War vets doing games is "pretty f***ing bizarre" - Haze writer News

Meh

/Back to sleep

0/10

This Yescombe fellow needs to work on his trolling skills.

I saw the game on Ubi Days, storyline sounds good, but the actual gameplay looks very bland, the graphics werent that groundbreaking either. Also the vehicle control was very floaty.

Once you're done tackling all these important moral issues, don't forget to make the game fun...

Oh.... I thought they went round helping sick bunnies, but with guns.

"Which is not to say things look boring, as they certainly do not."

It's quite funny to see how everyone has turned against Haze now that it's a timed PS3 exclusive.

Not really no but whatever makes them sleep easier. Also it's not like it's a real exclusive.

Considering this is the first thing this guy has ever worked on (research shows he hasn't written anything else whatsoever, commercially at least) the gulf between what he thinks he knows and what he actually knows seems to be pretty vast.

I don't know... I've read some pretty arsey comments from the Haze guys about other IPs, though that could have been misquotation.

"the way the Mantel helmet the player-character wears appears to "censor" what he sees of combat."

Sounds really interesting though I have my doubts whether they have the balls to get really political with this one like the movie "Apocalypse Now" did. I expect them to go all out cynical, Starship Troopers style.

Who actually wants moralising from a videogame, surely that's the kind of thing people play games to escape from. What next, a GTA game where you face the consequences of the virtual crimes you commit.

So this is the marketing pitch they are going to use then?

It's quite funny to see how everyone has turned against Haze now that it's a timed PS3 exclusive.

Hardly against, but the move does raise eyebrows and not the least drops it of the buy by default list of a lot of people (if ubi doesn't allow them to buy it, they will buy something else. People won't leave that money in their pocket this Christmas season.)

Game Designer: So here we were thinking of putting a health pack and an unguarded weapons cache. How much was it like that when you were in Vietnam?

War Vet: Umm, not alot. For one thing we had a medic who pretty much used morphine to help you die comfortably when you'd been shot and most weapons caches were booby trapped.

Game Designer: Seriously? Well how about the health bar on the side you could get shot more than once right?

War Vet: Well yes but you'd be dead.

Game Designer: But that's no fun for the player!

War Vet: You think it was fun for me?

Game Designer: I'm Learnding.

There seems to be no rock being left un-turned in the quest to gain column inches for this game.

Couldn't what he has said be applied to nearly every war spawned product ever produced through any consultation.

People can enjoy the "game" or challenge provided for them. Consultation providing accuracy.

How many people, like me, have played these games, and then thought fk me, I would not want to have been in that situation. When you have died on the beach storming level for the 40th time in a row, trying all manner of different tactics, just makes you think on reflection about the true horror of war and fragility of real life.

Concepts that are alien to this generation , i.e. having a war with Europeans – most countries now only a couple of hours away, rather than sounding like they were from a distant galaxy inhabited by horror’s. Most people under 30 visiting the Countries and places as tourists rather than soldiers.

I just hope he has been violently misquoted.

I am all for mature games, that tackle on mature themes in a mature way, but these Haze devs are making such a big deal about the whole issue that I have hard time believing they're really up for the task.

Still, it's really refreshing to see some dev trying to do things differently. Maybe in not so distant future we will have more genres in gaming. Some of which really make you think of what you are doing in the game world. However, as with movies, we do still need those popcorn games, so it's quite unfair to bash on games like Halo (like Haze devs did in EDGE interview).

The buzz is there, now Free Radical only needs to deliver the goods.

So this is how FR plan to gain publicity? By crapping on every other fps (WWII and Halo especially)?

Yep.

Looking at Dave Jaffe's comments, coupled with these, it's like "John Romero's about to make you his bitch" never happened.

I'm getting pretty bored of this constant Haze designer or writer says something "wacky" crap. You can just see the marketing and brand managers coming up with the idea of this as a strategy and thinking they were onto a winner. And don't tell me it represents what the creators are actually thinking because it blatantly is just PR led - it's way too consistent and overt not to be. Anyway, here's a hint: you failed. I was actually interested in this game... until the last 2 months that is. Now i feel the game sounds too pretentious and unfocused to be entertaining - which should be the primary goal of any game.

I'm not saying games shouldn't tackle other subjects, but when it comes to a product that people spend money on, it needs to be entertaining first and foremost (and if it manages to be emotionally or morally engaging or of broader artistic value then all the better; but these things should not be the main aim, not unless they intend the game as an exhibit piece, which is free of cost).

Now does tackling moral issues necessarily equal an un-entertaining experience? Of course not, and i'll wait until the game's out and I can play it before i form my final opinion. But from the sounds of it, and from the manner in which the Haze devs have conducted themselves, I have a feeling the actual 'entertainment' value of the storyline and writing will be too overt and in your face. Nothing on the subtle level of Ico for example (how did you feel about killing all those shadows when you realised what they were at the end?)

Mostly though, i just think it's pretty bloody rude and uncouth to go around crapping on other people before you've even proved yourself. It doesn't incline me to buy their game and support them, regardless of quality.

@BlankOBlank!: How do you know this is the guys first game? Did his name not show up on MobyGames or something? Cos I'm sure my name only appears for one game, although strangely I have worked on quite a few more......Games devs still dont appear in the public eye as easily as musicians or film stars (praise be to IMDB).

And thats not counting the times your name doesnt appear cos you left the company before the game was published (through your own choice or not)........

Free Radical's games already do crap on most other FPS's.

"Free Radical's games already do crap on most other FPS's."

If you're referring to my comment about not proving themselves, i meant in relation to Haze (not the dev in general).

Freeradical speak the truth :)

haze looks like a fairly shitty by the numbers FPS so how this guy can get on his high horse about other FPSs is beyond me

"we've got HAZOVISION which is nothing like the slow motion from max payne, the matrix and fear!"

pfft

"Mostly though, i just think it's pretty bloody rude and uncouth to go around crapping on other people before you've even proved yourself. It doesn't incline me to buy their game and support them, regardless of quality."

As has already been said, Free Radical have proved themselves, these are the makers of the Timesplitters games! (In other words: the most entertaining FPSs out there, that already crap on other people's work by how good they are, and that was without *gasp* a jump button!)

Apart from Timesplitters, they made Second Site, which had possibly the best story of any game I've ever played. Thirdly, the guys who started the studio worked on Goldeneye!

These guys have proved themselves many times over.

"Now does tackling moral issues necessarily equal an un-entertaining experience? Of course not, and i'll wait until the game's out and I can play it before i form my final opinion. But from the sounds of it, and from the manner in which the Haze devs have conducted themselves, I have a feeling the actual 'entertainment' value of the storyline and writing will be too overt and in your face. Nothing on the subtle level of Ico for example (how did you feel about killing all those shadows when you realised what they were at the end?)"

I'm sorry, have you read the script? No? Seen an outline of the plot? No? Well, then, how do you know? Apocalypse Now was very in-your-face, as was Full Metal Jacket, but they both managed excellent and subtle representations of war. Why? Because they were done by good directors; Coppola and Kubrick. Well, Free Radical is one of the best British - and best full stop - devs out there, so I think we can rest assure this game will be of a high quality, of both story AND gameplay (don't forget they're adding four player online-and-off co-op as well as what I'm sure will be an excellent multiplayer mode).

"we're trying to do Apocalypse Now"

Only if there's a Colonel Kurtz head rubbing mini game.

"As has already been said, Free Radical have proved themselves, these are the makers of the Timesplitters games!"

Apparently you didn't read my second post where I clarified I was referring to Haze when I made the 'proving themselves' comment. Sorry for the confusion. Look, I'm not saying that they're not good devs - I'm saying they shouldn't shit on other titles as part of the PR campiagn for Haze when that game is yet to prove itself. It's just setting them up for a bad fall. Furthermore this tactic is not exactly endearing.

"I'm sorry, have you read the script? No? Seen an outline of the plot? No? Well, then, how do you know?"
It's ironic that you raise these questions after quoting a paragraph in which the second sentence includes this quote from myself:
"Of course not, and i'll wait until the game's out and I can play it before i form my final opinion."
My opinions weren't stated as fact and i'm sorry you misread them as such. As I obviously stated already and in 'answer' to your question: I don't know, and I freely admitted that before. I haven't judged this game yet (although you apparently think i have). I'm simply commenting on how their PR efforts have affected my feelings about the game at the moment. You shouldn't quote an entire paragraph of said opinion and then read so selectively, blowing a gasket in the process.

ferrisboy: I'm not saying games shouldn't tackle other subjects, but when it comes to a product that people spend money on, it needs to be entertaining first and foremost (and if it manages to be emotionally or morally engaging or of broader artistic value then all the better; but these things should not be the main aim, not unless they intend the game as an exhibit piece, which is free of cost).

What a load of bull. Art can be entertaining and entertainment can be art. Games is such a huge medium already, that there's enough space for artistic entries. In fact, there's definitely not enough games that make you think and reflect things. And you know what, there's more than one way to express opinions, political or otherwise.

You only need to look at cinema. There are so many, many movies that have subtle messages planted in them, in mise en scene, in dialogue. Most of the time people miss these, but they might still enjoy the movie.

Actually, that Haze writer mentioned one commercial film, which did just that: Starship Troopers. Most action film afocianados think it's one of the best genre flicks, whilst they completely miss the satirism of the piece. Personally, I hate the movie, but I liked the point Paul Verhoeven made and how he did it, especially knowing how so many people completely misunderstood the film.

Oh yeah, and one more thing: most art exhibitions, even those ones that don't necessarily mean to entertain at all, are not free. So, maybe it is just that you don't like art that much, or you don't "get" it all. Whatever the case, I welcome all experimentation and artistic expression to games.

I'm not sure I agree that it is so bizarre... war is a central part of the human experience, and some of our greatest and most terrible stories comes from wartime. So in terms of the oral tradition of storytelling and so on, battles and wars have always been converted into entertainment. Years ago kids would read Biggles books, and comics like Victor and Warlord. Nowadays kids would want to play Call of Duty and Medal of Honour. It's not that surprising really...

I remain very interested in Haze and what FRD are trying to do with it. Anything that isn't another bloody Timesplitters is to be welcomed, and Second Sight was very good. I like shooting games, but I do find the current batch of Tom Clancy games and WWII games to be pretty moronic, and ultimately not designed for intelligent adults. If FRD can find a way to present combat and warfare in a more mature light rather than the "eat knuckle, Fritz!" derring-do of the current ralf of silly shooters, well that's to be welcomed and encouraged. That said, perhaps FRD should just let their game do the talking, as all these promises and claims could end up biting them in the arse later.

As far as platform goes... I'll probably hold off for the Xbox 360 version. I'd be quite happy to play it on PS3 too, but generally if I have to choose between the two I'll swing towards 360 because of (a) the Xbox Live integration and (b) the better controller for shooters (IMO, the PS3 pad is no better for shooters than the PS2 pad was).

>"made Second Site, which had possibly the best story of any game I've ever played. "

Emphasis on YOU.

@MGG

Yeah, I have the same problem with MobyGames, so I wrote a list of the other games I've worked on in the bio.

As for how I know he's not done other commercial work... I never reveal my sources.

;)

"What a load of bull. Art can be entertaining and entertainment can be art."

Did I say anything to contradict this? I simply stated that for a product that people would spend money on, in the hope of being entertained (which perhaps I am making a leap here, please let me know if it's not the reason you buy games) - the primary goal of said product is to entertain. I never said games shouldn't be artistic, I don't think there is even a debate in that regard as I consider games as valid an art as any other medium.

"I welcome all experimentation and artistic expression to games."

As do I. I neither stated nor implied otherwise myself. I simply believe that along with such things the designers main goal should be to provide value for money to the customer.

"Oh yeah, and one more thing: most art exhibitions, even those ones that don't necessarily mean to entertain at all, are not free."
Hehe, I was originally going to add an aside to my comment stating "Not including entry fee to the museum for example" ;) But fair point. I was unclear in that regard, my point was that in certain exhibits (particularly those which are free), one does not go with the explicit or presumed notion of being 'entertained' in the same sense that one who spends £44.99 on a game does.

@ ferrisboy
Amen!!!

Sounds like i'd like it.

"My opinions weren't stated as fact and i'm sorry you misread them as such. As I obviously stated already and in 'answer' to your question: I don't know, and I freely admitted that before. I haven't judged this game yet (although you apparently think i have). I'm simply commenting on how their PR efforts have affected my feelings about the game at the moment. You shouldn't quote an entire paragraph of said opinion and then read so selectively, blowing a gasket in the process."

I apologize, ferris, I was mistaken. Ironically I probably attacked yours because it seemed the most intelligent, and I wanted to indirectly have a go at certain other comments which were a lot less eloquent and thought out. I which case I agree: trolling other devs will not help, they need to be positive about what they can do (I personally am positive, but your reaction shows quite rightly that their going in this direction was a bad idea, though it is my personal opinion that it is mainly this interview - okay, and that Halo comment, too, but maybe they just thought they'd do it 'cause Miyamoto did - that gives that impression). However, from what I've seen of the game itself, it looks pretty good.

I will repeat, though, that I am especially interested in the four-player co-op. The single player in Timesplitters 3 was fairly good, if short, but in co-op it was a blast, so this should be really good.

"As do I. I neither stated nor implied otherwise myself. I simply believe that along with such things the designers main goal should be to provide value for money to the customer. "

I have to say, this is true, more than with films and other forms of art games have to justify their high price: they need a decent-length single player (10-15 hours at normal difficulty would be acceptable to me) and a fully future online and offline multiplayer mode, but in this respect we don't need to worry.

I'd take Gladiator is a good example: fairly arty, but great action, romance, etc, too, a traditional hero-against-all-odds narrative with some politics built in. That's the kind of balance Haze needs to achieve (with good directed replaced with good gameplay, etc).

there seems an incredible irony in us complaining about generic sci-fi fps games, and then laying into a developer for essentially agreeing.

lets be honest, if someone approached you for your view on fps games, what would you say?

and as an aside, they did not "bash halo" in edge at all. they said that it was a brilliant game, but also said that they weren't about to go and make yet another game like it.

I really hope this ends up living up to the hype they're trying to generate for it. It sounds good, but I'm unconvinced.

War. War changes everything.

More Haze article PLZ.

1 a day isnt enough.


-Signed Phil Harrison

I'm looking forward to a game where you play Marlon Brando and recite poetry.

As has already been said, Free Radical have proved themselves, these are the makers of the Timesplitters games! (In other words: the most entertaining FPSs out there, that already crap on other people's work by how good they are, and that was without *gasp* a jump button!)

It was an ok game but am I the only one that thought Timesplitters2(which is the best theyve done) was overated? Perhaps the real reasons people made noise about it:
A) PS2 and Gamecube(especially) were in need of decent FPS games
B) Nostalgia of the N64 days, yes we know there are some from Rare there... only times have changed now, yes they are still classics but NO they are not "still the best" by any strech of imagination(they make the best bots atleast... map/level design is not worth mentioning because thats one of the things people hardly ever agree on from game to game).

Lets see if they can pull all that off for real this time around(not saying they couldnt do it... never say never), a true AAA FPS title that leads the way on the console front.