Have you actually played the real game?  This game may not be as good as it could have been, but they did switch engines mid way through and I think they did a very good job at it all and all.  The story really picks up at the end of the second mission and by the end of the game you'll be wanting to play the next.  The game is flawed, but it has enough redeeming qualities that people should give it a rent at least.

I'm pretty sure it was leo-j. That's right up his alley.

Too Human was an unhyped game that only got noticed when Sony fans heard some early previews that were poor and wanted a game to compare to Lair.

The game did not sell well, but it did not (by any non-Sony-fanboy standards) flop.

^ LOL Riight On!! ha ha ha

MGS4 - 480k

Japans PS3 Install base (June 12th, 2008): 2.21 million

MGS4 had 21.8% of PS3 install base

Blue Dragon - 83k

Japans 360 install base (Dec 9th, 2006): 0.23 million

Blue Dragon had 36.2% of 360 install base

Whooptiedoo.

And I havent played Haze/Lair so I wont comment much, but I do know Too Human is a good game (just unrealized potental) and will have much more gaming legs because of the RPG/co-op/loot-based gameplay. Too Human is nowhere near the flop of Haze/Lair.

You know what other game is RPG/co-op/ and is loot based? Hellgate london. and that game didn't have good legs regardless of the devs that created it and the price cuts it had.

Either way, Lair probably sold around 600,000 lifetime, it would be pretty bad if TooHuman can't even pass 600k given the dev time and budget.

Okay lets try judge Too Humans success by a non-Sony Fanboy standard.

Cost's VS Profitability = You Guess

Hype Vs Actual Success = "  "

Average Predicted Sales Vs Actual Sales = " "

Microsoft Execs Faces Before TH release Vs Faces After TH = " "

Selnor: "Too Human I even expect 3-4 mill entire life and 500000 first day. ... life and over 2 mill first day)"

I could say the same for Haze then... right?

It only got recognition when horrible previews came out.

Most users on this site that were smart stoppeed thinking of this game about December after IGNs preview came out and the game was delayed.  But Too Human was hyped right up through July, when the bad previews started rolling in, then all the 360 fanboys started to say "ZOMG it wasn't hyped".  And still are, if I read your post correctly.

The truth is, this game was hyped, up until launch, with speculation of 4 million lifetime and a first day of 500k from some 360 owner.

As much as you and the 360 fanbase would like to compare this to Haze, it's a horrible comparison.

Incorrect.

Here's why.

Haze was a regular feature in the PS3 "list" thrown around whenever an Xbox 360 or Wii owner said the PS3 had no games.  It was in this list from the moment it was announced exclusive by Sony and Ubisoft, along with various utterances about Free Radical and Goldeneye.

Haze was something to be lauded by PS3 fanboys and feared by Xbox 360 owners, and this turned when it was realised it would be the sort of game that would end up on 55 on Metacritic.

Too Human was originally hyped at the 2005 (6?) E3 by Microsoft, and after a poor showing was ignored by gamers at large.  Shortly after the Haze fiasco there was a definite increase in attention paid to Too Human, but not (with the possible exception of yourself) by 360 owners.  This only intensified after the defection of FFXIII.  That was far more telling than the rantings of "some 360 owner."  Indeed, the main reason this game is a horrible comparison to Haze is that this game is significantly better

Of course, more than anything else, the real reason your post is complete and utter fail is that I DIDNT MENTION HAZE ANYWHERE!!!

You've been arguing with a ghost