their character. They have personality which is rare. Most AI are just a range of dumb to smart, and they are very smart yet predictable, these are less so.

The guns are nothing special but they're alright. The level design is alright. The plot is pretty good really. People tend to hate on all aspects of a game when they dislike it in general, as well as blind themself to the flaws of games they like. In Haze's case, the story is underrated generally. Maybe you have to by high, listening to the dialogue your drugged up AI characters chatter, but there's actually a lot more depth to it than meets the eye. It's less formulaic than most FPS.

I'm not saying it's a great game, but it certainly is a fun game. It's a bargain bin treasure but I can definitely see being pissed off and expecting more if I'd paid $60 for it. At under $20 you're likely to be happy with what you're getting though... unlike a lot of other FPS in the bargain bin you passed up because they just seemed boring, this one is actually fun behind all that - and it's a splitscreen CO OP game... that you can just jump in and out which is something we need more of this gen.
 
It's not that bad of a game for $10, but really anymore than $20 and it deserved the flack it got, blame the hype. However, considerin' it has Bots, it's well worth $10-20 for a few cheap thrills. Then again, after my stint with Killzone 2 I've been partial to any shooter with standard, non-drunk/mud bogged characters.
 
Its hard to find a bad game for $10.

At that price you can find any one thing you enjoyed about any one thing in the game and validate your purchase.

I enjoyed King Kong along with every game i have rented due to the price being under $10.

Unfortunatly games start at $60.. Haze is the worste shooter i have ever played.
 
The dialog/voice acting in haze killed me. It was awful. Especially the two or three guys in your unit or whatever. (It's been a while, I don't remember specifics.)

The rest of the game was just so bleh. But I'm one of the jaded individuals who spent considerably more on the game than your $10.
 
Its hard to find a bad game for $10.

At that price you can find any one thing you enjoyed about any one thing in the game and validate your purchase.

I enjoyed King Kong along with every game i have rented due to the price being under $10.

Unfortunatly games start at $60.. Haze is the worste shooter i have ever played.

I disagree. Most games that I consider bad, I consider bad at any price. Value is so subjective. Let's say FF6 was never made, and it came out.... today. And it was sold, with the exact technical parameters, running on PS3/Xbox360, for $60. I'd recognize it was a good game but something about it was overpriced. To me Haze feels like a good game that's out of its timeframe, like it's Timesplitters 4, yet it's not that much better looking than timesplitters 3. It just happened to come out in the wrong timeframe.

Alternatively... some games are just shit. The iron man game is shit because it's a bad, boring game. You can give it to me for free and I won't want to play it.

Really, if all games were free, some would be fun and some not, but you'd recognize some games were "bigger," had more content, better graphics, ext. Putting Haze in the $60 category is what kills it because it doesn't compete with games that are less fun than it, on a value level, which leaves it a frustrating experience since we're all consumers not just gamers.
 
I disagree. Most games that I consider bad, I consider bad at any price. Value is so subjective. Let's say FF6 was never made, and it came out.... today. And it was sold, with the exact technical parameters, running on PS3/Xbox360, for $60. I'd recognize it was a good game but something about it was overpriced. To me Haze feels like a good game that's out of its timeframe, like it's Timesplitters 4, yet it's not that much better looking than timesplitters 3. It just happened to come out in the wrong timeframe.

Alternatively... some games are just shit. The iron man game is shit because it's a bad, boring game. You can give it to me for free and I won't want to play it.

Really, if all games were free, some would be fun and some not, but you'd recognize some games were "bigger," had more content, better graphics, ext. Putting Haze in the $60 category is what kills it because it doesn't compete with games that are less fun than it, on a value level, which leaves it a frustrating experience since we're all consumers not just gamers.

Its odd fire because you judge the DLC games on price point and what you feel is worth $10 or $15. And how certain games should be $10 because "game you like" is $10.

If we judged Haze that way then it should have been less then $10 because their are several $10 games with more value and are more fun then Haze.

Haze is a horrible FPS and it was not fun at all to me. I felt like a game tester playing some unfinished shooter. The nectar and the "turning point" in the game were almost interesting but the game was such a mess it didnt work. Maybe a second version of the game would have as good an improvement as the KZ franchise?

I understand you want to stand up for it somewhat because you are a supporter of the Dev crew. This game was no timesplitters Fire.

There is a very short list of games i never want to experience again, like ever..

Haze and the new Turok..
 
Pricepoints are pricepoints on disc or DLC. At $10 Haze is easily there. It didn't feel technically apt for a $60 tag, but the design is decent.

If i didnt already know what kind of game it was i probably would pick it up for $10. I bet i would have even felt differently about the game if i picked it up for $10. At that price, i do understand you. I payed $60 for this game Fire.. It was a huge motivational tool to get me a blockbuster account for future games though.
 
Sure the investment weighs in on the perception. For all I know I'd like Mass Effect more if I didn't buy a console to buy it. These are things I gotta step back and roll around in my head for a while. It's actually funny how perceptions work like that. You can learn something but it might not change the wrong image of it you had in your head. So much of the way we think is just autopilot anyway.
 
Back
Top