Haze writer responds to review score News

Hmm, review embargo that lifts the same day the game goes on sale?

I smell another cast-iron surefire PS3 exclusive hit!

Like me grandpa said ya cant polish a turd lad!

And from the IGN review and playing the demo Haze is a major bog blocker of a turd.

Now wheres me plunger!

So haze is not only running in low def, its actually shit as well?

Bad times sony, bad times...

Perhaps. But I can't find any record of GoldenEye getting a 4/10 score so it can't have been a well known source.

Unless we are counting reviews on GameFAQs.

Wowzaa, 4/10 from IGN... the most notoriously harsh marking games mag on the planet!

Yeah, I gotta say that the game looks a little too dull to be anything other than a moderate success.

But at least we now know that IGN don't take bungs, or Ubisoft/Free Radical don't give money for good reviews ;)

http://i30.tinypic.com/2r6fjw8.gif

ARRGH!

Why are people so fucking obsessed with Goldeneye? It was only successful because it was a well known IP on a console, where the FPS market hadn't really ventured before.

It was fucking WANK.

No it wasn't

Who gave Goldeneye a 4? Probably Jack Thompson.

Edit: And WTF George? Goldeneye us rghtly regarded by 99% of the world to be a great game. You even answered your own question. It was a pioneer for console FPS, which makes it automatically good. Also, it was (and still is) the ONLY decent James Bond game adaption worth repeat plays. Multiplayer was fantastic and innovated many things that are taken for granted nowadays.

I didn't actually think the game was all that bad after playing the demo and there were alot of people already sharpening their knives for this. I'll definitely wait for a few more reviews before writing this off.


@nick_f - That's pure genius

"It was fucking WANK".

I think you're fucking wank! ;)

Bare in mind, everyone, that IGN also rated God Hand low after only playing the first level, and have rated literally hundreds of games too high.

Now, I'm not trying to defend Haze if it genuinely is sh*t, but IGN are in the barrel of 'worst games reviewers' along with GamesTM, GameSpot, and indeed, 90% of the sites/magazines listed on GamerRankings (Eurogamer aren't quite that bad yet, but they're getting there sadly).

So, you know, if anyone is put off the game from IGN, then don't be. IGN are the types to play the first level and then post a review.

Personally, I can't see how Free Radical are capable of making a rubbish game. But I'll openly slate it if it does turn out gash.

@ Draqule: I can't take credit, someone at work forwarded it to me.

@ George Roper: You, sir, are on CRACK.

well, the 4/10 for goldeneye isn't on metacritic and famitsu's the only one giving is a (only reasonablely) good score:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platform...

Empire gave Goldeneye 2 stars out of 5, which equates to a 4/10. It was a one paragraph review by someone who hasn't even played it. I think that the comparison's slightly disingenuous, as no proper videogame publication gave Goldeneye a bad score.

The embargo's for a good reason. Haze is simply not very good, and the FRD guys should avoid digging holes for themselves by even mentioning Goldeneye around it. I think Rob Yescombe got drawn into it, but it was a silly thing to mention as it's going to be spun to pieces.

I'm sorry but one 9/10 score from what seems to be a biased Italian PS magazine exclusive and 34/40 from Famitsu, the same magazine that gave Lair and Perfect Dark Zero similar scores, means very little and sounds like he's clutching at straws really. For me, the reviews from respectable sources like Eurogamer, Edge, gamesTM and (dare I say it?) GameSpot are what matter the most to me if I was deciding whether to buy the game or not. Admittedly the IGN review was poorly written, concentrating far too much on what they didn't like about the story and characters, and very little on pointing out why they deemed the game only worthy of 4.5.

*sigh*

No matter, I thought the demo was OK and my pre-order will no doubt be here come Thursday so I can make up my own mind about the game proper. I will say that there's a distinct Lair "whiff" to the whole thing though so it may be true that the full game really isn't much cop... gamesTM have suipposedly given it 4/10. Free Radical might have made the critically acclaimed TimeSplitters series but they also produced the mediocre Second Sight so maybe they're destined to be one-hit wonders (kind of)?

It's got three reviews on Metacritic - highest is 65% - general comments along the lines of "doesn't do anything new"

Poor deluded George. Are you upset because you missed out when everybody played Goldeneye. There, there.
/end of sarcasm

Be fair George. I think that you and me can both name games with the James Bond licence, that did not sell nowhere near as well as Goldeneye did. 8 million copies sold, according to Wikipedia.

The reason why people are obsessed by GoldenEye is that at the time it was an enormous amount of fun. That is why I am obsessed about it and that is why people expect so much from Free Radical. Because once upon a time, some of the guys at that team really knew how to push the envelope.

I don't have a PS3, so I'll be giving this a miss. But after having played the Timesplitters trilogy, I am really wondering if those guys will ever hit the heights of fun that Perfect Dark 1 and GoldenEye achieved. Or maybe I just miss being a student in 1997 and having a house full of cannon fodder, 4 joypads and my N64. I don't know.

Cant wait for Gamespots review


5.5 anyone?

It was successful because 4 player Goldeneye sessions were fucking brilliant. One of my mates used to always get the 'Mostly Harmless' and 'Most Cowardly' awards. Good times.


Shame about Haze though. Ah well, GTA4 and MGS4'll keep me amused for a while

Haze the next Halo beater, thats what they said, what are they to say now. The fact is Haze is shit because the PS3 is a poorly designed machine that most developers can't get decent results from, leaving them less time to work on gameplay.

I'm waiting for this game to be torn up by Yahtzee. *sigh*

And I was so looking forward to it...

So when can we get to read EG's review? I'd have thought it'd have been up by now as they're usually very quick to post them days or even weeks before a game is released here in Europe.

I think that the comparison's slightly disingenuous, as no proper videogame publication gave Goldeneye a bad score.

They should have compared it Eurogamer's 4/10 for Mafia ;)

On topic, this looked terrible to me from the very first video I saw. I'm surprised anyone thought it actually may be any good...

Goldeneye's single player was awesome, however, I have always thought splitscreen multiplayer to be somewhat shit. Regardless. And in todays day and age of online multiplayer 'mayhem'...plus Goldeneyes' acclaimed multiplayer...

Fuck it, I don't care. I just want Eurogamers review up, the comments on that one should be gold.

@Darren, it's under embargo!

3 reviews on Metacritic so far, average score 5.6 out of 10.

I was fairly interested in this game (if partly as another reason to justify buying my PS3, which was purchased after already owning a 360 and Wii). Pretty likely that I wont bother now, unless the scores from the big sites come in high.

Resistance 2 is a long way off and Little Big Planet just doesn't appeal, so MGS4 had better be good...

Two early reviews are far from conclusive, but it looks like my fears about this game were right. I feel a bit sorry for it being PS3 exclusive, because it has become another front in the console war, whether it wanted to be or not.

As a comparison, Dark Sector was a multi-platform game. It received some good scores, and some pretty bad ones, but each person could take it on i's merits because it was just a game, there was nothing more to the argument (I quite enjoyed it). If it had been exclusive to the 360 or PS3, then one side would have had to contest that it was the shittiest game ever released, and the other would have argued that it was actually a work of genius and cruelly misunderstood by the reviewers.

Look how much press Haze is getting, most of it negative. Even with the lofty claims of the developers and the length of time it took to finish, do you think it would have been such a focal point if it were multiplatform? It wouldn't (but unfortunately, it wouldn't have been a better game, either).

@asphaltcowboy - Not now it isn't, it's released in the US today! ;)

Anyway, with a game like GTA IV or Halo 3 the word "embargo" means quality game kept under wraps for spoiling the plot but with Haze it seems to mean mediocre game kept under wraps for spoiling potential sales! ;)

"Or maybe I just miss being a student in 1997 and having a house full of cannon fodder, 4 joypads and my N64. I don't know."

+1

Good times, good times

The difference is that Haze ain't gonna be no Goldeneye.

"Goldeneye's single player was awesome, however, I have always thought splitscreen multiplayer to be somewhat shit. "

Huh? What if your're husband+wife shooter fans? Eh? EH?

Goldeneye was great at the time, there was nothing like it!

Haze, there are so many things like it. I mean look at the mantel bods, then look at the cover of Crysis or Timesplitters. Protagonists in big metal suits. In fact you can lump the big green spaceman in with that too.

Consoles didn't have anything like Goldeneye, now they have loads of things like it. If the one player is meh and so is the multiplayer, there is nothing really to advertise this game.

I don't even agree with the "we wanted a solid framerate" story. Look at Warhawk, not visually spectacular detail wise, but more than happy to fling 32 players round a map at a good res and at speed. Plus the Resistance people were able to cut it a good year ago!

Still, I suppose its a relief to the old wallet. I'm yet to catch up on the entire Burnout & COD4 stuff ... Assassin's Creed even, so its nice to know that its a good wadge of cash saved. Proper rental market game.

Then the wife better be busy doing the dishes ;)

Hes confusing Goldeneye with the awful Golden Eye: Rogue Agent.

@Darren, fair enough. Either way, the last line of the article says "You'll be able to do that this Friday when the game is released, or by reading our review that should be up at around the same time."

GoldenEye was awesome back in the day, it was yet another N64 game that blew me away, kept me playing it for weeks on end and made me NOT regret having to sell my PS and its games collection to pay for all those expensive carts. Banjo-Kazooie, Jet Force Gemini, Diddy Kong Racing and GoldenEye... that was Rare at their very, very best IMO.

Banjo-Kazooie, Jet Force Gemini, Diddy Kong Racing and GoldenEye... that was Rare at their very, very best IMO.

Darren speaketh the truth.

+1

IGN gave God Hand a 3 and therefore have no credibility or importance.

@asphaltcowboy - Ooops missed the bit at the end about the review so it looks like it'll be tomorrow or Thursday at a guess then rather than today as I was hoping. Thanks for pointing that out anyway.

I feel a bit sorry for it being PS3 exclusive, because it has become another front in the console war, whether it wanted to be or not.

Perhaps they should have considered this at some point during the back and forth fiasco regarding its exclusivity, and maybe also reined in their criticisms of other games (most notably Halo).

Crash and burn, Haze, we hardly knew thee.

Maybe SDF will make an "unbiased" review and give Haze 10/10. :D

If there's ant fault with IGN's review scores its that they are too lenient with FPS's, Eurogamer takes much more feet on the ground approach to review scores.

But still it is hard to imagine that Haze could be worse than Turning Point... :-o Maybe I should finally install that Haze demo I already downloaded and see for myself...

i really enjoyed the demo... especially in 4 player online co-op i would have given it a 8/10... even though im not a huge fps fan

Holy shit, I've never looked at SDF before but that is hilarious.

Anyway, 4 isn't terrible is it? If we take 5 as an 'okay' or 'average' game, then a 4 puts it just below that, so more like a 'below average game but has some merits in there somewhere' maybe?

With the amount of FPS games out there, Haze had to offer something new to get a good review score in general, which it doesn't seem to do, so I would have expected a 5, or a 6 at a push anyway...so 4 isn't really too far off.

I'm sure it couldn't be any worse then some of the dross FPS demos I've tried of late such as Conflict: Denied Ops and Blacksite anyway.

Rob Yescombe has been putting himself in the camera (well, on things like Gamer.TV) for months now trumpeting on about Haze. It's recieved a lot of press and hype - partly IMO because of the PS3 exclusivity - so anything less than average is bound to attract a lot of attention. And at best, this is what it looks like Haze will be yes.

And yes I played the demo.

And yes, I also think Rob's Goldeneye comparison was a bad judgement call.

Maybe they should have asked Jade Raymond to help with the publicity?

@mikeck - I know you're just trying to put a positive spin on it - and good for you - but whether Haze scores 4, 5 or 6 out of 10, it'll still be viewed as mediocre and I'm sure that isn't what Free Radical were aiming for. In fact, it must be heart-breaking to spend two or three years working hard on a game that you're proud of only to release it to such hostile reception. I'd hate to be in their shoes I really would. Based on the demo I'd say that Haze isn't a poor game by any stretch of the imagination, just perhaps a bit too generic and ordinary to stand out from other FPSs out there. I'm actually looking forward to playing the game myself although I'm under no illusions that it's going to be groundbreaking or a Call of Duty 4/Halo 3 beater.

MKorkia- I really don't get if SDF are being serious or not? I really hope it sarcastic. Its just hard to tell without the voice intonation.

In terms of Haze.....thought it looked ok, nothing ground breaking. Not got a PS3 though so not that bothered. I'm mainly just reading this too avoid work.