Google+

MAG review

Back to Article

55 comments

  • Mr.YumYums - July 18, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    This is one of the funniest reviews I've read in a while. I know I read it back in 2010, but coming back to it now man this is gold. "killer weed maaaaaan"
  • alexkirby - May 18, 2010 2:10 a.m.

    I feel that Mag is much better than Mw2, for one because Call of Duty has been around for how long? It's about time someone made a game with a little different objective and enviroment.. With Mag you have 3 factions and many different weapon choices and in mw2 and all call of duty games for that fact have an over powering weapon in them, the sniper rifle. You can dominate the battlefield with a simple sniper rifle. Like explained in the review, mag has hardly any places to hide out and pick off a couple of people, and to be honest it said that gamesradar picks S.V.E.R over the other factions. Honestly how long did you guys sit there and play this game? A day? I've played over 300 hours and switched between all 3 factions but I wouldn't just say one faction is better than the other. Gamesradar basically trashed down an original game and said it's not worth what you pay for it, but who's to say it's not? 5 thumbs down on this review.. to sit there and say this game isn't worth the price is garbage.
  • starhaw - February 27, 2010 8:54 p.m.

    whats funny is the reviewer FAILS to mention the fact that ZIPPER is constantly LISTENING to their players, making things better and fixing problems, THEY HAVE released what 3 patches that have significantly helped the entire game, fixing problems instead of making them or ignoring them like MW2, and JUST WAIT there will be more maps on the way I MEAN COMMON DO YOU REALLY THINK ZIPPER WOULD MAKE A GAME WITH WHAT 12-15 maps (sorry if its not exact) and call it good? NO...I can assure you there will be more maps. MAG is a game you def have to get into, I mean i went over to a friends house (with my PS3)and he owns strictly a 360 but isn't a fan boy...he tried mag but didn't really get into it...his younger brother who is about 2 years younger played it and I asked him what did you think of it?, he said "ehh"...then later that day he asked HEY can I play MAG again on your PS3 and i said Yeah sure and the game GREW on him, He loves it and now is trying to convince his brother to get a PS3 with their money combined. I mean Yeah MAG isn't the best looking game but you can't just paint every little thing you see with red, you don't seem to do that with MASS EFFECT 2. Yeah its a great game but it has its major flaws just like MAG does, I expect GR to do this to MAG I really did, I'd like to see you guys give it another review in about 6 months though and see what happens.
  • keaton121 - February 25, 2010 5:13 p.m.

    good game. only problem is that some of the wepons seem genaric. this is way better than MW2 i think. i insist that people get this game only if they have a mic. bad ass game 5/5
  • rossc5 - February 24, 2010 4:13 p.m.

    Played MAG and leveled up to 10 and counting. Really like it since I have a good group of friends I made on the game. We all have mic's to which really helps. I actually prefer this to Modern Warfare 2. For me it feels like it has more strategy and teamwork. Which is lacing in some modern shooters. The only game I play as much as this is probably Team Fortress 2 (PC). If you have a PS3 I say get the game. Once you get into it you wont be able to put it down!
  • crumbdunky - February 22, 2010 2:46 p.m.

    Oh, well GR, I don't know which MAG you played or why you kept choosing to spawn away from your squad but the MAG I play is a more rewarding shooter than any of those you(stupidly, as none are even the same kind of games as all support going camping and lone wolfing unlike MAG)compared it unfavourably to. Fact is it's getting better everyday and is certainly an acquired taste(like ALL true team games from TF2 onwards)but your review really doesn't reflect anything like the current situation playing MAG. Seriously, it sounds like either you didn't give it more than a couple of hours or are just being obtuse for some reason. Anyway, can't agree. It won't be for everyone(but wasn't ever meant to be as Sony aren't stupid enough to think a squad shooter this size was ever anything but niche appeal)but, honestly, it's nowhere near as poor as GR make out. Nowhere near.
  • bayssa - February 22, 2010 5:20 a.m.

    i don't think MAG is that bad, though it's like assassin's creed a you love game, or a you hate game... for me i love it :D, btw the console war is not over we got heavy rain and God of War III coming on :P
  • najoh712 - February 21, 2010 11:59 p.m.

    i was definiatly disapointed by this game, i waited forever for it! played it, and it wasnt that good. i agree with gameradar
  • saints3429 - February 21, 2010 4:26 a.m.

    Thank u for reviewing i for one think it deserves at least a 8 but i see the main reasons y u gave it this im usually playing with a competent squad and platoon but thanks again 4 the review
  • TheWebSwinger - February 20, 2010 8:15 p.m.

    Not a fan of this article's characterization of stoners. Seriously, who eats hash cake..?
  • MateoC - February 20, 2010 5:48 p.m.

    Not much time at all. Both sides almost always head to the same area. It takes less than MW2 actually because you always have a clear idea where the other side will be. Spawn points for each time are on opposite of the objective. One side heads to the objective to destroy it while the other is spawned right by it. At most you'll spend 20-30 seconds finding someone on the other side.
  • jm42445 - February 20, 2010 1:15 p.m.

    I spend enough time running around MW2's maps looking for people...I can't imagine how long it would take on these big ass maps
  • tjkjr1992 - February 19, 2010 11:12 p.m.

    I'm happy with the game. Unlike MW2, I can play this to a degree that I feel satisfied enough with my progress. I think Zipper would do well to release the game with a headset though. When you get enough people that talk and communicate and have fun while they're playing, I find MAG more enjoyable than Call of Duty. But if you don't, you get the kamikazes and you do very poorly. Kudos to GamesRadar for holding off the review until they had time to play it.
  • aberkromby - February 19, 2010 4:06 p.m.

    Why do the larger review sites say that MW2 is one of the greatest first person shooters, while the majority of user reviews state that MW2 isnt a good game. even when compared to things like Haze Bottom line, Mag is better than MW2 for 1 reson: It works. MAG may be more generic, but its servers are reliable and contain minimal lag. The guns are generic, but at least they dont have a certain class that is overpowered. The sniper rifles are a bit weak, but you dont have assholes who think no-scoping is realistic. the melee attak is mediocre, but at least the knife range is below 5 feet. The factions are all the same, but at least it is remotely balanced. MAG simply works.
  • philipshaw - February 19, 2010 11:50 a.m.

    For what I played that seems fair, I thought it was "meh" and that only the hardcore will get into it
  • banjokazoozie - February 19, 2010 11:47 a.m.

    this game is insane!!
  • sexyman500 - February 19, 2010 7:53 a.m.

    yeah just asking wtf does troll mean? and @mateoC you said something bout GR being owned by Microsoft but i can see clearly a PlayStation official magazine logo at the bottom right of my screen?
  • MateoC - February 19, 2010 6:44 a.m.

    Also, the reviewer spent more time talking about what kind of people are talking (or not) on mics and spawn points than the actual game. This review is utter crap and should not be trusted. Go to GameSpot, they actually played the game.
  • reaperman22 - February 19, 2010 6:17 a.m.

    @xboxrulez, first of all go learn to speak and write properly and second you clearly don't love your xbox 3shitty as much as you say as you spend all your time trolling through games radar being a tosser and trying to start flame wars.
  • MateoC - February 19, 2010 6:13 a.m.

    MAG is better than most shooters. This review is fail. I mean seriously after reading the review, the reviewer basically docked it points for not being as explodey, pretty or fast as other shooters. Wow what a solid argument, it is soooo convincing. I played the game and the experience is far better than MW2, Killzone 2 or BF: BC. Why? No instantaneous deaths from headshots like in K2. It is less random than all three games, has more teamwork and most importantly it has dedicated servers where the other three do not. At most in MAG you wait 18 seconds to respawn, AT MOST and in a 20-30 minute game that isn't too long. For how far you have to go, it differs from no distance travelled to get to where you want to be to about 20 seconds to get to your desired destination. tl;dr This article failed to give a convincing argument beyond shallow reasons to say why it is not as good as other shooters. FAIL ARTICLE IS FAIL.

Showing 1-20 of 55 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

More Info

Release date: Jan 26 2010 - PS3 (US)
Jan 29 2010 - PS3 (UK)
Available Platforms: PS3
Genre: Shooter
Published by: Sony
Developed by: Zipper Interactive
ESRB Rating:
Teen: Blood, Violence, Mild Language
PEGI Rating:
16+

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.