MAG is an almost impossible videogame to review, simply because almost everything that is memorable and cherishable about it is down to the hard work of you, your teammates, and the silent mass of your opposition.
(MAG, PS3)
-
I agree with his point on almost impossible to review. Personally, since it's online only, it will go down to the user's experience with his squad and overall team. It could go either way.
I remember those long minutes spent watching a sniper-camping de_dust while the T's casually plant the bomb.... There's always someone who doesn't get it.
But, at least in MAG's case, if you're that person - you're the one having no fun since you'll be the one who can't level, gets killed a lot by guy with better kit, and ultimately goes away.
Nor can I. I find it funny how reviewers managed to review the game PRIOR to the public servers going online and manage to play enough of the game to write a review about it.
It would like be reviewing Star Trek Online first hour OF BETA.
Let it lauch, Play for a week. Write your opinions and DON'T give a score.
How do scores work when their such variety in games, gameplay and user experience.
He couldn't be more right when he says "impossible to review" and things like "camaraderie" definitely create some memorable moments. SVER is crazy so far after every win almost everyone starts shooting bullets into the air etc. You get to know people on your PMC throughout many many games its actually kinda cool.
camaraderie Thats what I took from the open beta,every other member of Raven was a clan member,we fought for each other in that game,and overall for everyone else in the faction.There were a good 25 thousand players all the time,and there was a cracking fight between us a Sver for the communication contract. Knowing thousands of us were fighting for it,and seeing a contract tug of war ever time I played was great feeling,I was worried no reviews were coming out,I expected solid 8's but i'm happy,and i'll get the game delivered on friday.
ddayum,its about time.. what a SOLID review guys.. now THIS is how its supost to be done.. they said it like it should be,its almost impossible to review MAG ,ESPECIALLY with a SCORE..
i think imo MAG and ALL online only games should be reviewed without a score and at least let the users review it from their personal experience.
The entire structure of MAG is very ambitious but at the same time somewhat volitile on a match-by-match basis I had this "impossible to review" feeling when I first played a little bit of the open beta, since MAG has such a heavy focus on teammate communication. Having mature, focused individuals working as team commander's and synchronized teammates who don't just go off on their own and who only worry about some Kill/Death ratio (idiots on MW2 online need to let off on that) rather than the team objective is what will make MAG matches shine the most for MAG players.
I do see it as being volatile since there are idiots who play online like on MW2 who won't even use their headsets for quality communication; some will just be idiot suburban white boys talking like they're from the hood saying "Yeah Ni**as. Y'all be little b*tches. You all are stupid ni**as who can't compete with me!"
People may complain about this new, heavy communication and heavy team-focused approach that MAG brings, but hell at least it shows that Sony isn't just "Playing It Safe" and releasing some COD or Halo clone just to appease all the detracting critics. Who will at one moment complain about wanting innovation and change within games, yet come around at another moment and complain that games like MAG don't "Feel" or doesn't "Play" like Call of Duty.
Some critics say they want innovation, yet complain when they don't get replication.
I don't think those types will last After a few weeks they will leave after they've been killed for the 1000th time because the decided to play rambo. This game just isn't for casual FPS fans, and that's fine, there are plenty of other games for them.
Dang dude, this is the second time I've seen you in a MAG article Saying that it's "not for you". If it's not for you, then why are you in all of the MAG articles?
Most Mario Games are "not for me", and it shows, because I have nary a post in any of them; unless it's for ones I like (paper mario).
And as far as "Sloppy", if you mean controls, here's a quote from the article:
"The controls are absolutely pitch perfect – they basically take their initial cue from Call Of Duty, and who wouldn’t?"
As "sloppy" as Call of Duty. :/
If you meant the "gameplay" that all depends on you; which is the crux of the whole ides of MAG. If that's the case, It's not the game, bud.
At any rate, the best quote of the review: "In one of our first online bouts, an insanely focused, obviously experienced American fellow was our squad leader in a game of Sabotage, and he flipped between three voice channels throughout the game (one of the many perks of being in charge) to guide three different factions of us grunts toward different locations on the map. When he issued orders for us all to simultaneously charge the objective, the enemy had absolutely no chance of defending against such a devilish attack. Winning has never felt so good."
THAT'S what makes MAG a great game: It's so adaptable that techniques are nearly endless for defending/attacking.
I'm still deciding between this and Mass Effect 2. Hardest decision I've had this gen.
What do you mean why am I in hear? When people flip out over it being a "non" finished and unfair, I like to shed light on the other side of the coin, that un finished or not we all got to play the core of it.
When the hell did you become president of propaganda?
Holy shi The game is sounding better and better. I love strategic game play. MAG should have play books like NFL games.
ForROME It's "not for you", we get it, you can leave now. No one here agrees that you get the gist/core of the game play from the beta alone, especially when they changed and fixed so much. http://n4g.com/NewsCom-4638...
160°
350°
0°
10°
10°
10°
Ad 
10°
I remember those long minutes spent watching a sniper-camping de_dust while the T's casually plant the bomb.... There's always someone who doesn't get it.
But, at least in MAG's case, if you're that person - you're the one having no fun since you'll be the one who can't level, gets killed a lot by guy with better kit, and ultimately goes away.
r.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
It would like be reviewing Star Trek Online first hour OF BETA.
Let it lauch, Play for a week. Write your opinions and DON'T give a score.
How do scores work when their such variety in games, gameplay and user experience.
brilliant overview imo.
Finally someone who "gets it"
He couldn't be more right when he says "impossible to review" and things like "camaraderie" definitely create some memorable moments. SVER is crazy so far after every win almost everyone starts shooting bullets into the air etc. You get to know people on your PMC throughout many many games its actually kinda cool.
Thats what I took from the open beta,every other member of Raven was a clan member,we fought for each other in that game,and overall for everyone else in the faction.There were a good 25 thousand players all the time,and there was a cracking fight between us a Sver for the communication contract.
Knowing thousands of us were fighting for it,and seeing a contract tug of war ever time I played was great feeling,I was worried no reviews were coming out,I expected solid 8's but i'm happy,and i'll get the game delivered on friday.
i think imo MAG and ALL online only games should be reviewed without a score and at least let the users review it from their personal experience.
I had this "impossible to review" feeling when I first played a little bit of the open beta, since MAG has such a heavy focus on teammate communication. Having mature, focused individuals working as team commander's and synchronized teammates who don't just go off on their own and who only worry about some Kill/Death ratio (idiots on MW2 online need to let off on that) rather than the team objective is what will make MAG matches shine the most for MAG players.
I do see it as being volatile since there are idiots who play online like on MW2 who won't even use their headsets for quality communication; some will just be idiot suburban white boys talking like they're from the hood saying "Yeah Ni**as. Y'all be little b*tches. You all are stupid ni**as who can't compete with me!"
People may complain about this new, heavy communication and heavy team-focused approach that MAG brings, but hell at least it shows that Sony isn't just "Playing It Safe" and releasing some COD or Halo clone just to appease all the detracting critics. Who will at one moment complain about wanting innovation and change within games, yet come around at another moment and complain that games like MAG don't "Feel" or doesn't "Play" like Call of Duty.
Some critics say they want innovation, yet complain when they don't get replication.
After a few weeks they will leave after they've been killed for the 1000th time because the decided to play rambo. This game just isn't for casual FPS fans, and that's fine, there are plenty of other games for them.
Saying that it's "not for you". If it's not for you, then why are you in all of the MAG articles?
Most Mario Games are "not for me", and it shows, because I have nary a post in any of them; unless it's for ones I like (paper mario).
And as far as "Sloppy", if you mean controls, here's a quote from the article:
"The controls are absolutely pitch perfect – they basically take their initial cue from Call Of Duty, and who wouldn’t?"
As "sloppy" as Call of Duty. :/
If you meant the "gameplay" that all depends on you; which is the crux of the whole ides of MAG. If that's the case, It's not the game, bud.
"In one of our first online bouts, an insanely focused, obviously experienced American fellow was our squad leader in a game of Sabotage, and he flipped between three voice channels throughout the game (one of the many perks of being in charge) to guide three different factions of us grunts toward different locations on the map. When he issued orders for us all to simultaneously charge the objective, the enemy had absolutely no chance of defending against such a devilish attack. Winning has never felt so good."
THAT'S what makes MAG a great game: It's so adaptable that techniques are nearly endless for defending/attacking.
I'm still deciding between this and Mass Effect 2. Hardest decision I've had this gen.
When the hell did you become president of propaganda?
Now pull up your dress and shut your mouth
Sounds like a guy on Planetside Werner server on the terran republic side called Ostecake or similar, great squad leader.
I was so hoping MAG would be another PS... ah well.
The game is sounding better and better. I love strategic game play. MAG should have play books like NFL games.
ForROME
It's "not for you", we get it, you can leave now. No one here agrees that you get the gist/core of the game play from the beta alone, especially when they changed and fixed so much.
http://n4g.com/NewsCom-4638...
...says the tranny with the toga and the leaf wig for a avatar.
Check out the rest of the blog - http://blog.zavvi.com/games...
High praise for Dark Void and Vancouver 2010 too.