Haze will require a 4GB+ install, will run in sub-HD 1024x576

So fucking lame. This is the final nail in Haze's coffin.

To top it off we were laughing at every cutscene and VO when we played the demo at NARP. Haze is very clownshoe-y.

as a PC Gamer I laugh at you all

I've gotten the feeling from a few interviews with the developers that the making of this game was a clusterfuck in several areas. I'm not surprised by this.

Don't we have these things called PCs that already require installs?

Stolen from another comment I saw on the net:

Full 720p - 1280×720 = 921,600 pixels
Some Sub-HD games:

Lair - 800×1080 = 864,000 pixels
MGS4 - 1024×768 = 786,432 pixels
Metal Gear Online - 1024×768 = 786,432 pixels
GTA4 (PS3) - 1152×640 = 737,280 pixels
Halo3 - 1152×640 = 737,280 pixels
Dark Sector (PS3) - 1152×640 = 737,280 pixels
Call of Duty 4 (PS3 , X360) - 1024×600 = 614,400 pixels
Haze (PS3) - 1024×576 = 589,824 pixels

Most people look to COD4 as the touchstone for graphics especially when it comes to FPS games. To see it running in such a low resolution with a relatively low pixel count really says alot.

Seeing this chart, you should realize that games can look great without a huge pixel count. Sure, it's preferable to have high resolution, but I'd rather have a solid framerate any day.

"The next generation doesn't start until we say it does!"

@Glitched:


I think you completely missed the point

"The HD era really only starts when we are on the market"
~Phil Harrison

"
PlayStation 3 system is technologically superior to anything out on the market. I think it's curious to read our competitors' comments on this now, versus a few months ago. A few months ago, we were reading things our competitors saying that 1080p of 60 frames per second is impossible, and they won't achieve in year five, let alone that launch software won't get close to it. I think you've probably seen some tentatively titles of running at 60 frames.

They're launch titles. So this notion of resing up, it strikes me as just a little bit disingenuous: what they're really offering consumers, what they said our system could do and couldn't do, and now how they're reacting to it. So, I think for a long time they wanted consumers to believe these systems were really on par with each other. Like, there's no graphical difference, that there's no gameplay difference, and, I think what consumers will see, in a very few short weeks is that nothing could be further from the truth. PlayStation 3 is technologically superior. You're gonna see it in the games. It's true HD. We can now put 1080p at 60 frames per second, and they can't. And that's something that they'll live with. They built their system, it was important to them to get it to market first, and so, based on that, I think they rushed a system to market that wasn't quite ready for prime time."

~ Peter Dille, Sony Computer Entertainment's SVP of Marketing - November 2006


Let me say this, I don't mind it's resolution. & I love my PS3 & 360. But this is just sweet in that Free Radical basically admitted their publisher was lying. & that it's running a low resolution because it couldn't achieve higher and a smooth framerate; which im sure tastes bitter to the 1080p 60fps launch title PR nonsense Sony execs were bragging about.

PS3 & 360 are both great consoles. I believe the PS3 does have more potential for growth mainly because it's architecture is so abstract that programmers have probably not experimented as much for new rendering methods. But I dont buy for a single solitary second the 1080p 60fps "True HD" nonsense Sony was bragging about during it's launch.

For example the only 3 1080p cross-console games.

NBA Street Home Court, Virtua Tennis 3, Fifa Street 3

they dont run any better on the ps3.

The only cross console game which was 1080p on ps3 but 720p on 360 is Marvel: Ultimate Alliance. And that game was a absolute slide-show on the PS3 and near 60fps on the 360. I have to wonder why they chose to go 1080p; whether it was pressure from management or if they believed sony, or if it was for marketing. As for the other 3, the detail is sparse & the framerates were comprimised. Take Eurogamer's comparisons for instance. They reccomend running 720p every time.

Xbox 360 vs. PS3 Face-Off: Round Nine FIFA Street 3
X360 v PS3 Multiformat Face-Off, Round Three Marvel Ultimate Alliance
Xbox 360 vs. PS3: Multiformat Face-off Virtua Tennis 3 / NBA Street Homecourt

meh doesn't bother me i just upgraded my hdd to 250gigs for my birthday so i don't really mind. as for the hd resolution i don't really care i still do not have an hdtv.

I think Niero, you should've mentioned that there will not be any load times, after the install, during this game.

There's few PS3 titles that run in 1080i/p.
HD system my ass.

The only way we're going to get gamse that run at 1080p is if developers accept that they can't have mad crazy effects and filters coming out the wazoo on every frame of animation. The current generation is extremely disappointing as far as performance goes. A £2-300 console will NEVER perform as well as a gaming PC.

When I had my PS2 (or anything earlier) there were very few games that had significant bugs or slowdown. These two things are now commonplace in console gaming which is a shame, because to me my consoles were always a way to get into some instant, hassle free fun. Now it's looking like playing on the PC:

put in disc
wait 20 mins for install
start game
download latest patch
restart game
play

I see console gaming embarking on the slippery slope that PC gaming started down a while ago with all these problems, misrepresentations and lies.

Only fanboys dig up shit from 3 years ago and bitch about it. I could go through the statements of the other console manufacturers and criticize them whenever something comes under par. But that would make me a fanboy.

I think Magesx summed it up pretty well.

Ripten you say? RIPTEN?

I might get it on the 360.

@ ChristianGamer

Oh wait...

This just sucks balls! A lot of people weren't bothered about Haze before but this is like putting on concrete shoes by the lake.

For a PS3 exclusive as well you would have thought that Free Radical would have optimized the game so that they wouldn't need an install or at least a really small one. I mean they managed it with Uncharted and that hardly had any load times. As for the sub HD resolution I can understand the preference for a solid frame rate but come on they should easily have been able to achieve both especially with an install.

Let's just hope that this is just a warm up for Time Splitters 4

I could care less about mandatory installs (if it makes load times shorter, I'm all for it), but running at such a crappy resolution is a bummer.

@Too much coffee, it's the fact that you wrote an essay in the middle of the "Comments" section.

This is Haze. The guys that made Time Splitters made this game. I'm willing to give it a good play through regardless of faults.

good thing the demo sucked so much ass i wouldnt want to put my hands anywhere near the finished product.

so what are they gonna do when your hard drive fills up?

also screw Haze, GIVE ME TIMESPLITTERS 4!!!

I love Timesplitters...