By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
radiantshadow92 on 01 February 2010
Edit Thread
twesterm said:
Thechalkblock said:
dsister44 said:
Thechalkblock said:
I'm questioning the legitimacy of these reviews honestly. The game allows 256 players, of course it won't be perfect upon release. I think it's very possible this game will be a lot better than a big reviewer's 7.

So what are you saying? That they shouldn't review the game at all. Or that they should give it a ten because it might get better

Neither. I'm saying reviews for this game might be even more pointless than reviews usually are. Don't get me wrong, I could care less about this game; it isn't my type of thing. The situation the game's in is just a prime example of the lack of game review credibility.

Did you actually read the review?  They actually talk about how they had to wait a week so they could review the game because they didn't want to base their review on the beta and wanted to wait on being able to play the actual game with actual people with the servers open.

I don't really get your reasoning for not trusting the review.

he is saying how the game is more than likely to get patched and get better along with time as the community grows...just like the other socom game, it isnt the game game that got like a 5 on IGN anymore, its 70+ material now, so as time passes by MAG become a better game....he not saying that they shouldnt have reviewed it or anything, but that the review should not be a staple that goes along with the word MAG