Haze is the perfect example of why hype is a bad thing. Now I have heard a lot of people say that Haze wasn't very hyped, that it wasn't supposed to be a AAA title. Well I, like you, am a member of this community and I know that Haze was being touted as a premier title for the PS3. Ultimately the hype is what has caused Haze to fall flat on its face and become the huge disappointment that it has become.
Haze follows the very short career of Mantel soldier Shane Carpenter. I won't spoil what little story there is for anyone, but suffice it to say that Shane has an epiphany about 1/3 of the way through the game and then decides that his abilities are best utilized fighting for The Promise Hand. That is about all you need to know about the story because it is poorly told and feels incomplete. It's only made worse by the atrocious dialogue and poor accents that accompanies the games AI.
If there is any reason to pick up Haze it has to be the multiplayer. Although the campaign features some good balancing between the Mantel forces and The Promise Hand rebels, everything else in the campaign is a total debacle. If there is even any reason to venture into the co-op it is to avoid the painfully horrible one liners that are thrown around every few minutes by your AI squad mates. However, the multiplayer is a different story. Although it is very limited as far as the game modes you can play, the balancing in the campaign transitions well to online. If there is any reason to check out Haze it resides solely in the multiplayer.
Haze, to put it simply, is bad outside of the multiplayer. The campaign features AI that ranges from below average to pathetic, the voice work borders on insulting, the dialogue is some of the worst writing I have experienced in a game (or anywhere for that matter) and the gampeplay itself is average and uninspiring. While playing through it don't be surprised if you find yourself wondering why it was delayed so long considering this is what the final product yields.
Haze is very simply a bad campaign and a solid multiplayer; nothing more nothing less. The ideas and concepts for a great game are there but they are hidden under flawed and sloppy design. I can't recommend this game as a purchase for anyone; all I can suggest is that if you are that curious rent it and bypass the campaign.
Alex S. from Link-Cable writes: "When shopping for new video games you can often trust the name publisher or developer on the box to be an indication of the quality of the game. Names like Nintendo, Square Enix, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Capcom, Xbox Game Studios and Sega are world famous because they helped shape the industry by releasing some of the most defining video games of all time. Though sometimes even these great gaming houses stumble and put out a stinker."
Splatterhouse remake . Loved the og’s at the arcade growing up . Hell the best thing about the remake was the og,s were included . And left alive by Square . That game had so much potential , but the gameplay was worse horrendous .
once Great studios getting destroyed is actually common. happened with ND and Last of Us2, Bioware and Mass Effect Andromeda/Anthem, Bungle and Destiny .
I'm pretty much certain that any Sonic game that comes out will be terrible, I've not enjoyed one since the original side-scrolling days of the MegaDrive.
For this Topic it says Good Studios that make bad games. Sonic Team hasn't been good in years.
Guns, drugs, and unnecessary war. Fun for the whole family.
Good review, i think exactly the same thing. About the IA... aint it very sad to see 3 of your partners get in front of the rocket-buggy to get killed? 3!!
i like the read.