-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
New Haze screenshots (uh-oh)
- Thread starter XSamu
- Start date
â Narayan
Member
What the Hell?! Read the bloody caption on the first one! That explains everything! 
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Ranger X said:
The weird look is because the player is using Nectar. But yeah, these are scans after all.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
RobertM said:
You do post the dumbest shit, don't you?
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
RobertM said:
The ****?
AltogetherAndrews
Member
So no one else finds the idea of your team mate going berserk and lifting people by the throat before shooting them in the head exciting?
Actually, in writing that doesn't sound like something that'd make a sane person excited.
Actually, in writing that doesn't sound like something that'd make a sane person excited.
UnholySpectacle
Member
I'm surprised more people are not talking about this game since the latest PSM. 4 player online co-op made me almost shit my pants with glee. We are talking drop in and out anytime you want co-op too, like Gears of War. Plus, the new shots look amazing. Free Radical decided to change the games concept around because they did not want to release a good game when they could make a great one.
I obviously have a lot of faith in Free Radical. Making this game kick ass will allow me to forgive them for making the lame TimeSplitters 3.
I obviously have a lot of faith in Free Radical. Making this game kick ass will allow me to forgive them for making the lame TimeSplitters 3.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
UnholySpectacle said:
It wasn't that bad. Sure the level design isn't nearly as good as part 2's but it was still a fun ride.
UnholySpectacle
Member
PepsimanVsJoe said:
After 2, it was a chore to play through 3. Not to mention the fact that it felt entirely too easy compared to part 2. The multiplayer was pretty good as long as you played on the right maps. There were some downright horribly designed MP maps on part 3. Of course 2 had its fair share of crappy design too.
Secks4Food
Member
RobertM said:
So foliage and shanty shacks=Wannabe Crysis?
AltogetherAndrews said:
Nope, shit like that is totally emblematic of the laziness and sheer lack of self-awareness in gaming? You know those old robot and tin-can space ship movies from the '50s that everybody laughs at now for being so naive? We're playing the modern-day equivalent of those movies.
Just own up to objecting to a triviality - don't call it 'emblematic' and try to build a whopping, bitter argument on top of it. Tin-can sci-fi is cultural treasure, btw: if self-awareness means sneering at that kind of stuff, then stick it.
'Administering' is the right word - not that it matters much of a damn.
'Administering' is the right word - not that it matters much of a damn.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Flynn said:
And you're basing this off of a properly used term that signals a player controlled action? As in administering Nectar to the player? It's not even that I necessarily disagree with the larger argument you're making, but homing in on something that in context is perfectly valid doesn't make for the best spring board for the argument. Nor do I see what's wrong with that specific term. It is a cue to indicate the infusion of nectar into the player, that's all it is.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Mojovonio said:
Nope.
frd_neko said:
.AltogetherAndrews
Member
There might be additional games available on the system that he's interested in, with this being the game that pushes him over the edge so to speak. That, and there's the price difference. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. Unless the 360 version flat out sucks nard, but that's pretty unlikely.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
PleoMax said:
The project lead said that the PS3 version is easily on par with the other version, and later clarified that by "easily on par", he meant that it was "outperforming PC's that it really shouldn't be". So yeah, right now it'd seem as if it's a notch above. I wouldn't expect there to be any massive differences though.
Buffy4ever
Banned
PS3, X box 360, and PC. multiplaformShanks said:
rod said:
Great language to be using on a forum toward people. I don't appreciate people calling me names, and it's a bannable offence according to the TOS. Y'know what? The incredible majority of HD games (AND WII GAMES for the record) do NOT HAVE AA! Everytime you see 16xAA in a screenshot, take it with a grain of salt. There is tons of AA in both these scans, AND the original "concept" screenshots. You will not see that on your TV. This is an extremely common practice, and it pisses me off to no end that I'm being called a douche and a retard by multiple people for it. This has NOTHING to do with the Wii, it has everything to do with these screenshots not being realistic and not representing what the final product may or may not look like on our consoles.
What pisses me off most is the "downgrade total" talk when more realistic screens are released of a product, as if people were expecting games like Gears or MGS4 to look the way they did in their original screens/videos. You all need to have more realistic expectations of what platforms are capable of, not to be calling people a douche who don't, for one second, believe that the current crop of consoles is capable of 16xAA. Either these are PC shots here, or console bullshots.
Edit: Oh, and for the record - I have a gaming PC, thanks, and I'll be playing this shooter on that. So no, I'm not jaded because I can't play this game.
It's not just the magazine shots I was talking about. I was referring to the originally posted shots as well.
That came off sounding very rude.
There's a simple explanation for screenshots in magazines looking like they have AA. Magazine editors and publishers ask for screenshots in extremely high resolution to be used when printed in the magazine. Since these screenshots should be scaleable 300dpi is a minimum for them to be usable.
There's a simple explanation for screenshots in magazines looking like they have AA. Magazine editors and publishers ask for screenshots in extremely high resolution to be used when printed in the magazine. Since these screenshots should be scaleable 300dpi is a minimum for them to be usable.
I don't know what's going on, but alls I know is that this game I never heard of before looks great and people are trying to push the PS3 version over the Xbox 360 version on people who don't have PS3's and have Xbox 360's.g35twinturbo said:
Alls I know is I have a 360 and if I get this game, it will be the 360 version.
And that's alls I knows.
Alls. Y'alls.
Hitler Stole My Potato
Banned
StevieP said:
You know, when you come into a thread and indirectly declare that everyone that's posted in it is "sad" you should expect some flack so don't go around here crying like you're somehow a victim.
Kabuki Waq
Member
Prine said:
huh? Even timesplitters 1 was better than PDZ.
Thunderbear
Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
StevieP said:
I don't really know what you're basing this on but I can tell you it's not true. Most games since mid-development of the PS2 era has AA. Most Xbox360 games have excellent AA.
Yes a lot of screenshots have higher "AA" sampling than what you end up seeing in game, but that's generally because screenshots are grabbed and released at print resolutions. A place like IGN gets these and resizes them as they see fit. Generally in a bi-linear fashion or if they know what they are doing they'll use something like bi-cubic or catmull-rom. Of course developers/publishers are aware of this positive side-effect but it's rarely an intentional practice.