IGN MAG Review

IGN Says: MAG Does a lot of things right - it's a solid shooter, and has shown that having a large number of players doesn't have to choke up the gameplay. Unfortunately, it didn't show that more players means more fun. Bugs, imbalances, and a lack of content for the price make what could have been an excellent game just decent

The story is too old to be commented.
LordMarius4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

"MAG Does a lot of things right - it's a solid shooter, and has shown that having a large number of players doesn't have to choke up the gameplay. Unfortunately, it didn't show that more players means more fun. Bugs, imbalances, and a lack of content for the price make what could have been an excellent game just decent."

Better luck next time Zipper

4618d ago
Jamegohanssj54618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Not sure if you all know this or not, but IGN actually changed the score from a 6.5 to a 7.0. Fishy.


-Alpha4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Many fanboys kept insisting that more players= better game and kept trying to spit on lower-numbered games which was very stupid of them. I take pleasure in laughing at them now.

Anyways, whether that statement applies to MAG or not is a mixed bag since the opinion is so split.

I expected higher from IGN and considering that I did believe the game would open up with more time spent with it. Regardless, it's still a good score and in no way should this be looked down upon-- MAG was never hyped to be AAA and the A-AA scores it's receiving sits fine with me and the general attitude people had before MAG came out. If I'm not mistaken, the game did not receive K2 or UC2 hype. But I hear a stampede of angry PS3 fans so I'm going to go microwave my popcorn...

A PS3 exclusive receiving under AAA is bound to be turned into a bad thing... despite the fact that not every PS3 game needs to be hyped AAA and despite the fact that MAG wasn't hyped AAA itself except by a few fanboys who think that every PS3 game has to be AAA in order for it to be a good game. It's those guys that are going to be most upset with this score.


I think it's entirely subjective. I have just as much fun with a 5 on 5 game of Halo or Uncharted 2, a 6 on 6 game of COD, a 12 on 12 game of Bad Company, etc. But in no way should people arrogantly claim that more players= more fun than less player.

People were really bashing smaller player games despite the fact that large war games and smaller games are two entirely different designed games requiring different mechanics of play.

I'm not saying 128 players on one screen isn't fun, but I don't think it's fair to say that it's objectively better or more fun than playing a game of Free For All in a smaller-numbered game.

The thing people kept saying is that MAG was going to set new standards. I think it set a new standard but it's not something that every FPS needs to hit. Again, more players doesn't mean better game. It's not like BFBC2 coming out next month is going to be inferior because it has less players-- you simply have to understand that that's how the game is built.

I generally like smaller games because it's more personal and you develop a relationship with the enemy players, but I wouldn't say that larger games are therefore inferior because it doesn't do the same. Larger games simply have different standards and achieve different experiences.

Cyrax_874618d ago

After watching that video of the 128 SVERS's stampeding, it looks ALOT more fun.

only on playstaychun4618d ago

Zipper are trying to simulate a real battlefield. I doubt you can do that with MW2 6v6 running and gunning. I dont think size is the issue here. The issue seems to be that there is a lot of love or hate for this game.

deadreckoning6664618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Great Score...if ur a gamer. If ur a PS3 fanboy...not so good.

Edit: Only a PS3 fanboy would be offended by my comment so I take it u guys are here already =D

callahan094618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Completely disagree with this review. The game is brilliant. Phenomenal level/map design (and shipped with 15 maps, all of which are absolutely huge)... great upgrade system... unique, complex and fun tactical objectives in each different game mode... cool leadership and experience point system... interesting backstory and implications of the shadow war (requires going to, but it still counts)... solid controls... good graphics and sound.

There's really nothing about this game that I would change.

I'm completely baffled at what game some of these critics were playing. How could you put time into this game and not being having a blast and find yourself utterly addicted to it? There are so many unique and impressive things that this game introduces to the online gaming arena that have never existed before. And these critics just don't seem to appreciate it. I'm totally lost. MAG is a solid 9 in my opinion, but these low-ball reviews aren't going to prevent me from continuing to be addicted to this awesome game.

Edit: I'd like to add a bit more. They gave it only a 6.5 for lasting appeal? They say that good players will reach level 60 in a week or two? Today marks a week, and every match that I've been in the highest ranked player was about level 35 or so. I checked their profiles and it says they have like 30 hours or more into the game.

This same site just gave Mass Effect 2 a 10 for Lasting Appeal! That's a great game, but a 10 for lasting appeal? It's about 30 hours long. Come on, a 10 for that, but only a 6.5 for MAG? They're obviously way off target with their estimate of how long it takes to get to level 60.

The best players, the squad-leaders, in all the matches I played this afternoon, they were in the high 20's to low 30's, and had around 30 hours of game time. Are you seeing where I'm going with this? They say that casual players will give up well before they ever get to level 60? Well, I'm a more casual player with this game, I mean the top-scorers always score about 500 points a round, but I'm not a hardcore player like them, I score about 100 points per round, and I have only put about 7 hours into the game in the week that it's been out versus the 25 to 30 hours put in by the more hardcore players. BUT, I'm still enjoying the hell out of the game.

That 6.5 for lasting appeal is an absolute joke of a score. It deserves MUCH higher.

And I'd also like to complain about the 6.5 for graphics. It's actually a really pretty game. There's so much detail in the maps! I even just noticed today that tropical birds fly around in the central American maps for Raven. The textures are sharp and the lighting is really impressive. I think it's a gorgeous game, and considering that it's an online game with 256 players makes it all the more impressive.

Seriously, what game are they playing? Not the same game I'm playing, that's for sure. Because they low-balled the hell out of this game's score from my perspective.

Digitaldude4618d ago

Maybe its not technically excellent, but its a fun game.

SniperJDC4618d ago

This game will most likely be a rental for me...what about you guys?

SOAD4618d ago

Actually, the game is a technical marvel.

128 players on screen with no lag was demonstrated in another thread, and thus, I must conclude that Zipper's netcoding is the most impressive I have seen.

I don't think there are many games that can handle that kind of player presence, even Battlefield 2 on PC has problems.

IGN must be judging this game from a different standpoint, probably just so they can find something negative about the game and lower the score.

I feel IGN has some biases, depending the on the particular reviewer.

While I'm sorry to say that I won't be getting MAG anytime soon (because I have to get GOW collection and Demon's Souls), I will say that this game deserves to be purchased by most FPS fans. This game shows Infinity Ward how it's done.

GreenRingOfLife4618d ago

Its good to see IGN waiting a few days to play the game since its online only and the true way to experience it is with 256 players. Now ppl can't argue that they didnt have enough time to review it. but it stinks it only got a 7/10 o well its a definite rent

Dragun6194618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

SVER ftw!

Sver- 128 players stampede

Anyways MAG has great potential to be a good online franchise, and does well to deliver what it promises to do, and that is delivering a 256 online tactical FPS which involves with working with your team in order to win. So far I been enjoying it and I say its worth $60 but it would have fared way better especially in reviews if it was just $40.

goflyakite4618d ago

Oh how some websites make there double standards so obvious.

Let me ask everyone a question, which game that received a 9.5 from this very same website does this quote remind you of, "Bugs, imbalances, and a lack of content for the price"?


Saaking4618d ago

Good review imo. This game always seems to be overshadowed by other PS3 exclusives, but it's good to see it getting nice scores. From the way people talk about it, I'm really tempted to buy it. Hopefully soon.

CWMR4618d ago

-"Zipper are trying to simulate a real battlefield."

Emulating real life is not what games are necessarily about. There are lots of ways games could try to be more like real life that would only make for worse games. Oftentimes when developers try to make things more "realistic" they only hurt the gameplay and the overall experience.

My favorite online game on the PS3 by far is Uncharted 2 and that is only 5 vs 5. It's not about numbers of players, it is about how fun it is.-

Eamon4618d ago

It's good to see that people have ignored the troll named Bungie.

I think you will have to be a fan of the genre to be really into MAG. I haven't tried it so I don't know if having one person control a squad of real gamers will work out since there are immature gamers out there.

Anyway, plenty of other games worth getting this year. =/

ShadowRyuX4618d ago

It is $60 for a multiplayer only game which is pretty much a first on PS3 I believe and it also offered no bundle with a mic. On top of that the variety of weapons and skills and such seemed a little shallow, at least from the beta. I can kind of understand the lack of skills, but I was actually quite angered by the lack of guns and armor for each faction.

lokiroo4204618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )


lol, priceless! 'nuff said.

UnSelf4618d ago

u give Prince of Persia a 9+ but this a 7? IGN has truly lost its way.

im done wit reviews everywhere

Bnet3434618d ago

7/10 is a solid score for MAG. After watching that 128 player video, I'll be looking out for it when it goes cheap. One thing that worries me is how long will the servers be up?

callahan094618d ago

Why do I have so many disagrees on my above comment? I think my points are all well-reasoned. Not one of the subsequent comments is addressed at anything I said, so why all the disagrees if nobody has anything to say to refute my comments?

Bigpappy4618d ago

7 is not that bad for an online only FPS. You guys say that FPS are a 360 thing, yet an online only FPS gets a decent score, from a reputable site,and you think it is not high enough. It is becoming more clear that you guys care more about the review score than your own personal judgement of the game. They gave the open beta so everyone with a PS3 got a chance to try the game if they even had a hint of interest. What I am saying is: in the end, if people like it, they would buy it (Good review or not).

Aquanox4618d ago

I hope those guys always waiting for IGN's now just get over thefact that MAG just isn't triple A.

BaSeBaLlKiD7214618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Look at Resistance Fall of Man and Warhawk, the servers are still up and running strong.

4617d ago
callahan094617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

Look, a 6.5 for lasting appeal is a joke.

They gave Darksiders a 7.5 for lasting appeal! That's a 15 hour game with no multiplayer and pretty much no reason for replay value!

Lasting appeal is a rating that's supposed to imply how long you'll be playing this game if you buy it. Are they seriously going to tell us that this game isn't even going to provide a week's worth of entertainment spread over 15 hours? Because that's what they said Darksiders provides, and they gave it a higher lasting appeal mark than this game.

For god's sakes they JUST gave the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics video game a 7.3! There is no way that's a better game than MAG. There's no way it deserved a higher score in graphics and lasting appeal, especially, except somehow it got higher scores in both categories. Seriously. Compare the graphics in the two games. MAG not only looks better, but it looks better while being a 256-player online FPS. You can't honestly think that IGN is being fair, here.

Let's see, they gave No More Heroes 2 a 9.0 for lasting appeal, while in the same breath calling it a 12 hour long game. A 6.5 for MAG's lasting appeal?

I could go on, but what's the point, really?

raztad4617d ago

hehehehee Awesome review. /s

I'm off for some Domination! RAVEN is finally getting on its own, almost blew SVER out of the water few minutes ago.

All MAG haters can have fun playing with reviews.

A Cupcake for Gabe4617d ago

Well if MW2 didn't come out, MAG would of gotten a higher score. I think most shooters will suffer from here on out cause every website can't help but to love MW2 and use it as standard for the rest. The odd thing is, MW2 is a broken pile of crap and MAG isn't.

I don't get it. Maybe I just like innovation.

Chubear4617d ago

Keep playing reviews haters while the PS3 base are enjoying an experience no other console has ever seen virtually lag free. Now go munch on some grass and pray to the almighty metacritic. :D

One year from now, some of the haters will go buy MAG and go "OMG, I can't believe I listened to the reviews when I could have been enjoying this a long time ago" Yeah, have fun hating fellas lol

Lifendz4617d ago

Almost hit agree on your comment. Then I caught your name. Keep it up though.

Not a bad score for MAG. After they patch it a few times and address some minor concerns it sounds like it could be great.

sikbeta4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

lol @ THIS:

"about damn time for the IGN review"

Excuse me WHAT? IS a Review made by GOD or something?

delusion-guy has not limits lol

Anyway, WHO FVCKING CARES If The Game Is Not a 10/10 When everyone is ENJOYING The Game

MAG is Awesome and a Review can't change that, WHO in Hell said that a Very Fvcking Awesome and Enjoyable Game needs a 10/10

If you buy MAG, you'll not regret the Purchase

Peace Out

Blackfrican4617d ago

Games without single players get blasted by reviewers. Shadowrun shared a similar fate on Xbox360 and was extremely fun to play.

Chubear4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

IGN actually rated MAG a 6.6 but then recently changed it to 7.. what happened? a typo? an initial error of some sort? no, they accessed the crap they were about to get and adjusted the rating. Why? cause it all doesn't matter. They just manipulate the young gaming community cause they know they can.

So it was a 6.5 before and then 5minutes later it's become a 7, wow, magic.

Doesn't matter if it's given a 10 or a 2, if you actually listen to review gaming sites cause you think they are "professional" gamers then you're a dumb assed sheep. No other way to put it. You drink acid if you were told it tastes good and enough people do it too.

ScoobyDrew4617d ago

hey, i thought this was a pretty fair review, if anything though MAG just needs some fine tuning to make this more fun... until then it'll be bad company 2 'ery day

STK0264617d ago

I have the game, and I can't understand how anyone could rate it lower than 7 or higher than 8 out of ten. Let me explain myself, the shooting works, but is nothing spectacular, the graphics are nice and clean, obviously MAG doesn't look like Uncharted 2, but it has huge environments, a somewhat good draw distance (despite the pop-ins and the shadows when sniping) and up to 256 players. The lack of maps really hurts the game, they'Re mostly well designed, although it does seem like they are not perfectly balanced. The game would really need another set of maps, preferably free of charge, unless Zipper wants to fragment the user base, like in WarHawk.

I still don't exactly understand why we can'T create atleast 3 accounts, inn order to have a character for each faction, having 2 PSN accounts, I could create myself two characters, but I just don't understand why I can'T simply create more characters. It feels like Zipper didn't want us to fully experience the 3 factions, which is a shame, since all three have different weapons. Some could say that Zipper wanted the player to feel connected with their faction in the shadow war, but all three of them are so shallow and only have a small background, it's actually hard to care about your faction (atleast I'm having trouble with it).

Another thing about MAG, it feels like this game was meant to be released 3-4 years ago. Small details, like seeing your hands when going down a ladder, better player animation (I'm referring to your hands, not the enemy or ally), etc. Like I said, small details, but things I expect from my FPS these years.

In the end, I'm really enjoying MAG, and can'T see why someone would rate it under 7 out of ten, considering just how fun the game can be, but I also can't understand how one would rate it higher than 8, seeing this game is flawed and suffers from a lack of content. All in all, in my opinion, MAG is a great game that despite its somewhat generic look can provide a unique experience at best, and feel like a poor man's battlefield at worst.

Red Panda4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

Good game, nothing more, nothing else matters. End statement!

ArmrdChaos4617d ago

Quick on the edit...better. Appreciated.

ThanatosDMC4617d ago

Most if his reviews are about complaints. If that was him in the video, you can tell how much he sucks. He lobbed a nade at his own teammate at a foot's distance.

I got better at it in a couple of hours and dying is not so bad when you have teammates to resuscitate you. But then again my KTD is almost becoming more and more 2:1.

Grenades arent actually overpowered. You can survive a blast but probably die if you're closer to the epicenter of the explosion. It's the poison gas grenades he should talk about. Those things could slaughter a whole squad hunkering down to protect an objective in a pretty wide space. Spam healing isnt strong enough to outlast two gas nades.

I'm surprised he didnt complain about how underpowered RPGs were vs APCs or HumVs.

Rampant4617d ago

Didn't they review Lost Odyssey like a few years ago?

mopground4617d ago

ahh reading your comments always reminds me of how hopeless the human race is

Jamegohanssj54617d ago

I haven't purchased MAG yet, but I probably won't until I complete my backlog. The most recent game I have is Demon Souls.


The Happy Baby4617d ago

because the game is "decent" and a 7 is a "decent" score. 6.5 is kinda lame. 8 is good. 9 is great. 10 is awesome.

Hoggy19834617d ago

Quick question, why would IGN lie? Secondly, its just an opinion, as are all the reviews. If you think its great then thats just as valuable opinion here on N4G. However, the consensus seems to be its a 7-8/10 which is still pretty good.

What Im excited about is who will take this concept on and add in all the trimmings to make it 10/10 whether that be Mag 2, Killzone 3 etc or a new IP.

nycredude4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

For all you clowns who haven't and have no intentions of ever playing the game yet continue to be in all the review threads commenting and preaching like reviews are gospel, please just get the fcvk out of here. No one cares. The only reason why people don't have fun in this game is it is hard and does not cater to the cod fans. You CAN't run and gun and frag faces and tea bag on your own. This is different breed of online shooters, and requires patience, fortitude, and skills, something I am sad to say most gamers, especially spoiled reviewers lack in spades this gen.

It isn't for everyone and thus will be hated on and loved equally, but make no mistake this is a more than solid experience for the gamers looking for something new and challenging and an experience unlike anything out at the moment.

Once again if you don't like the game fine but come on with the hate already. Personally I have put more hours in and have had infinitely more fun with this game than I have COD MW1 and MW2 put together just in this weekend alone. And that is considering I played COD 4 MW 1 and 2 sp twice and some mp.

Also wtf is up with all these reviews complaining about bugs and glitches and scoring this game low on graphics. IMO, considering all the chaos in domination and the player counter and a smooth framerate and lag free I think this trumps COD. How come they gave cod MW 9.5 in graphics and never mention the bugs, glitches, lag, etc.

Bottom line is those hating on MAG are all COD fans. Just read the reviews and you know it. They downplay Mag's player count, making excuses for low player count (COD), talk about minor bugs a (COD gets a pass), say it isn't fun (Too hard for them, COD is easy).

I bet if the next cod comes out with 100 player count it will be trumpeted as the next best thing to hit fps and is innovative beyond compare and it rapes every fps ever made in the whole universe and beyond!

y0haN4617d ago

Who played the beta and didn't see it coming? People expect Zipper to deliver.. they should have just done SOCOM Confrontation.

Hoggy19834617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

What are the game modes like on this? Do they have non respawning types? I know that if you die earlier it could get boring waiting for the next game or leaving however it would add some great realism to the battlefield. With regards to this, the idea of a "defend the fort" mission is really appealing (in my mind at least)

For example- 100 players defend a fortress. 156 players try to get in and take control. No respawning.

Proxy4617d ago

This game goes up .2 points for every hour you play.

otherZinc4617d ago

This game sucks & not 1 reviewer wants to give this $9.99, PS1 looking, 1 dimensional game a friggin 2 out of 10!

+ Show (46) more repliesLast reply 4617d ago
only on playstaychun4618d ago

6.5 Graphics
It runs 256 players smoothly, but at the cost of graphical detail. Texture pop-up at middle range.

How can they give this 6.5? Didnt they just give a 9.5 to MW2 which barely looks better than MAG and hasnt got 256 players and doesnt even run smoothly??

6.5 Lasting Appeal
You can feasibly reach the level cap within a week or two, though more casual players will likely quit in frustration before then.

Im sorry but I think many ppl who actually enjoy games like MAG will keep returning to the game for as long as they reach lvl 60 for all the PMCs, like I will.

Dissapointed with a 7 because this game doesnt deserve it. Think it is easily an 8 and after 1-2 yrs this game will be a blast.

7.5 Gameplay
Solid shooting mechanics and interesting maps are hampered by bugs and too many hazards on larger game modes.

Sorry what bugs? You sure they arent review MW2?

-Alpha4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Probably technical bugs-- I don't think MW2 had any major MP bugs that were noticeable on the surface-- remember that this is a MP only game so it's going to be more criticized than MW2's MP.

Are you talking about hacks and glitches? Again, MW2's MP was touched lightly by reviewers. I guarantee you that if anybody spent time with MW2's MP extensively they would sh*t all over it.


It really is. But MW2 was judged on co-op, MP, and story. It lead to easier reviews. MAG is a MP only game so all the focus is on the MP so reviewers end up spending more time on the game and becoming a little harsher.

Unicron4618d ago

Which is unfortunate, as MW2 has proven to be one of the most glitchy online experiences ever.

only on playstaychun4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Well I have played MAG for about 5hrs, I am level 17 with SVER, and I am pretty sure that the game isnt "hampered" by bugs. Very little to no lag and game runs rly smoothly. Cant say that the hit detection and animations are great, which they arent, but they do the job.

On the other hand I have actually just played MW2 today and MAG easily runs much more smoothly than MW2. Eventually MAG might have some problems with keeping the same performace but Zipper have really put out a solid online game.

frostypants4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

MW2's single player was arguably it's WEAKEST aspect. It was short and it was cheesy. On that alone, it was an 8 at best. I disagree that reviewers of MW2 were focusing on the single player...if they were, the scores they gave it are indefensible. Nobody bought it for the campaign, and it would have sold just as well without it. Half of the people on my friends list haven't even completed the campaign portion. Some haven't started it at all.

simplyRealistic184617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

this is what it so hypercritical of ign, i pretty sure mw2 i had more bug then mag, but yet it get overlook because it was a high profile game, they gave gears 2 over a 9 when their multiplayer were unbearable

ThanatosDMC4617d ago

MAG has bugs??? I havent noticed them. I've been playing for more than a total of eight hours at least.

The Happy Baby4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

Jesus, ive never heard so much whiny comparisons to another game.
MW2, MW2, BOO f*ckin HOO.

According to IGN: MAG is "decent". Get over it. This doesnt mean IGN's opinion is better than your own, so if you like the game, play it and enjoy it---but dont cry about it or make envious comparisons to other games.

nycredude4617d ago


What story?


Glitchfest and lagfest, and with inferior player count.


Fun but nothing special.

9.6!!!! woohoo


What story? Online only.


Smooth as silk, very little problems and no lag, 256 player count with crazy amounts of stuff going on , all while looking every bit as good if not better than cod.


FUN! The entire game is a coop experience.


+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4617d ago
-Alpha4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

"That isn't my complaint. My complaint is that, due to their dominance, players are deleting their Raven and Valor characters and joining the winning team. As a result, most matches are S.V.E.R versus Raven, and S.V.E.R versus Valor. Rarely is it ever Raven versus Valor. This means that S.V.E.R – who were already winning most of their matches – was now also playing many more matches than either of the other PMCs, and as a result, their victories were compounding."

That was my concern too-- being able to freely switch teams, but again, MAG will live or die by the community.

People are also going to chase the trophies. Perhaps Zipper can address this, but surely there are at the very least 128 players on any given PMC.

MAG has a tally system, correct? It shows which PMC is leading the most wars?

This is probably getting people to switch. Maybe Zipper can make it so that the system factors in # of games player, # of total players on PMCS, etc. (unless it already does that).

"Bugs, imbalances, and a lack of content for the price make what could have been an excellent game just decent"

Bugs can be fixed, imbalances are definitely an issue. I heard that maps are different according to PMCs so its really crucial to have balanced maps. Though, it does add to the character of PMCs.

As for lack of content: if MAG was at $40 it would have been of great value. I do question the full price for the game simply because it lacked a story.

However I personally dont find value in even the best of SP games if they are short-- I rarely buy new SP games unless they are well over 25+ hours.

It seems more fitting that a MP-only game be worth more than a SP game just because it's more open ended.

But as IGN said, it seems that you can max out a level in 2 weeks-- which is probably another cause of so many people switching PMCs. I've always said MAG will be defined by the community so maybe after everybody has their trophies and whatnot they can settle in. However this has also been my concern because maybe people will be done with the game by then, which would lead me to resist purchasing the game in the future rather than buying it now on impulse.

I actually expected bugs to be a significant problem. There's only so much Zipper can cover with such a huge project and small problems are bound to seep through and become apparent.

Ultimately the review seems fine to me: you can't call it biased or early and in the end a review just outlines a player's experience.

Taking into consideration that this is MP only I expected a harsh review but even a 7/10 is not bad. Remember that MAG really didn't get AAA hype to begin with so you cant claim that it "failed" to meet hype. If it's one thing that gets the fans raging it's the fact that 360 fans will easy say that this game failed because it got a 7/10, but people really need to take a step back and realize that a 7/10 doesnt make a game atrocious.

@VileandVicious below

I havent played the beta. Do you have the full game? Maybe there are more bugs in it than in the beta. I was on the MAG forums and that's what one of the threads brought up. But bugs can mostly be fixed or patched-- again, this hurts MAG only because it's a MP game so the review can't make excuses for the game.

jmare4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

you can reach level 60 in 2 weeks and have any semblance of a life. In the time I played the beta the highest I got was Level 18 and that was the closed beta. I think it would take a reasonable person about a month to a month and a half to reach the level cap. But that is what veteran mode is for.

EDIT: I understand that, but from my experience it was nowhere near as easy to level up as the review makes it seem. I suppose that if you play it non-stop it could be done, but some of us have lives.

-Alpha4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

I assume he only leveled up one PMC.

But MP games are always open ended and the carrot-on-a-stick method shouldn't be used to judge longevity of MP games.

I forgot about Vet mode too.

Edit: Actually I think that's exactly what he did lol. Play non-stop.

Either that or he just simply made a calculation based on the time he has already spent on the game.

frostypants4618d ago (Edited 4618d ago )

Heh. Do your fingers have blisters after that post?

Anyways, yeah, one way to solve the imbalance is to either handicap the bigger team or reward more experience to players on the smaller/losing country. I'm assuming they aren't doing this already, of course. There's an online PC combat sim called Aces High 3 that works this way...if one side has too big an advantage, they lose access to certain planes. Works well.

Pennywise4617d ago

Alpha, I am so sick of your long winded comments about MAG. Actually, Iam sick of your constant stealth trolling of all ps3 titles.

You don't own MAG, so why don't you quit talking about it. At least anything I lend my opinion to, I speak from experience...

Ichiryoka4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

Man...I have not commented in such a long time but you said exactly what I was thinking.

Thank you!

iceman064617d ago

Is not so much with the score. In fact, I don't put so much into review scores to begin with...unless they are unanimously below standards (like HAZE for example). My issue is with the fact that it seems like the reviewer was just frustrated at being on the losing side too many times.
Balance can be an issue. It IS an issue right now. But, that is because of the evolving nature of the game. Many of the BETA players realized that SVER had an innate advantage. So, they went with that. There are MANY new players that are still grappling with the idea of why each objective is important. They are pretty much lost on the battlefield and just fight what comes.
Seeing the same map will happen. However, it won't be the same team that is attacking or defending. This, in essence, changes the way that the battle is played out. Strategies that didn't work previously might actually be fruitful...or vice versa. In that respect, it's like chess...same board....same pieces...different opponent...NEW GAME.
As for the leveling. Unless you play the game relentlessly (7-8 hrs a day), I don't see anyone getting to level 60 in a week. I was in 3 BETA phases and leveled up to 40 (which was the cap at the time), but just barely made it each time. Those phases were roughly a month. I was playing 3-4 hrs. at a time and I would say that I am an average gamer (200-300xp per round where the high was usually 500-600).
As you said, that is one person's experience...this has been mine. MAG is a fun and different experience. It's not for everybody. If you like a more strategic approach to's probably worth your time. If you are more into twitch style run and gun, you can play it and probably have fun. But, you will be surprised to find out at the end of a round that you are NOT at the top of the leaderboard.

-Alpha4617d ago (Edited 4617d ago )

Whine all you want about me "stealth trolling". I don't have the same opinion as you, cry some more because I really don't care simply because you make accusations without proof. It's very typical of people like you to simply label me a troll instead of actually ponying up to make an actual relevant response. The only troll is you, since you really don't say anything intellectual in response. What an amazingly easy world it is to just call people trolls and label them as fanboys instead of having a decent response.

I criticize the PS3, yet I also praise it. of course, you're never around when I do simply because it contradicts your assumption. And I think you know the saying about assumptions.

If you don't like what I said, then tell me what you didn't like and at least have the guts to make a counter response. Sick of me "Stealth trolling"? There's an ignore button. Use it.

Morbid Bulldozer4617d ago

Pennywise is sick of trolling? Are you deleting your multiple accounts then?

nycredude4617d ago


Serious are you going to buy this. If not just stop wasting your time. If you are not sure a word of advice do NOT listen to these reviews just rent it or buy it and play it. It's better and more fun than these reviews make it seem.

I played for about 20 hours and I am at level 24. If you are good you will level up faster. When you reach level 60 you can change factions and then start all over again. you get a trophie for reaching level 60 for each pmc. This is to motivate people to rotate to other PMCs!

People just stop putting so much stock in all the media's reviews. Remember these are the same people who gave GTA4 10s and drools at the mention of COD! If online shooters are your thing this is worth the try! It's Counterstrike + Socom + steroids!

Stop dissecting it and just play it. that is what we do right? PLAY THE GAMES!

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4617d ago
LordMarius4618d ago

Blah you can have this one bots
MAG = flop....there

Bungie4618d ago

yeah, It Only Does Everything

FLOPs included