I never knew that this game had been delayed again...

I do agree with the idea that a deleyed game can be a good game and a bad one is bad forever, but i for one would like to know what the reason is for all the delays... At this rate it will interfere with other games that i plan to buy and will thus be forgotten!

C'mon Free Radical, get this game out!

no, im out...ill see if i gets good reviews because obviously theres something wrong with the game...

I´m getting it whenever it comes

Haze is being made by the dev-team that brought us Timesplitters!... Timesplitters is an FPS franchise that is famed for it's multiple multiplayer modes and balanced and varied gameplay.

The team that first formed Free Radical consisted of 28 people, who had all worked at Rare during it's glorydays. They all worked at Goldeneye for the N64 btw!

Nowadays the team consists of more than 100 people and they are still hiring!

Free Radical has never made a bad game. Bad = lower then an 8 on gamerankings for them. (Lower than an 8 isn't really bad but you know what i mean..., they have a good backcatalog).

All this gives me the feeling that Haze CAN'T be bad!... And it has a 4 player offline and online co-op!... ! 

I don't know, the fact that it had a firm release date and even had printed ads in several magazines up to a month before that release and then the game gets delayed indefinitely really says something.

Something went terribly wrong with the game and they are frantically trying to fix that. It could be a major bug, the game could have just really sucked, or it could be any number of other things but something isn't right in that game.

-edit-

At least on the bright side they are taking their time to fix it. 

Maybe they just decided not to rush it for the holidays, and fully take their time, or maybe they just realized that it was not fun to play, or something like that

Maybe they found a massive bug. Or eehrm, Free Radical or Ubisoft thought they had to port it to X360/PC because they thought they couldn't make a profit on a PS3-exclusive.

All speculation though... 

Ubisoft would not really fear poor PS3 sales, Rainbow Six sold about 500k (320k without Europe) and of course AC has 2m. I think they delayed it from the holiday because it was not ready and it would have been killed by CoD, and they delayed it because they saw RSV 2 as their priority, and they would not want them to go head to head. Of course, now they need to get it out before R2 and KZ2

You don't indefinitely delay a game a month before release that you already have printed ads advertising that release because you're afraid of the competition.

Just off the top of my head, I would say it's one of these three things in this order:

1. The game wasn't fun down at the very fundamental basic gameplay level.
   • This seems the most likely because it makes the most sense (to me at least). The team probably knew that the game wasn't fun the entire time but they pressed on. The publisher finally had enough and rather than scrapped and gave them a time line to fix it. If they didn't get it fun in that time line, then the game would be handed to someone else that could make it fun.
2. The game is no longer exclusive and is being made a simultaneous release.
   • This makes sense too in that making the game playable and ready for the 360 would take a fair amount of time. Everything would have to be retested and how the levels are presented and everything in those levels would have to be rethought. It would take a considerable amount of time and would warrant having that firm date moved.
3. The game had frame rate and LOD model problems similar to Mass Effect.
   • This makes sense to me in a weird way. Mass Effect was a great game but it received a fair amount of criticism for those glaring problems. Bioware saw fit to release a game like that so perhaps Free Radical did as well. Free Radical saw the fallout that Bioware received and decided that it was worth the effort to fix the framerate and LOD model problems.
4. There was some major bug found.
   • This one is believable but I don't think it would be one that takes this long to fix. As more and more time goes by without word on the game, this one really does become less and less believable.  Anything major enough to give this kind of delay would have been known earlier, would have been fixed earlier, and a single bug *shouldn't* take this kind of time to fix.

 I agree, but I think under different circumstances (although probably not with FR as the dev) the publisher may have forced it out, although I think they probably could have got it done by March, could a serious bug take half a year to fix?