Free Radical - PS3 technical issues hampered Haze development

"A lot of them were technical issues," he said. "The PS3 is a powerful machine but a difficult one to get the best out of."

Hilton admitted that, in developing the PS3-exclusive FPS Haze, the studio "hit a few stumbling blocks".

"We spent more time trying get the game running properly and less time to design the game properly," he said.

Interesting really, seems odd that they decided to go PS3 only, had they gone 360 they couldve got it over to the PC in short time and then later on PS3. Im guessing its because they chose the PS3 as lead platform from the very start.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/32590/PS3-technical-issues-hampered-Haze-development

As much as I like Free Radical and the work they did before Haze (GE007, PD, TS, TS2, TS:FP), that's just damage control. They could have easily made it multiplatform and easily could have finished it before release. Or, they could have just made TS4 and been done with it.

I guess that explains the story , level design , AI , vehicle handles , and the dialogue. I guess you can't accomplish anything when you're too busy trying to figure out teh cell.

I guess that explains the story , level design , AI , vehicle handles , and the dialogue. I guess you can't accomplish anything when you're too busy trying to figure out teh cell.

Nike_Air

Pretty much this. Expect to see similar comments from High Voltage regarding the Wii soon.

u guys smell that......"sniff" "sniff"...oh yeah that's good ol GRADE A.......B.S

Haze is a technical nightmare.

It only runs at 1024x576 @ 30fps, yet it still looks worse than the 600p 60FPS COD games.

They should have spent another year or two developing methinks.

:|

Their game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

How is this damage control? They basically had a hard time getting the game to run properly and thus design suffered because they couldn't put more resources in it. This is a pretty reasonable statement. If I were them I'd have just done a PC/360 combo, only people who are funded like crazy can go through the headache of being PS3 exclusive.

:|

There game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

kool-aids

He never said the console sucks he said it was pretty powerful but it was hard to dev for.

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]

:|

There game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

Espada12

He never said the console sucks he said it was pretty powerful but it was hard to dev for.

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]

:|

There game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

Espada12

He never said the console sucks he said it was pretty powerful but it was hard to dev for.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]

:|

There game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

kool-aids

He never said the console sucks he said it was pretty powerful but it was hard to dev for.

First party devs with huge budgets, devs kits before the console released and lots of time compared to 3rd party dev who was new to the hardware, doesn't have the console maker funding them and doesn't have near as much time to release the game.

[QUOTE="kool-aids"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

He never said the console sucks he said it was pretty powerful but it was hard to dev for.

Espada12

First party devs with huge budgets, devs kits before the console released and lots of time compared to 3rd party dev who was new to the hardware, doesn't have the console maker funding them and doesn't have near as much time to release the game.

Well this is rather obvious. FR should have made this multiplat from the start though so its really there own doing.

Sorry i don't have any sympathy for Free Radical being stupid enough to make a FPS exclusive to the PS3.

:|

Their game just sucked, plain and simple. I look at games on the console that were successful such as MGS4, Killzone 2, Uncharted, and Resistance(1,2) and realize its the developer, and not the console.

kool-aids

All third party developers got dev kits before the console released. And Haze released well after RFOM. RFOM had to be a launch title and it was Insomniac's first game on PS3. Haze was delayed.....over....and over....and over and over again. It released late May of 2008, as opposed to RFOM, which released in November of 2006. Insomniac is now at the point where they are releasing THEIR code as open source code available to other developers, first and third party and they have made a total of three successful game releases on PS3 and they're set for their fourth later this year. What does this tell you? Free Radical definitely aren't the best PS3 developers in the planet.Brownesque

That doesn't say anything we have no idea what budget constraints ubisoft put them under or how much time from dev beginning to completion was given by ubi. The fact is all these devs are given the resources and enviroment to excel while LEARNING to code for the PS3. People outside of the first party are not, and it is the reason why alot of 3rd party games come out worse on the PS3. It isn't anyone being lazy, it's sony's fault.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="kool-aids"] It looks like those developers found a way to get around the hardware and make decent looking games. they are the only ones to blame here. Resistance 1 looks better than haze. Brownesque

First party devs with huge budgets, devs kits before the console released and lots of time compared to 3rd party dev who was new to the hardware, doesn't have the console maker funding them and doesn't have near as much time to release the game.

Excuse me but Insomniac is sony funded and bigger than Free Radical. Free Radical aren't the greatest devs but Insomniac or any large dev for that matter are poor examples to use.

I'm just waiting for Furi-Kun to come in hear and say something!

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] All third party developers got dev kits before the console released. And Haze released well after RFOM. RFOM had to be a launch title and it was Insomniac's first game on PS3. Haze was delayed.....over....and over....and over and over again. It released late May of 2008, as opposed to RFOM, which released in November of 2006. Insomniac is now at the point where they are releasing THEIR code as open source code available to other developers, first and third party and they have made a total of three successful game releases on PS3 and they're set for their fourth later this year. What does this tell you? Free Radical definitely aren't the best PS3 developers in the planet.Espada12

That doesn't say anything we have no idea what budget constraints ubisoft put them under or how much time from dev beginning to completion was given by ubi. The fact is all these devs are given the resources and enviroment to excel while LEARNING to code for the PS3. People outside of the first party are not, and it is the reason why alot of 3rd party games come out worse on the PS3. It isn't anyone being lazy, it's sony's fault.

Ironically they're sitting here telling us their time spent trying to "mek it work" basically cost them valuable time in making the game design meet par. As far as you saying it's Sony's fault....lol, I'm done with you. That's not even a cogent thing to say. Not even a little bit. Yeah, Haze is Sony's fault, good thinking.

Like I said, though, Insomniac and Naughty Dog have released their source code. It's 100% all available to developers. Do you know what source code is? There is no development kit or engine that can be bought that can be read and learned from or even utilized as much as source code. They have the game in the palm of their hands with that. If Microsoft released their source code, it would be reverse engineered in no time and brought to us from other distribution channels with bug fixes, huge alterations, who knows what else. That developers seem to be so incapable of doing anything with it says a lot more about them than it says about anybody else. That and the Edge tools were released during the development of Haze. Simply, they could have bought an engine and been done with it, but noooo. They wanted to complain about buying an engine and then complain about the system when everyone complained about what a steaming hunk of garbage Haze was.

Put simply, Sony isn't doing a damn thing wrong. Where's the source code for Halo 3? Where's the source code for Left 4 Dead or Gears of War? You can't see it. But you can go access the source code for Insomniac's games.

I'm quite certain that "technical issues" did not cause the poor level design, horrendous gameplay, and sub-par story.Bentham

The sad and ironic thing is the Wiki for the game says they decided to not purchase a game engine, saying that building their own allowed them more freedom in game design.

Ironically they're sitting here telling us their time spent trying to "mek it work" basically cost them valuable time in making the game design meet par. As far as you saying it's Sony's fault....lol, I'm done with you. That's not even a cogent thing to say. Not even a little bit. Yeah, Haze is Sony's fault, good thinking.

Like I said, though, Insomniac and Naughty Dog have released their source code. It's 100% all available to developers. Do you know what source code is? There is no development kit or engine that can be bought that can be read and learned from or even utilized as much as source code. They have the game in the palm of their hands with that. If Microsoft released their source code, it would be reverse engineered in no time and brought to us from other distribution channels with bug fixes, huge alterations, who knows what else. That developers seem to be so incapable of doing anything with it says a lot more about them than it says about anybody else. That and the Edge tools were released during the development of Haze. Simply, they could have bought an engine and been done with it, but noooo. They wanted to complain about buying an engine and then complain about the system when everyone complained about what a steaming hunk of garbage Haze was.

Put simply, Sony isn't doing a damn thing wrong. Where's the source code for Halo 3? Where's the source code for Left 4 Dead or Gears of War? You can't see it. But you can go access the source code for Insomniac's games.

Brownesque

I don't not believe they were doing this around the time of haze first of all, and the thing is they don't have to release the source code for L4D or GOW because it's not needed... no seasoned programmer is getting a headache coding for the 360...

[QUOTE="Brownesque"]

The sad and ironic thing is the Wiki for the game says they decided to not purchase a game engine, saying that building their own allowed them more freedom in game design.

Ironically they're sitting here telling us their time spent trying to "mek it work" basically cost them valuable time in making the game design meet par. As far as you saying it's Sony's fault....lol, I'm done with you. That's not even a cogent thing to say. Not even a little bit. Yeah, Haze is Sony's fault, good thinking.

Like I said, though, Insomniac and Naughty Dog have released their source code. It's 100% all available to developers. Do you know what source code is? There is no development kit or engine that can be bought that can be read and learned from or even utilized as much as source code. They have the game in the palm of their hands with that. If Microsoft released their source code, it would be reverse engineered in no time and brought to us from other distribution channels with bug fixes, huge alterations, who knows what else. That developers seem to be so incapable of doing anything with it says a lot more about them than it says about anybody else. That and the Edge tools were released during the development of Haze. Simply, they could have bought an engine and been done with it, but noooo. They wanted to complain about buying an engine and then complain about the system when everyone complained about what a steaming hunk of garbage Haze was.

Put simply, Sony isn't doing a damn thing wrong. Where's the source code for Halo 3? Where's the source code for Left 4 Dead or Gears of War? You can't see it. But you can go access the source code for Insomniac's games.

Espada12

I don't not believe they were doing this around the time of haze first of all, and the thing is they don't have to release the source code for L4D or GOW because it's not needed... no seasoned programmer is getting a headache coding for the 360...

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Wasdie

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Wasdie

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

navyguy21

free radcial are the same idiots who made timesplitters a fps without a jump can we say crap?videogamesdead6

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Wasdie

As much as I like Free Radical and the work they did before Haze (GE007, PD, TS, TS2, TS:FP), that's just damage control. They could have easily made it multiplatform and easily could have finished it before release. Or, they could have just made TS4 and been done with it.

foxhound_fox

free radcial are the same idiots who made timesplitters a fps without a jump can we say crap?videogamesdead6

[QUOTE="videogamesdead6"]free radcial are the same idiots who made timesplitters a fps without a jump can we say crap?Wasdie

Developers blaming PS3 development difficulty on Haze coming out horrible? Well according to an entire thread of Cows I spoke with a few days ago; there are never good excuses on the developers end and it is always the developers fault if a game encounters problems.

Development difficulties are irrelevant, it is always the developers fault they encountered problems, it's their job to make games after all.

Right Cows?

(not that I agree with you...)

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Wasdie

All those games have big funding behind them and bioshock had over a year and that wasn't capgods first game on PS3, so I think they knew what to do by then..

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Didn't stop Killzone 2.

Wasdie

I said earlier that it was DC from free radical :|

Its their fault for thinking that crap up :P. I was simply pointing out that using a first party game as grounds that the dev didnt have problems isnt really fair, now had you said the games you listed just now, i wouldve agreed with you. Geez. system wars really IS serious business :|

Dead Space

Wasdie

Sorry, but I keep seeing people list Dead Space as a equel cross platform title and it simply isn't. Dead space suffered from really bad shadow banding in the PS3 version; which simply didn't exist in the other versions,

PS3

360

PC

All those games have big funding behind them and bioshock had over a year and that wasn't capgods first game on PS3, so I think they knew what to do by then..

Espada12

And what was stopping Haze? Its not like Free Radical is some no-skill developer and Ubisoft is poor...

Face it, the PS3 didn't stop them from making a good game, they stopped themselves from making a good game and now are blaming the PS3.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

All those games have big funding behind them and bioshock had over a year and that wasn't capgods first game on PS3, so I think they knew what to do by then..

Wasdie

And what was stopping Haze? Its not like Free Radical is some no-skill developer and Ubisoft is poor...

Face it, the PS3 didn't stop them from making a good game, they stopped themselves from making a good game and now are blaming the PS3.