Haze Writer Responds to Poor Score

[CSN NewsBot]

The lead Haze writer, Rob Yescombe, responded to IGN's 4.5/10 review score for Haze. Yescombe made his comments to PlayStation Universe.

"My thoughts are "Owch". No, wait - MEGAowch," wrote Yescombe.



"Haze has had mixed reviews, but even GoldenEye got a 4/10 when it first came out. With a 9/10 in the Italian PSM, and an extremely positive review in Famitsu, we're looking forward to people playing Haze and making a judgment for themselves."

The IGN reviewed cited a "bland story with weak characters" as being a major issue, in addition to a number of graphical issues as being the reason for the low score. So far, reviews for Haze have been all over the board with IGN's score being the lowest and the Italian PSM (9/10) review being the highest.



Additionally, there is a new promotional video out there for Haze. If you'd like to have your mind twisted around and then stomped on, click on to see some of the oddest nine minutes of your life. It does show gameplay footage... eventually.[break="wtf"]

[IC dead people]

VERY VERY funny stuff



It's a parody of an old British TV show "Blind date"



for those who don't know it

[meowmeow]

People who check out websites for reviews for any game, need to get smacked across the face with a dead squid. Watch the trailer, watch the gameplay videos, watch the screenshots, if you like it, go out and buy it, simple shit.

[Zips]

meowmeow wrote..

People who check out websites for reviews for any game, need to get smacked across the face with a dead squid. Watch the trailer, watch the gameplay videos, watch the screenshots, if you like it, go out and buy it, simple shit.

That really isn't a good way to spend upwards of $60 a pop for a game just based on what you see or read. Previews hardly tell the whole story of what a game is like, and videos/screens are usually sent out by the developer and will almost always look as good as they can, perhaps even doctored up a touch.



Reading just one review and basing your purchase off of that is rather stupid, I'll say that much. But if you go to some place like metacritic that has a compilation of reviews, that is usually a better means of seeing if it's worth it or not. Many voices, one place.

[pwnedbyIbanez]

Yeah, I think Jeff should rethink his whole ratings system- it seems to come from opinion over the storyline, which looked really good to me (Drug abuse? Oppression?) After playing the demo, I didn't see any problems on the technical side- the jungle setting is awesome, I want to congradulate the level designers on that...



I think that IGN should start having at least three guys give an opinion on a review... but that's just me...

[-:Nighthawk:-]

You weren't even kidding about it being odd. I didn't find it particularly funny, but I see the definite attempt for humor and I have an intellectual appreciation of the fact that they're willing to be unconventional in their marketing.



As far as ratings go, I look to mass ratings for video games, but ignore them in movies. It's easy to go down to the local Redbox and pick up a movie for $1, so I find myself being fairly nondiscriminatory when it comes to movies.



But yeah, even for something cheap like a $10 game, I typically ask a lot of people who I feel have similar taste to myself -- namely CSN visitors. :) Beyond Good and Evil was a recent example of that, though I only now finally got around to starting HL2:Ep2 so BGaE will have to wait a bit longer...



For the $40-$60 stuff, unless it's from Valve I'm likely to hold out until I've played a demo or seen it on a friend's system, no matter what the ratings say. Just not worth blowing that kind of money on something I'll quickly tire of.



Final thought. A review is inherently colored by the preferences of the reviewer. That's true whether you're reading something on IGN or right here on CSN with the Skin of the Day. I don't think it's possible to write a good review that doesn't include your preferences, though. The primary reviews I don't respect are those that lack acknowledgment of the visceral enjoyment that unsophisticated games can possess, favoring high and lofty ideals of creative effort over what's simply fun.

[Thortok2000]

I tend to read reviews as "That's what they thought, now what would I think?"



If they make a complaint about something, that I know I don't care about, then I kinda disregard. If they say something was awesome, and I know I wouldn't care for it, I disregard that as well. For instance, GTA, I know it's an 'awesome' game, but I don't care for it because of the content.



BG&E was really well done, and the only flaw it really had was that it felt like the first of a trilogy, with no two games to follow. It can be considered a full game in itself, but it'd be awesome to have some followups. But it's just an all-round good game. In fact, I've been considering playing it again. =P



I'm still trying to figure out what new game I should get. The only game that's released yet that I am slightly interested in getting is Battlefield 2. But an expansion and a sequel (with ads) has come out since then, so I've kinda held off on that. I played the demo and loved the game, but my biggest worry is that maybe it's not really played much anymore, or supported, etc. I don't know if it is or isn't, really.



As far as BioShock, I played the demo. It was awesome, it had great graphics, but the plot just really isn't my thing. I'd play it for $15 bucks or less, maybe $20, if the price gets that low, I'll give it a shot. I really don't know anything about any of the other games I hear so much about. Crisis, Farcry, Call of Duty, etc.



I got this awesome computer with my tax refund, but I'm not playing any games on it, which is ironic. What do people recommend, anyway? And it doesn't have to be just fps games. =P I kinda like any type of game except sports.

[Omicr0n]

Haze looks choppy from the commercials, and gameplay seems very linear as well. Those two things are my enemies when playing a game.

"Haze has had mixed reviews, but even GoldenEye got a 4/10 when it first came out..."

http://ign64.ign.com/articles/151/151991p1.html



ign gave it a 9.7, not a 4.0 as they try to make it seem, citing ign's review originally.



I trust ign quite a bit because they're usually unbiased and quick to point out the vitals about a game. Haze looked iffy to me from the commercial so I'm not surprised that the hype is the best part about it.