Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Luke Mitchell
30 May, 2008

Haze Review

PS3 Review | Better than a nectar overdose?
We've come to realize something important after many years of discussing and deliberating over video games, and that is quite simply that, expectation is a nasty creature unlike any other we've ever experienced. If we had no expectations, bad games would be playable, average games would be awesome, and great games would be mind-numbingly blissful. Alas, in this world filled with expectation, it causes some games to be over before they even begin, especially one that's been so often delayed and often discussed as Haze. Is it going to be on multiple platforms? Is it going to be any good? It's delayed? It's delayed again? It's finally coming out next month? It's finally here! All of these stages that we've gone through since it was initially announced, and here we are today, the game sitting in front of us, completed... and after all the expectations, we're left wondering: could it have used a bit more time in development?

The premise behind Haze is actually interesting enough on its own to at least give the game a right to exist among the other FPS's available. Some games have unique weapons and some include twists such as time manipulation or are period pieces, but no matter what, each one of them has some sort of 'hook' that is designed to make you stop and go notice that something different is going on. Haze's hook is Nectar, a performance enhancing drug that is given to the soldiers of Mantel to use while they are in combat, which heightens their senses, allowing you to see enemies highlighted from a distance despite being surrounded in shrubbery that would normally camouflage them, as well as making your defenses better, among other things. Of course, every drug has its side effects, and after using Nectar for a while, it starts playing tricks on you and malfunctioning within your system, which is where the main narrative kicks in. The questioning of what Nectar is really doing to people on a wider scale is the focus here, and as you progress through the game, all sorts of twists and turns will take place as you get closer to discovering the horrible (and somewhat predictable) truth.

"What!? You think our helmets are generic!? ATTACK!!"

"What!? You think our helmets are generic!? ATTACK!!"
Close
It's not a terrible story by any means, but where Haze trips, stumbles and falls flat on its helmet-covered face is in the actual delivery of said story. There are no 'cut-scenes' of any kind, at least not in the traditional sense. The closest you'll get to a cut-scene is when your character has a conversation with another character, still from the first person perspective. This means that the twists and turns which could normally have worked very well are hidden away in a sea of what seems like never-ending dialogue, made all the more difficult by the voice-acting being sub-par in terms of quality. The characters in the game also come off as a little too preachy, as if they're consistently lecturing you on the horrors of the world and where that places you as the main character. It feels like the writers of this story had a whole lot to say, but we just wish they'd chosen their words more carefully rather than forcing us to listen to characters ranting about the struggles of society.

Of course, it's not all about the story. Haze is a FPS, and is very generic in its execution. Apart from the aforementioned Nectar having a direct impact on a couple of your skills as a soldier, the gameplay is a linear 'go into this area, kill everyone, go to the next area, kill everyone again' style of formula, and it can get quite monotonous. Charging yourself up with Nectar is as simple as pressing the L2 button, but if you inject too much into yourself, you'll react to the overdose by losing control of your character temporarily as you shoot your weapon sporadically and generally run around like a madman. This super-drug of sorts makes you almost indestructible when in combat with the enemy, so you should have no trouble progressing through the game until the point where - shock horror - the story takes a turn and you're left to fight without the use of Nectar at all. Yes, you read that correctly: the main hook of the game is being able to use Nectar, and then mid-way through, you're left to fight without it for the rest of the experience. While we can understand why the decision was made to progress the storyline, it leaves you with yet another standard shooter that's far from unique.

Nectar: Make the most of it.

Nectar: Make the most of it.
Close
Sure, you'll get some different-ish weapons to use such as Nectar-grenades designed to make your enemies go crazy and shoot each other and the ability to plant grenades in the ground as landmines, but for the most part you'll just be shooting a lot of bad guys over and over again until the credits roll. This is made all the more frustrating by the AI, or more appropriately, the lack of AI. Enemies have no cohesion, will stand out in the open waiting for you to shoot them, and often won't back up their soldier buddies even though they were killed mere metres away only a millisecond ago. They will sometimes run right up to you and then do a 180 to go in the opposite direction for no apparent reason, and will even run right past you at times despite the fact that you are trying to shoot them in the face. The squad that's supposed to back you up isn't much better; expect them to run into landmines and dive right in the middle of a skirmish with a pile of enemies, leaving them downed and waiting for you to revive them because they can't revive each other.

Thankfully, your team is basically expendable, and new squad members will likely join you at every single checkpoint to make up for your losses - but this raises another problem with Haze, which is that you're never really challenged. Enemies are stupid enough to never take advantage of a bad situation you may find yourself stuck in, and most gamers should find themselves breezing through quite easily. The only time we found ourselves getting killed was when an enemy soldier jumped from around a corner and promptly used a shotgun to take us down in one shot, or when a not-so-friendly turret was placed just out of sight from our weapon, defeating us before we could blink. Normally when a game beats you, you accept it and try to think of how you will overcome the obstacle next time, but when Haze gets the better of you, it honestly just feels cheap. Then there are the vehicle segments of the game, and the less that's said about those, the better. Clunky, simplistic and terribly frustrating to control, one driving section would have been enough... but of course there's a few of them littered throughout, supposedly to break up the monotony of a whole heap of shooting.

"Come on guys, I thought we agreed on RED Helmet Wednesdays!"

"Come on guys, I thought we agreed on RED Helmet Wednesdays!"
Close
Alas, while it does have some glaring problems, Haze does actually have some redeeming features, and these come in the form of multiplayer modes, both competitive and cooperative. You can play through the entire campaign online with up to three other people, which does make the whole thing much more entertaining than it is in reality. It's actually a testament to social gaming in general that playing this game with friends makes it fun, because you'll probably be chatting away too much to realise that it's all very predictable and uninspired. There's also 16-player competitive multiplayer online, and while fun for a brief period, surely won't hold the interest for very long when there are much deeper online alternatives already available.

We're getting to a stage with the PlayStation 3 where we know that games can look fantastic, and it's basically expected. Again, it really is a shame, but Haze just doesn't look technically impressive. The texturing is average at best and often doesn't load properly, leaving some surfaces looking unfinished and... well, texture-less. Pop-up occurs constantly, with plants and trees appearing before your very eyes, combined with some painfully obvious clipping issues between characters and their environments. With the amount of time and money spent on this game, it's incredibly disappointing that these issues are so frequent. The sound is annoying on an entirely new level, too; we mentioned that the voice acting was sub-par, and we weren't kidding, as this even translates to the dialogue of your squad-mates throughout the entire experience. Every few seconds, expect them to yell something random, and then yell it repeatedly up until the point you are literally screaming back at your TV screen for them to stop.

With some serious technical issues and some odd design choices including a narrative that clearly thinks it's far more interesting and deep than it actually is, Haze is certainly a step backwards for the FPS genre. What makes this entire situation all the more disappointing is that Free Radical have proven themselves time and time again as developers that really know how to make shooters work, and work well. Even though we've been incredibly judgmental of Haze in this review, we should note that it's certainly not the worst game we've ever played; it does have some redeeming features in the form of multiplayer, there are a couple of decent ideas and the actual core 'shoot people a lot' gameplay certainly isn't broken, rather just generic and predictable. If you're completely starved for a new shooting game on the PS3, then Haze might be worth checking out, but make sure to proceed with caution when doing so.
The Score
A game like Haze from a developer like Free Radical had so much potential, but there are just too many issues with the end product, making it very hard to recommend.
Looking to buy this game right now? PALGN recommends www.Play-Asia.com.

Related Haze Content

Haze bargain round-up
21 May, 2008 Hazy on which retailer has the best offer?
Ubisoft confirms whopping install for Haze
20 May, 2008 Be prepared to twiddle your thumbs.
Haze dated for Australia
09 May, 2008 Out in a few weeks.
23 Comments
1 year ago
I totally agree with the review its ashame as it showed some promise. I finished it in 5 days (trying to take it slow) and returned it for MGS4 preorder. Multiplayer deathmatch was OK but I thought the maps were a little too big. Didnt get a chance to play co op campaign as by the time I had finished it in single player I had already had enough of it.
1 year ago
Cred to palgn for calling it how it is, despite the large amount of haze advertising the site has.Would have been easy to slap an 8 on it to appease ubi(or whoever is handling the site ads).
1 year ago
wrote
There are no 'cut-scenes' of any kind, at least not in the traditional sense. The closest you'll get to a cut-scene is when your character has a conversation with another character, still from the first person perspective. This means that the twists and turns which could normally have worked very well are hidden away in a sea of what seems like never-ending dialogue, made all the more difficult by the voice-acting being sub-par in terms of quality.
I think games like Half-Life 2 and its episodes prove that cutscenes are only one method of effectively progressing a narrative. It's a shame that Haze fails so dismally in what can actually be a more immersive - and in fact game-like rather than film-like - method of storytelling.
1 year ago
Everyone is saying it showed a lot of promise - can someone explain what this was cause I seemed to have missed it. It just looked like another first person shooter to me (with added 4 player co-op which many of the reviews have said it was a good feature)
1 year ago
It was developed by Free Radical, the people behind the Timesplitters series, and most notably comprised by some former Rare employees who worked on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. It was sort of expected they would be well versed in developing first person shooters.
1 year ago
Cerebral wrote
It was developed by Free Radical, the people behind the Timesplitters series, and most notably comprised by some former Rare employees who worked on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. It was sort of expected they would be well versed in developing first person shooters.
Oh i knew that - but what about the game itself? I mean after people in the industry played it at previews, they were disappointed about the graphics and the frame rate. Naturally all the previews are going to end with "well if they fix these things up it should be a good game." I'm not surprised people buy that line because it gives them hope (which by the way is what The Shawshank Redemption sold and went on to be the second highest rated film according to IMdb).

Well I liked Timesplitters 2 - i thought that had great multiplayer. Haze seems to me they have left that cartoony style and gone after the Halo market.
1 year ago
My only question concerns the length of time it will take admeister to defend this game.
1 year ago
GooberMan wrote
My only question concerns the length of time it will take admeister to defend this game.
He's not the only one. I own Haze, and would personally give it 6.5-7/10.

I think a lot of people's perception of the final game has been overblown by the immense bashing Haze has received in many reviews. I mean, let's look at what happened. IGN give it a 4.5, yet they gave an absolutely terrible game like Blacksite: Area 51 a 6.5. I'm sorry, but there is absolutely NO WAY that Blacksite is better than Haze. The market has been flooded lately with mediocre shooters, such as Turok, Blacksite and Turning Point. In my opinion, Haze is much better than these 3 games and doesn't deserve the hate it has been getting.

No, it isn't a "Halo killer", and upcoming PS3 titles like Resistance 2 and Killzone 2 will leave Haze for dead, but I think that Haze is a relatively solid game in both single player 4 player co-op, and multiplayer competitive. Far better than a lot of the FPS trash out there right now.
1 year ago
mipac wrote
let's look at what happened. IGN give it a 4.5, yet they gave an absolutely terrible game like Blacksite: Area 51 a 6.5. I'm sorry, but there is absolutely NO WAY that Blacksite is better than Haze.
*sigh* That's the problem with giving games a numerical score. These comparisons aren't necessary or warranted.
1 year ago
Spanca wrote
mipac wrote
let's look at what happened. IGN give it a 4.5, yet they gave an absolutely terrible game like Blacksite: Area 51 a 6.5. I'm sorry, but there is absolutely NO WAY that Blacksite is better than Haze.
*sigh* That's the problem with giving games a numerical score. These comparisons aren't necessary or warranted.
Exactly. We don't review games on the basis of 'well, we gave this other FPS a 6, and Haze is probably better, therefore it should be at least a 6.5'.

There are a number of factors that go into each review, obviously, and Haze quite simply doesn't cut it when there are much better shooters available. Different people also review different games too, remember, so I for example am not going to change my opinion on the basis that *insert reviewer here* gave some other FPS a better score 6 months ago.
1 year ago
mipac wrote
Turok, Blacksite and Turning Point. In my opinion, Haze is much better than these 3 games and doesn't deserve the hate it has been getting.
You may be right, but it's certainly not better then COD4, Resistance or even something like F.E.A.R/Files.

You enjoyed it and that's great. It doesn't mean that it's a good game in the great ocean of gaming though. I personally would have bought this game if it has been a 9'er across the board. But my gaming time is premium (i.e. I don't have a lot of it) so I prefer to play only the cream of the crop. And, judging off the 10+ reviews I've read, Haze is not a good game and not worthy of my time.

If Haze was a multiplatform game, like Turok, then it wouldn't be getting any of this attention. The hate is coming from the dissapointed gamers and 'I told you so' from the fanboys.
1 year ago
Quite a few of my PSN buddies have this game.I will not be joining them in owning it.
1 year ago
Despite the poor reviews, it will still sell well.
1 year ago
I never thought that this would be the game to make me buy a PS3. That would be MGS4. icon_wink.gif
I didn't understand the hype for this game, it does look generic. PS3 doesn't need a "Halo-killer", it needs Gran Turismo. I hate the term Halo-Killer, besides COD4 has beaten Halo 3 in almost every way and it's multi-format.
1 year ago
Luke Mitchell wrote
Spanca wrote
mipac wrote
let's look at what happened. IGN give it a 4.5, yet they gave an absolutely terrible game like Blacksite: Area 51 a 6.5. I'm sorry, but there is absolutely NO WAY that Blacksite is better than Haze.
*sigh* That's the problem with giving games a numerical score. These comparisons aren't necessary or warranted.
Exactly. We don't review games on the basis of 'well, we gave this other FPS a 6, and Haze is probably better, therefore it should be at least a 6.5'.

There are a number of factors that go into each review, obviously, and Haze quite simply doesn't cut it when there are much better shooters available. Different people also review different games too, remember, so I for example am not going to change my opinion on the basis that *insert reviewer here* gave some other FPS a better score 6 months ago.
I believe Spanc quite rightly meant the unavoidable competitive sport mentality readers take from a numerical-based review system, rather than the perceived closed realities of how we decide the end score of a game review.

Apparently, Haze receiving 'mixed-reactions' and 'low scores' is hard-hitting news in this industry.
1 year ago
^ Yep. Although it can provide great entertainment at times. I remember the IGN boards a few years ago when Double Dash was released and subsequently 7.9'd. Fun times.
1 year ago
Not exactly on the topic of the review but... Having paid attention to the Haze TV ad last night, I wondered how it got through the OFLC since the primary gameplay feature is drug use.
1 year ago
nikack wrote
Not exactly on the topic of the review but... Having paid attention to the Haze TV ad last night, I wondered how it got through the OFLC since the primary gameplay feature is drug use.
If I can recall from the Blitz: The League RC, the reason that it probably got let through is the fact that the game shows the consequences of drug abuse through it's gameplay.

Blitz: The League did too, but as far as I know it wasn't so obvious.
1 year ago
Interesting point Nikack. I understood that Blitz was banned for promoting drug use in sport in a positive light (ie giving rewards for taking drugs), yet Haze seems to be doing the same through granting special powers through drug use.
1 year ago
Haze most likely got through because, towards the end, the game was VERY anti-Nectar and showed all the effects it has on someone and society.
1 year ago
And didn't Blitz have you just take steroid, i.e. a real drug?
1 year ago
This is very disappointing!

I guess I can hold off on a PS3 just a little longer.
1 year ago
legend166 wrote
And didn't Blitz have you just take steroid, i.e. a real drug?
Exactly my thoughts, nectar is in no way an illicit substance. Perhaps though, this game promotes drug use in that it requires you to be as high as Lucy in the Sky with Diamond to gain any enjoyment out of it.

OFLC always a step ahead...
Add Comment
Like this review?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/18C

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
  Pre-order or buy:
    PALGN recommends: www.Play-Asia.com

Australian Release Date:
  22/05/2008 (Confirmed)
Standard Retail Price:
  $119.95 AU
Publisher:
  UBI Soft
Genre:
  Shooter
Year Made:
  2007
Players:
  1

Read more...
Currently Popular on PALGN
Bioshock 2 Review
Welcome back to Rapture...
Win 1 of 10 Bioshock 2 packs
Includes free stuffs!
PALGN Weekly Releases - 08/02/10
Christmas in February?
Nier Preview
Nierly as dark and twisted as Drakengard.