Why can't they defend their game? I would do the same thing if I created something I was proud of and it was being bad-mouthed by someone. If they keep quiet it means that they knew the game was shit and released it anyway. As long as they are just talking and not bullying people into giving their games good scores then I see no problem with it.

This game looked like shit from the start.

I'm not spending £30 on a game just to 'try it for myself'. Hell, if they give all of us trial versions I'll do just that but not until then. Hrmph.

@exodus

Like the demo they already released?

(I played it, it made me decide not to get it)

4.5 from IGN, a site famous for it's 7-10 review scale.

Really.

Actually I don't see how there's anything odd about saying a review is always just a single person's opinion and still citing a favorable review.

I called it as soon as it went exclusive (made a post way back about it). The head honchos at Ubisoft knew the project was dying in the ass and refused to shell out the money for a 360 and PC port, figuring they might make some dying sales by sticking to the PS3 as an exclusive. People called me a fanboy, people said the game was going to be a 9.5, denying the obvious fact that if this game was going to be a stellar hit, Ubisoft would be more than willing to put it on the 360 and PC; they like money don’t they?

Still, I would have preferred the game to be awesome, but the writing was on the wall.

I'm glad I never cared about this game in the first place!

Then again, IGN gave God Hand a 3.0. This game is 1.5 better than that? Wow. God Hand was tits, this game must be super awesome!

But then I remembered that the IGN reviewer used the classic defence "I suck at this game, therefore this game sucks" when reviewing God Hand.

If Haze gets less than a 7 from IGN, it must be fucking terrible.

I mean really when was the last time a rock band wrote a song for a good game? Key word is wrote, not licensend.

Jesus, some of you take the word of Jim as venom from satan or something. All he's saying is that it's funny how they claim the word of one reviewer is good enough to sell a game, but that you can't judge the quality of a game from the review of just one person when it comes to a bad game. Sure they can defend their games, it's just the way they do it that's pretty damn funny.

You peeps need to chill out a bit.

Haha I like the caption on the Picture... Priceless!

That's all I've got.

Instead of making something good they greenlit a game where you smoke crack then shoot people in the face. Nice going.

But guys! It has 1200 pages of dialog!

@Detry

I see, well I could take drugs (shrooms) and shoot people in Rise of the Triad. The only difference was that game was awesome.

-To FPS Developers-

*Please take notes from COD4*

Free Radical is like the guy that brings Natural Light to a party, and Infinity Ward is the guy that brings Crown Royal and Sam Adams.

@JACK of No Trades

Does that make Bungie the drunken frat-boy doing a keg-stand/beer-bong?

I know that that this might sound nonsensical, but I lost all interest in the game after seeing that horrible Korn video...

While its disappointing that it got such low scores, and the demo wasn't too interesting, I'm still gonna have to give this game a try by renting it from Blockbuster.

This is Free Radical we're talking about! At the very least, multiplayer should be interesting.

btw- my comments were given an 8.5 by Famitsu, so do read them.

I thought the game might be half-decent at first, but after this I know for sure it's crap. Next!

I played the demo and it was unfun. Sorry.

@B-Radicate Shit I've been saying that for a year now, if everyone could come around to this side of the view point Ubisoft would swiftly go to hell. Every time I see the producers face of Vegas I about puke from the overly bizzare features of a rat eating cheese.

Yeah, the demo was crappy in my opinion, and there's no way that they're going to get me to buy the whole game.

At some point, people need to understand that game reviews are PURCHASING ADVISE. They aren't just opinions to be debated and reviled. They are for the very users that decry them.
Game Critics, at this points, are effectively trade journalists. They're more analogous to car reviewers, helping informed readers make purchasing decisions, than they are Film and Theatre critics, pontificating about the merits of their respected medium's products, "because they can".

I agree Jim. The companies love the review if it benefits them if not they are incompetent. I say all that but also think too many reviews are nothing more than biased opinions. A healthy review should always have some bias and opinion but that should only be an addendum to solid unbiased technical info and specs on the game,its relationship to other games,etc. So often I find more of an op ed piece on a game under the rubrick of a review. Thats cool but it shouldnt be called a review. Reviews should be objective first and foremost based upon facts. If those facts reveal a poor game so be it! If its a great game so be it! One caveat is some people have a hard time thinking for themselves and rely on others to make their decisions for them. I wish folks would exercise their critical thinking skills and learn how to discern reviews-factoring in the reviewers bias and presupposition as well as their own likes and dislikes. HAZE may not me all that great of a story or just another run of the mill shooter but some people love that and shouldnt let IGN and their bar of measuring a games quality keep them from that enjoyment. I would encourage all readers of reviews to play the games you like and not be a lemming. Take the profitable parts of a review and assimilate it and ignore the rest. The reviewer is one man or woman and may have some knowledge and insight into a game, but not into you or your desires and likes so go for it and play what you want even if it has a low review score. And as far as these companies I can sympathize with them but they need to back off. THey know unfortunatley that the majority of folks dont think for themselves and let the reviewers think their thoughts-that is why they get so worried about a review.

ubisoft is seemingly getting too big for their britches. used to be everything they made had a certain quality to it that you couldn't find another company as consistent. Now that they're putting out more "AAA" titles a year, they all seem to be getting worse. And just to be an asshole, I AM going to take the review scores at face value and ignore the game. Make a real fucking Rainbow sequel, fuckers.