Haze says no to HD, yes to HDD [Joystiq]

[DP ServBot]

Filed under: Sony PlayStation 3, First Person Shooters

Free Radical has confirmed that ambiguously exclusive PlayStation 3 shooter, Haze, will not be the source of standard, high-definition visuals. Speaking to Ripten, Creative Lead Derek Littlewood explained that, much like other sub-HD games, the 1024x576 resolution was chosen to ensure "a nice smooth framerate." Says Littlewood: "Well, as you develop an engine you're aiming for a certain thing, but as all the pieces slot into place, you end up realising what sort of resolution you can run it at and that's where we ended up with for Haze."

Though the PlayStation 3 will upscale 576p images to 720p (1280x720), it's unlikely to provide Free Radical's penance in the eagle eyes of pixel-counting pedants. With any luck, people will be too busy complaining about geebees to notice the lack of pees, as Ubisoft also confirmed that Haze will require a 4GB installation. Look forward to discussions involving the game's more obscure features (gameplay, story, blah blah blah) once it's out on May 20.

[Via Eurogamer]

Read -- Not very many Ps
Read -- Too many GBs

Permalink | Email this | Comments


</img> </img>


More...

[roushimsx]

All of the games listed that run below 1280x720 still look fantastic and, most importantly, maintain a nice, silky smooth framerate throughout. I fail to see the problem unless people are hellbent on us returning to the days of the N64 where shit framerates didn't seem to bother people.

[PapaStu]

Yes but Free Radical is all about frame rate. Thats what distinguishes their games from the rest. Well that and the monkies and ducks with Uzi's

I've never played multiplayer games that have been as smooth framerate wise as theirs. Even when there are 8 people/bots and we've all got double mini-guns. Never a iota of slowdown.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

All of the games listed that run below 1280x720 still look fantastic and, most importantly, maintain a nice, silky smooth framerate throughout. I fail to see the problem unless people are hellbent on us returning to the days of the N64 where shit framerates didn't seem to bother people.

Agreed.

I do worry about the 4gb installation on the HD though. Less than 10 games like this and you have to start deleting stuff... or go out and buy another hard drive and reformat and so on...

[Cryomancer]

Framerate is damn important. That's part of the reason I always felt there was a bit of a step down from Dreamcast to PS2. Most of the DC's quality games had awesome framerates.

[ProgrammingAce]

I only realized after playing a ton of COD4 that Halo 3 has a horrible framerate problem that they tried to fix with motion blur. There's some strange tearing and stuttering too.

[Trebuken]

I've played the demo. It looks great. Not a point of contention for me. Reminds me of the Resistance launch where everyone was upset by it not having 1080 support...still a great game...

[gum_drops]

Well, the first couple reviews came in and its not looking good. IGN only gave it a 4.5/10 . . . ouch!

I will still play the demo and most likely wait for a price drop before picking this one up.

[heybtbm]

Well, the first couple reviews came in and its not looking good. IGN only gave it a 4.5/10 . . . ouch!

I will still play the demo and most likely wait for a price drop before picking this one up.

The demo was mediocre IMO and the voice acting/plot were just plain embarrassing. Now the reviews are starting to confirm this. I guess my first impression was sound.