The problem is that reviewers don't always have the same taste as you do or look for the same thing in games.

I think it's undeniable that some games plain suck because they suffer some flaw that breaks the entire game (like Lair to most back then), but some just hit one person's taste and don't hit the next guy's.

I hear the game got a 4.5 from IGN though. I think that's a little too harsh. Even Lair got a better score back then. For what it's worth, HAZE is at least enjoyable in short bursts and with friends. That's my opinion from what I've played and seen.

I will buy it down the road, for 15 bucks or something :)

Sure, it was robust, the aiming tight, and I was OK with the graphics, but upon reading this review, my fear has been confirmed: The game sucks after playing it for an hour.

I'm sorry, even if the developers are from England (like I am), I can't buy this game that has mediocre written all over it.

I'm better off spending those £40 extra on the MGS4 LE which nets me nothing more than a documentary and a figurine. That's how bad I feel about HAZE now.

Now I know this happened with Fable 1, I'm just speaking in general. Really, devs, don't hype your games up like that yourself. Let the fanboys take care of it.

In all honesty, I didn't mean that this wouldn't be "fun" in a way. Just like DDR I guess. I suppose the problem is that I'm too much of a boring person. I don't like SIXAXIS or other motion controls particularly much either. It's ok, but sometimes I don't feel like moving my arms, let alone whole body. I prefer to have my peace and quiet and place my lazy butt on a sofa when playing games :)

Ehm, forget I said anything :p

This is one of the reason I won't ever touch that thing [Wii Fit]. You look like an idiot playing it. Couple that with unexciting exercises that I can (and already) do better in real life, and you've got yourself...a casual gamer's wet dream.

But I don't think that Microsoft's first party, who *should* be doing just that, is maxing out the console. They just can't do it. Maybe it's because the developing environment is, as Phil H. said, too far away from the machine and doesn't let you use the resources to their full potential. Maybe it's because the 360's CPU and RAM aren't fast enough. Who knows exactly.

That's where it gets interesting. I think Sony excels at maxing out their consoles themselves, while 3rd parties are slower at that. Look at Killzone 2, Heavenly Sword, Lair (it looked great at 1080p, give it that), Uncharted (yes, I know, it's not Sony internal blah blah, but it's still damn close) and so on and you see what I mean. Heck, Heavenly Sword was clearly a first generation PS3 game that featured native 720p resolution AND anti-aliasing while looking nothing short of great. That's on a graphics chip that isn't technically able to render HDR and AA at the same time. Yeah.

We can argue about the 256MB of RAM or the "7800GTX" GPU holding the PS3 back all day, in the end, it's down to what developers can do with it and how much experience they have. Maybe the super fast main memory of the PS3 can give it the edge. Maybe Blu-Ray. Maybe nothing, who can really tell?

Going back to Free Radical, I just think that as a third party and little connection to Sony they had so much trouble getting the game to run on all three platforms that they needed to settle on one and get things sorted out. Although this game in particular runs at sub-HD resolution, the next one from them might not. To me, it's very unjustified to claim that either PS3 or 360 are lacking in processing power just now or that one is exceeding over the other. We are seeing amazing looking games in 720p on both systems and HAZE isn't exactly the happiest of the bunch, being exclusive producing flamebait.

If you ask me though....1920x1080 or 1280x1080, it doesn't matter for GT5. It's the best looking racing game and definitely one of the best looking games in terms of photo realism on the market, period.

If they managed to make the Cell produce 4xAA in the final version of GT5, that would be graphics quality on Crysis levels, exceeding Killzone 2 by far.

In the defence of the game and Free Radical, give it some time people. This is their first shot at the PS3 and I guarantee they will produce stunning looking games in the years to come. Remember, HAZE was meant to be a first generation PS3 game launching last year, but they apparently had too much trouble fiddling out the engine. That's why it's being compared to the new Killzone 2 or Gears of War 2 standard.

Anyhow, what are people going to do when they discover that MGS4 runs in 640p (or rather, if it does that actually)? Commit suicide?

There just are some games that are technical showcases for the console, and some aren't. For that, they have loads of content or replay value/multiplayer and fun gameplay (e.g. GTA IV, Halo 3, HAZE, MGS4).

<3

Also, this game heavily reminds me of Doom 3, which I think was a lot scarier than stuff like F.E.A.R. It's just the "alone on the planet" addition that does it for me. Basically, in Doom 3 or this game, you've got nobody to help you. There aren't any other humans nearby.

What I like about the gameplay itself is the strategic dismemberment, although it looks like it doesn't control very well (or the person aiming just sucks at it).

That tech-demo we saw a while ago? It's a game after all?

Didn't know Siren was going to be a PSN release either, I'll definitely pick that one up.

Seriously, pass me some of the stuff you are smoking.

Nah, that'd be stupid.

But heck I won't complain about more material to watch and enjoy.

Thanks for the video!

BTW, what do you taste like? I hear troll is similar to fish, just not as greasy.

I agree with the review except for one bit - I don't mind the marshmallow triggers on the PS3 controller. I think they are great for driving games.

They are less great for shooting stuff. :/

Thumbs Up.

Anyway, ScrewAttack has lost a fair amount of popularity and quality since Tom left, so nobody really cares anymore. If it weren't for the AVGN, I wouldn't even look at their stuff. To think, there was a time when I digged everything, from the daily updates to videogame vaults.

Full RGB Range not making a difference? Now THAT is bullshit. I can tell the difference even in the XMB. Switching it to limited on my 1080p display, the colours of the dynamic background (Original Theme) are much less vibrant and there is less colour "variety". Means, green that is supposed to be light green turning into dark green along the way will be streamlined to just green. Of course, this sometimes happens at unnoticeable colour ranges, but mostly it does make a difference.

The explanation to this is simply that RGB Full Range utilizes the entire, natural RGB colour palette, opposed to the limited, cut one. [manuals.playstation.net]

Having more different colours available, from a logical standpoint, automatically improves the quality of your image because it should look more life-like and less shaded or coated.

The problem comes to show with TVs that are incapable of the full range or just generally suck. Black colour can be too dark or too bright, pulling everything around it with it, sending the contrast to hell.