MAG

 PlayStation 3
  • Publisher: SCEA
  • Release Date: Jan 26, 2010
User Score
8.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 573 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 442 out of 573
  2. Mixed: 58 out of 573
  3. Negative: 73 out of 573
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. BryankK
    Jan 29, 2010
    9
    I love this game. Give you a sense of a large scale battle with an team focus. No one person can take over a game with 256 players. This game takes teamwork. Never been great at FPS, but love that I can help my team through healing and repairing.
  2. Cuban__B
    Feb 1, 2010
    9
    Very impressed. Really forces player to play a team game (whether you have a headset or not). Going off the beaten path and trying to play solo, players will quickly realize that this will usually lead to instant death and not a recommended course of action. The squad spawning further re-enforces the team work mentality. Medics to get an inordinate amount of points. The leveling system Very impressed. Really forces player to play a team game (whether you have a headset or not). Going off the beaten path and trying to play solo, players will quickly realize that this will usually lead to instant death and not a recommended course of action. The squad spawning further re-enforces the team work mentality. Medics to get an inordinate amount of points. The leveling system actually gives the users something to build towards and lets the user fully customize their characters abilities. I personally think Zipper hit a homerun. If they stick with it and release a couple of DLCs (maybe a few or maps/gun or maybe a new faction), this game will be an instant classic.… Expand
  3. DanM.
    Feb 1, 2010
    9
    Took me a while to get into it, but after investing some time into the game I can safely say I like it a lot. Lots of fun when you know what you're doing.
  4. MattN.
    Feb 1, 2010
    9
    This is my favorite shooter since battlefield 1943. Finally a game the requires be to work together for the benefit of all instead of lone wolfing it like most games. The gameplay isn't that complicated just think cod with no lag and a hit detection system that actually works. The game has only been out for a little less than a week and i have easily poured over 20 hours into this This is my favorite shooter since battlefield 1943. Finally a game the requires be to work together for the benefit of all instead of lone wolfing it like most games. The gameplay isn't that complicated just think cod with no lag and a hit detection system that actually works. The game has only been out for a little less than a week and i have easily poured over 20 hours into this game. My only complaint over this game is the fact that their are some respawn issues, but I hear that if you play with the internet plugged directly into the PS3. Heres hoping they get the few glitches in the game fixed.… Expand
  5. JoeyS
    Feb 2, 2010
    9
    As a semi-pro fps gamer, I have a ton of experience in the genre. And I have to say- this game is a home run. With all of the great games being released right now, and with mw2 in the not-too-distant past, MAG is the game always in my ps3. The graphics are just kind of... there, and yes, the factions are a little unbalanced, but the game is great. For those who claim lack of content, As a semi-pro fps gamer, I have a ton of experience in the genre. And I have to say- this game is a home run. With all of the great games being released right now, and with mw2 in the not-too-distant past, MAG is the game always in my ps3. The graphics are just kind of... there, and yes, the factions are a little unbalanced, but the game is great. For those who claim lack of content, I'm about 30 hours in and I am level 30, which is about 1/4 of the way through one of the 3 teams on the game. This game is, or ought to be, the future of fps for a while. Get it now and get in on the shadow war! And hey- bring your microphone please!… Expand
  6. GregL
    Feb 2, 2010
    9
    This game is way better than the ratings it has received. I have been around awhile, all COD's, socoms, battlefields...yada, yada. This game actually pulled me away form CODMW2 and I thought that this would never happen. Yes It does take some getting used to but the whole teamwork concept was what I was after. Most people do work together, the weapons are cool, aim is true. I believe This game is way better than the ratings it has received. I have been around awhile, all COD's, socoms, battlefields...yada, yada. This game actually pulled me away form CODMW2 and I thought that this would never happen. Yes It does take some getting used to but the whole teamwork concept was what I was after. Most people do work together, the weapons are cool, aim is true. I believe all these ratings are skewed because they were not basing this on the game on hand but the beta. I an surely attest that this game deserves at least a 9, is fun to play and you won't put it down for a long time.… Expand
  7. JeffF
    Feb 3, 2010
    9
    Anyone else find it strange how practically everyone who has played the game is giving it 8 -10s? The only thing bringing this review score down are two-year old fanboys giving it ones and twos, well, and IGN... It's hard to tell the difference between the two anymore though.
  8. BobL
    Feb 3, 2010
    9
    Wow. How many reviewers are giving this game a low rating because it might only appeal to hard core gamers and has nothing new to offer to the genre? How unfair and unprofessional of the reviewers. I mean if I was giving a review on a minivan I wouldn
  9. IsaacL.
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    i like this game and you should buy it.
  10. MArkKidd
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    Don't believe the hate. Just because a game is not CoD doesn't make it bad. Most early reviews are clearly based on the beta.
  11. JoseV.
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    If you like large scale tactical battles than MAG is right up your alley.
  12. JoshuaS.
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    This is a great game, even with the large battles, there is no lag and i can wait to get into another session.
  13. JinnyR.
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    People reviewing MAG seem to forget three main things, the fantastic moments when it all comes togther, the other roles that can be as simple as a medic to add some real depth and finally they keep mentioning 256 but forget other modes like 32 vs 32 deathmatch, they seem just as deep and there is, if anything, more strategy involved.
  14. Kyle
    Jan 27, 2010
    9
    Remarkably smooth gameplay, no lag whatsoever. The graphics are slightly dated, although they still look pretty good, and don't interfere with the gameplay whatsoever. Plain and simple, worth it.
  15. MarkD.
    Jan 28, 2010
    9
    This game isn't MW2, it's more difficult, less forgiving and way more team-based. It's a total different experience. The graphics might not be the greatest, but when you understand they couldn't make breath-taking graphics without lagging, you'll find them more than satisfying. The gameplay is this game's jewel, when you unlock the 256 mode, you'll This game isn't MW2, it's more difficult, less forgiving and way more team-based. It's a total different experience. The graphics might not be the greatest, but when you understand they couldn't make breath-taking graphics without lagging, you'll find them more than satisfying. The gameplay is this game's jewel, when you unlock the 256 mode, you'll understand that you are nothing more than an ant. You will need to fight as a team to win, without doing so, you will just die countless of times. I've played the beta more than I've played some game that I bought. I would recommend this game to FPS fans that don't just run and gun.… Expand
  16. AlexJ.
    Jan 28, 2010
    9
    This game is much better than MW2 since it focuses all it's attention on online play, but at the same time tells some what of a story with the different factions.
  17. AlexS.
    Jan 31, 2010
    9
    I think most game journalists missed something when they essentially dismissed MAG. It's exactly what I've been looking for. MW2 is too fast and twitch based. Op Flash is just broken. MAG is the perfect combo, it supports any play style and encourages tactics. And looks great, runs at a solid framerate and sounds great. Other than a few distance drawing issues with graphics, I think most game journalists missed something when they essentially dismissed MAG. It's exactly what I've been looking for. MW2 is too fast and twitch based. Op Flash is just broken. MAG is the perfect combo, it supports any play style and encourages tactics. And looks great, runs at a solid framerate and sounds great. Other than a few distance drawing issues with graphics, it's as solid as it needs to be. Most underrated game of 2010, calling it now.… Expand
  18. JedD.
    Jan 31, 2010
    9
    I can play this game for hours on end. Very team based oriented and somewhat complicated and intricate, but i like that because once u play for awhile, it becomes better. If i were a critic, i would say im disappointed on how i cannot actually controll the helicopters. I would enjoy the game more if it were divided up into different divisions such as Marines, troops, helicopter pilots, I can play this game for hours on end. Very team based oriented and somewhat complicated and intricate, but i like that because once u play for awhile, it becomes better. If i were a critic, i would say im disappointed on how i cannot actually controll the helicopters. I would enjoy the game more if it were divided up into different divisions such as Marines, troops, helicopter pilots, gunmen. But those are just ideas. Overall, it could have been a little bit more creative and diverse gameplay.… Expand
  19. ArkonBlade
    Sep 29, 2010
    9
    i dont play mnay games online longer then a week in the last 4 years . infact if i play some thing longer then 2-3 months im amazed. probibly the only 2 games i have played longer then that in the last 4 years have been gears of War for 3 years and Call of Duty 4. for 3 months. that reason being every thing is recycled its all the same run around like a chicked with your head cut off andi dont play mnay games online longer then a week in the last 4 years . infact if i play some thing longer then 2-3 months im amazed. probibly the only 2 games i have played longer then that in the last 4 years have been gears of War for 3 years and Call of Duty 4. for 3 months. that reason being every thing is recycled its all the same run around like a chicked with your head cut off and shoot every thing that moves with no real point but that. mag tries to change that . the game is one of the most team based games ive played since gears of war . in game modes like Domination where there are multiple objectives to take down and team work is key . having a good sqaud leader , platoon leader and OIC are very important . this game is as fun as the people you play with are at communication . if your team does not talk and the other team is then you will most likely loose your matches . so this game is best played with friends if you dont know any one with any on this game like me when i first got it just keep talking you are bound to find people who do and will invite you into there clan and then the game experiance becomes amazing . ive been playing this game since febuary of 2010 and will probubly keep playing it till socom 4 comes out. zipper hass been updating fairly frequently fixing all the bugs and glitches in this game they are doing a pretty decent job on it but theres still more to go . they add new content at a regualar basis. there are 13 maps if you include intrediction DLC and more coming . the right faction isnt as key as finding the right people to play with . there is a decent gun selection but i wish there was more but they do add new wepons in DLC. the balancing issues with the factions maps have been getting addressed. they now mix the maps up in sabotage for the factions. the knife has alot of issues as it will not work some times you can stab a guy in the head from 1 foot away and nothing then you can get stabbed from 50 yeards away in the body with 120% health boost and still die . i do wish that when you did domination you actaully saw the 128 vs 128 people instead its broken up into sections . so its more like 32 vs 32 . so it never really captures that feeling as you are in this grand war as id hoped it would . more vehicles would have also been nice . i would have loved to see tanks and choppers you could fly . its a thought i guess for the seqeul if they make one. Mag is a very fun game although if you dont want to talk and just want to run around like a chicken with your head cut off go play battlle field 2 and MW2. we dont want you on mag.… Expand
  20. PurpleHaze
    Aug 23, 2010
    9
    Awesome game. This game really need skill and 256 players domination matches are so awesome and what best there`s no auto-aim like modern warfare 2 + everything are balanced. This is must buy ps3 game if you like FPS games.
  21. valber
    Sep 4, 2010
    9
    esse jogo só exige uma unica ação companheirismo se você não não for desse tente ser o máximo possível para se dar bem com o jogo.Se você tentar, pelo menos, para trabalhar junto com seus companheiros de equipe e as estratégias de forma que se torna uma dasesse jogo só exige uma unica ação companheirismo se você não não for desse tente ser o máximo possível para se dar bem com o jogo.Se você tentar, pelo menos, para trabalhar junto com seus companheiros de equipe e as estratégias de forma que se torna uma das melhores experiências que você pode começar a partir de um FPS. Mesmo que o seu não é o melhor jogador de FPS, você ainda pode fazer decente e se divertir neste jogo.… Expand
  22. aspentitan
    Jan 25, 2011
    9
    This is hands down the best online shooter available on the market but be warned this is a hardcore game so don't expect to casually walk in and be a superstar. Where MAG excels is in the subtleness of the gameplay which forces you to always be aware of basically everything around you at the same time. This is what separates it from all other shooters. You are actually immersed in a realThis is hands down the best online shooter available on the market but be warned this is a hardcore game so don't expect to casually walk in and be a superstar. Where MAG excels is in the subtleness of the gameplay which forces you to always be aware of basically everything around you at the same time. This is what separates it from all other shooters. You are actually immersed in a real war with a ton of other players and have to earn your own personal greatness slowly. Even once you acheive good loadout equipment there is tons of strategy and teamwork necessary to beat the other team at whatever mode you choose to play. I can't say enough good things ahout this game it is nealy a perfect shooter in my opinion. The only reason I'm taking a point off a perfect 10 is because too many times online you get booted off in the middle of a game and this is inexcusable. Two other complaints that are common is that the game looks washed out and your teammates don't communicate. I find the washed out looks actually adds to the feel of combat and the latter is really a player problem, not a direct problem of the game. It's not hard to form a squad and avoid that problem either. In sum the scale of this game is the next level of gaming for those of us who find Modern Warfare lame and childish. Apart from disconnects the game is fps heaven. It's easy to drop in and play with great controls but also allows you to go all in and be as much of a war trooper as you choose to be. You can play casually or take the role of squad or platoon leader and set the entire strategy and communication of what is going on throughout the game. In turn this is not only a fps game is is also at the same time a real time strategy/tactical game. The brilliance is that you get to decide what you want the game to mean to you each time you play it. It is a shame people are rating the game on their own personal skill. It is hands down one of the best games out there if you take the effort to learn all its subtle aspects. It is not strictly fps, it is more than that and a lot of the negative reviews by people are basically because they couldn't get past the basics and so blame the game for this.… Expand
  23. Zeph
    Mar 27, 2011
    9
    This game is probably one of the greatest FPS games out there. It is very different in strategy than CoD. Success relies on how effective you work together, and that is one of the greatest things that you can get in a FPS game. The one issue I have about the game is... it has the stupidest and most retarded music I have EVER heard in a war game.
  24. FerPSX
    Nov 18, 2010
    9
    MAG is the best shooter, if you like strategy and team play.
    NickC says:
    This is really incomparable to games like MW2. If you play call of duty style you will hate this game die a lot. If you at least attempt to work along with your teammates and form strategies it becomes one of the best experiences you can get from a FPS. Even if your not the best FPS player, you can still do decent and    MAG is the best shooter, if you like strategy and team play.
    NickC says:
    This is really incomparable to games like MW2. If you play call of duty style you will hate this game die a lot. If you at least attempt to work along with your teammates and form strategies it becomes one of the best experiences you can get from a FPS. Even if your not the best FPS player, you can still do decent and have fun in this game.    … Expand
  25. barretxiii
    Jan 15, 2011
    9
    I was skeptical about getting MAG at first (I know a lot of people have already said that). I did my research, read plenty of Critic and User reviews, watched trailers, watched gameplay videos on youtube, and waited for the price to drop. I got very interested since the gameplay videos looked rather decent and reviews stated that the games focused on operating as a TEAM. A tactic that CoDI was skeptical about getting MAG at first (I know a lot of people have already said that). I did my research, read plenty of Critic and User reviews, watched trailers, watched gameplay videos on youtube, and waited for the price to drop. I got very interested since the gameplay videos looked rather decent and reviews stated that the games focused on operating as a TEAM. A tactic that CoD has never truly implemented. It was summer vacation in 2010 and I was getting bored playing solo games so I bought the game used for $30. A fair price at the time. I had heard of so many people joining the SVER faction and I, being a non conformist, went and joined Valor since they felt like the were the least liked of the three factions... And their theme music is like hard rock meets the Blues. When I first played a few games I felt a slight disappointment since I had been playing with people who had the game far longer than I had, had gotten well accustomed to the controls and gameplay, and who knew more about teamwork than I. Also I died repeatedly. After a few hours I got more and more into it since I had leveled up a few times giving me access to more skills and weapons. The gameplay is like CoD and also a far cry from CoD. The TEAM and OBJECTIVE focus is what makes MAG unique. By fighting with your teammates, completing objectives, and defending those objectives you get double XP. For example, an enemy kill awards 5 XP. An enemy kill in the vicinity of a prime objective awards the usual 5 XP but with a FRAGO bonus of another 5 XP. This helps encourage team based combat rather than trying to be a CoD/Halo one-man-army, charging to your death. Now it's January 2011. The game has made some incredible changes, from improving the graphical frame rates, to changing the skill and "armory" system, to adding new ways to get LOADS of bonus XP. I downloaded the massive update and Was astonished. The frame rates went from a slightly choppy and inconsistent 24-30fps to a smooth 45-60 fps. And being a later date more people had joined the game giving more people to fight and more opportunities, in general, to fight. There had also been two new games modes that had been added Interdiction and Escalation. Interdiction was like another massive Deathmatch with vehicles, while Escalation gave all three Factions a chance to fight each other at one time since all other modes only allowed two factions at a time. The skill tree and "armory" had been revamped as well so rather than having new weapons unlocked by spending skill points the skill tree has much more skills and there is another supply tab that houses all the weapons plus some new additions, as well as new gadgets and camo colors. The updates have also added new maps some of which look amazing compared to the old ones Now the game is batter than ever. Back in 2010 I would've given the game maybe a 7 because it felt like it was in its experimental stage but now I see that the developers are working to build a better FPS. Breakdown... Sound: 7, The sounds are the only things that haven't improved. Bullets still can sound rather weak. Graphics: 8, Graphics don't make a game but they help, and MAG wasn't groundbreaking, but the improved frame rates do help make the gameplay more functional. Gameplay: 10, The controls handle just like any other FPS, I don't know what the fuss is about. OK maybe a few bits are different from CoD but come on people. Open Minds please. And the fact that I have met some people that want to play as a team makes it more enjoyable with 10,000 bullets flying by my head every minute. I don't feel like some douche is going to spawn camp me every time. But you will die a lot so stop whining CoD lovers. Lasting Appeal: 9, I say 9 because while it does some things greatly it is still an FPS. You play one FPS you have pretty much played them all. But it is perpetually online gameplay with no fee. Unless you are a CoD fanatic you will come back for more.… Expand
  26. McFearless
    Oct 11, 2010
    9
    Great game. It's not perfect but for what it was trying to accomplish it wasn't far from it. It could've used better graphics but with 256 players in one match rendering in high-def could have introduced some lag (and I find it humorous that MAG has virtually no lag with 256 people whereas highly praised games like CoD virtually always have lag with no more than 20 people). Some criticsGreat game. It's not perfect but for what it was trying to accomplish it wasn't far from it. It could've used better graphics but with 256 players in one match rendering in high-def could have introduced some lag (and I find it humorous that MAG has virtually no lag with 256 people whereas highly praised games like CoD virtually always have lag with no more than 20 people). Some critics and others say that not having a campaign held this game back, but really why would you need a campaign in a game like MAG? It's meant to be large-scale, team based battle and it did just that very well. That's where the rest will draw the line. MAG isn't made for casual gamers, it's made for people who want to work as a team to achieve victory (instead of jerking off to their k/d ratio). They did force the players to work as a team in MAG and honestly, I think it was a great choice, because with 256 lonewolves running around doing nothing but worrying about kills would be a terrible game. It's also extremely well balanced, although admittedly you have to look for it sometimes. What I mean by that is, for anything (and I mean literally anything) that your enemy does, there is a counter to it. The weapons, while limited in variety, all have specific bonuses over one another which adds greatly to the balancing. Sniping actually requires you to 1) be a good shot 2)understand how to set up in a good position and 3)move after several kills. That's how sniping is supposed to be if a game is going for any realism at all. This game actually requires you to think. This is getting lengthier than I expected so I'll wrap it up with this. If you're a team or victory oriented player, MAG is a great buy for you. If you're a kill/death oriented player, stay the f*ck away from MAG and stick to the regurgitated profit based games (like CoD), because you won't appreciate anything that varies from what you're used to and I don't want to see or hear some 13 year old douche sitting in one spot trying to snipe complaining about how people can see him and how he can't get one hit kills constantly and call in a nuke to win automatically.… Expand
  27. deerosa
    Oct 14, 2010
    9
    This game is actually a team based game. MAG should have promoted this as a team based strategy game but it came across as a FPS that required you to be a straight killer. But you need to help your teammates and also capture objective. It is an objective based game that requires teamwork!

    K/D ratio is for newbs who want to run and gun, well good luck doing that in this game as you will    This game is actually a team based game. MAG should have promoted this as a team based strategy game but it came across as a FPS that required you to be a straight killer. But you need to help your teammates and also capture objective. It is an objective based game that requires teamwork!

    K/D ratio is for newbs who want to run and gun, well good luck doing that in this game as you will get owned. Healing your teammates is much more important than killing someone.    … Expand
  28. Xiphus200
    Oct 27, 2011
    9
    Even after a year MAG still remains my favorite shooter on console, I love the focus on squad based infantry combat. With a minimum of 64 players each match (before ragequits) each round in MAG feels more like a full scale assault instead of a 8v8 airsoft arena.
  29. The_Leducs
    Jan 12, 2011
    9
    Massive Action Game is exactly what MAG is. It is a little rough getting used to, as there is a steep learning curve. Once you get the hang of things it really changes. Also, Zipper has done a great job of contunually updating MAG to refine every detail. The graphics may not be the best, but that so you can go 128vs128 which is insane! If you like action or FPS's then this is for you.
  30. Celestics
    Feb 3, 2011
    9
    Frankly, MAG is an FPS game unlike many others in the world today. What takes me by surprise is the reality of the battles and the intuitive style of gameplay. The main aspect of the MAG is its emphasis on the team rather than the individual, and I say this truly adds to the gameâ
  31. X-Abrupto
    May 8, 2014
    9
    So, yeah, MAG is dead. Its servers have been down for a lil' while already so why am I wasting my time typing a review for a game nobody will be able to play? Because MAG was a pioneering, underestimated FPS and it deserves at least a few minutes of my time, for posterity.

    Since this game is now dead, I'll write a review but I'll also add my little story concerning the game and why it    So, yeah, MAG is dead. Its servers have been down for a lil' while already so why am I wasting my time typing a review for a game nobody will be able to play? Because MAG was a pioneering, underestimated FPS and it deserves at least a few minutes of my time, for posterity.

    Since this game is now dead, I'll write a review but I'll also add my little story concerning the game and why it ultimately failed to find its way in the very tight and ruthless FPS market which is almost under the complete grasp of two gigantic franchises, Battlefield and Call of Duty.

    I got the beta of MAG before its release. I immediately fell in love with a few aspects of the game. The first one was the whole teamwork concept. We're still in the prehistoric age of online gaming. Most players who play shooter games will toss aside the whole teamwork aspect, going in like Rambo. Well, MAG forced you to work with other players in order to achieve victory. That wasn't new for the genre, but the fact that you had squads and platoons, the vast use of headsets and the respawn which had a countdown so that you could reappear with your squadmates all encouraged and enforced teamwork.

    The second thing that really got me interested was the overall difficulty of the game which was due to its realism. Once again, teamwork was essential here if you wanted to survive. Also, you had to aim at the right body area to kill someone effectively. Most shooter games sure will make you deal more damage with head shots, but many will allow you to kill someone with a single sniper bullet in the foot and that's something I always hated - it removed the realism I was looking for.

    MAG was not an ordinary shooter. Heck, I'm not even sure you could see it as a FPS because it was so different from the other FPS at the time. The main reason for this was the vast amount of players who would kill each other in each and every game. With over 200 players simutaneously, this game was more of a war simulation than a video game to me.

    Another thing I loved was the fact that the game didn't really reward you for killing people. Sure, you'd get experience for kills, but in order to win, you had to destroy or conquer objectives which forced you to come up with strategies. You couldn't camp in this game and be part of the victory effort at the same time.

    When the game was released, it faced some harsh criticism. The thing is, many so-called pro reviewers played the beta and hypocritically wrote their review on the real game that they barely played. I've noticed a trend in pro video game reviews ( especially with IGN ) where they want to release their review ASAP ( to get the upper hand against other video game websites ) and they will often base themselves on betas... So yeah that's my opinion for the early and bad reviews of MAG.

    The critics of this game hurt its sells for sure but MAG wasn't perfect either. There were 3 factions in this game and one called SVER was overpowered for a very, very long time. Not only were the weapons better but the maps were strategically easier to defend as a SVER whilst the RAVEN faction was the complete opposite.

    The whole idea of factions was terrible. It split players in 3. If a friend chose to join VALOR and you were in SVER, you couldn't play with him, you were forced to play against him. They should've given up on factions and focused on clans instead.

    Zipper put a lot of effort into improving their game based on the gaming community. I have to give credit to them, because I think they spent a lot of time ( and money ) on patching it up. In the end, they kinda got rid of part of the faction problem by allowing, example, RAVEN players to defend maps of SVER. They did their best to recalibrate overpowered guns - unfortunately, to the point of nerfing some of them.

    The main flaw with this game was not the number of players ( I've rarely seen a laggy game despite playing with people from Japan, Australia, France, Brazil, etc. etc. ), but the size of the maps. They made the maps so huge that even if there were tens and tens of players, you would sometime have to run for an extended period of time before you actually encountered an enemy. All they had to do was to keep the same number of players but reduce the maps. This would've led to more action and less dull moments, especially after you respawned.

    This game was not only a pioneer in the number of players ( I'm sure this will be a norm in the upcoming years ), but also in the whole military hierarchy department. Squad leaders, platoon leaders and officers in command were ordinary players like you and me who had more experience than others and were given some extra power to influence the course of the battle. Once you were one of those, you could really tell that a good leader in this game was often the reason for a victory or a defeat. Battfield 4 recently implemented a similar concept in their game so I think people have noticed the potential of leaders in FPS games.    … Expand
  32. MikeH.
    Jan 30, 2010
    8
    After a week of solid play, MAG is proving to be a lot of fun. Its squad-based approach to combat is way more engaging and rewarding than the host of other "Rambo-Style" run-and-gun shooters out there. When your teammates are communicating and working as a unit, the fights are AWESOME! Unfortunately, if you get stuck in a squad with a bunch of tools, the gameplay quickly becomes After a week of solid play, MAG is proving to be a lot of fun. Its squad-based approach to combat is way more engaging and rewarding than the host of other "Rambo-Style" run-and-gun shooters out there. When your teammates are communicating and working as a unit, the fights are AWESOME! Unfortunately, if you get stuck in a squad with a bunch of tools, the gameplay quickly becomes frustrating, because opting to go solo will just end up getting you killed. This isn't MAG's fault though... It's the reality of the online fps genre. While I don't miss having a standard -or garbage- single-player campaign/story/filler mode (I'm looking at you MW2), I do think that MAG's training mode could have been better. Very few of the strategies and game mechanics are fully explained before entering battle. Even fps vets will probably feel a little lost the first few times they do sabotage, acquisition, and domination matches, and noobs will run around like chickens with their heads cut off. More detail would have been helpful for getting your whole squad up to speed... Finally, my only real gripe with MAG has to do with skills and loadouts. In my opinion, if you want to specialize as say... a direct-action soldier, you will probably be using heavier gear than any of the other "classes", but will be stuck with the same weight cap as everyone else. It only seems natural that if you want specialize in some way or another, you should have some perks to help get the most out of your character (for example, more grenades for commandos, or more mines for field-support, or greater carrying capacity for direct-action). I don't understand why they didn't implement anything like this. All in all.. This is a great game! It is about tactics, not flash. And I hope to see all you campers soon!!!… Expand
  33. QuinnH.
    Jan 26, 2010
    8
    A solid, teamwork-based FPS, MAG's control scheme will cause some stumbling, but the leveling system, expansive maps, and immediate rewards for support roles can keep casual and more team-oriented players in their seats for hours.
  34. MatteoM>
    Jan 27, 2010
    8
    this is a good game but the weqpons aren't good and the veichle is very hard driving but is a good game and more large
  35. MichaelD.
    Jan 27, 2010
    8
    nothing special besides player count. more customization would have been better. will get better as community matures.
  36. JohnT.
    Feb 1, 2010
    8
    It took me a little bit to get into. Once I leveled up some and my friends were playing with me I really into it. I 've read some reviews that there is never an epic moment. When playing Domination after points A and B have been taken over, all players must go to C. Capturing C with only seconds left can become very intense when both teams are giving it their all. Side-note: people It took me a little bit to get into. Once I leveled up some and my friends were playing with me I really into it. I 've read some reviews that there is never an epic moment. When playing Domination after points A and B have been taken over, all players must go to C. Capturing C with only seconds left can become very intense when both teams are giving it their all. Side-note: people giving this game anything lower than 5...WTF! No matter how much you dislike this game, it is nothing lower than a 5. I have a feeling that this game will only get better over time. I am happy with my purchase.… Expand
  37. Tom
    Feb 2, 2010
    8
    At first, I found the game to be pretty "meh". However, after putting some time into it and leveling up some to unlock some gear, I really started to enjoy it. It keeps up quite well with the online considering the scale of the game. There are some interesting elements as far as unlockables and game modes, but not a tremendous amount of innovation. They pretty much take what others have At first, I found the game to be pretty "meh". However, after putting some time into it and leveling up some to unlock some gear, I really started to enjoy it. It keeps up quite well with the online considering the scale of the game. There are some interesting elements as far as unlockables and game modes, but not a tremendous amount of innovation. They pretty much take what others have done before them and tweaked it a bit, not that its a bad thing. There seems to be a lack of maps, probably due to the money to be made after sale with DLC. My only big gripes are that there are some choke points coming out of spawns where snipers on the other side of the map tend to have a clear shot at, and you know how frustrating it can be to have some skill-less pansy camped out on the other side of the map cheesing his way to a good score. There are also a few bugs that seem to take place, mostly with respawning. At times I get stuck on the respawn screen and the respawn clock will just keep resetting it self, 4-5 times. Ive also had an issue where I just couldn't respawn at all, with no clock to speak of at all. Overall, I think the good far outways the bad. Some of the negatives reviews Ive read on here sound like some of these people haven't even played the game. At least or more than an hour before passing judgment.… Expand
  38. JoaoS.
    Jan 27, 2010
    8
    not perfect,not best graphics but have the rest,good online,good shooter and very lot of fun.;)
  39. ChaseF
    Feb 1, 2010
    8
    My vote says it all. If you like tactical and strategic based FPS's, this is your game. If you like to run and gun and play individually on a game like COD MW2, this is not your game.
  40. JonH
    Mar 5, 2010
    8
    I loved this game, but the story mode can be boring sometimes. I'm glad I got it.
  41. PeterD.
    Jan 29, 2010
    8
    This game is great in so many ways, yet like all other games, it has downsides. Where the Shooting, leveling, tactical and layout systems and mechanics all work tiptop, and are solid to the core, there are a 2 things that bother me. 1 is a very small issue, and thats graphics and animations. it has a few hicups, for example when your character pull his weapon towards his shoulder to aimThis game is great in so many ways, yet like all other games, it has downsides. Where the Shooting, leveling, tactical and layout systems and mechanics all work tiptop, and are solid to the core, there are a 2 things that bother me. 1 is a very small issue, and thats graphics and animations. it has a few hicups, for example when your character pull his weapon towards his shoulder to aim down sight, the animation is halved, so instead of either doing it instantly, or performing a full action(take for instance call of duty: Modern Warfare 2, an example most can relate to) and the other graphics arent so great, with a bit of popins along the way. Now that is a tiny issue that i can look away from, but looking at the wider perspective, im sure there are other who cannot. the final problem is the communication.very few has a microphone, and even fewer has the connection speeds to pronounce anything but gibberish. the preset commands are also a little scrapped, only telling you where to go, and does not allow your squad leader to put down more advanced maneuvers (put a mine here, for example). other than that, shes a sturdy horse this one, a definite lookie if you are into large scale warfare.… Expand
  42. BrandonS.
    Jan 31, 2010
    8
    To be frank, it's for people who look for a deeper FPS experience. Not in a sense that you have more tools or it's more complex because it's not. It's deeper in a sense that the fight demands more time, more awareness, more cooperation. Today's typical FPS game doesn't require any of that. So when typical FPS junkies jump in, they loose interest. You have to To be frank, it's for people who look for a deeper FPS experience. Not in a sense that you have more tools or it's more complex because it's not. It's deeper in a sense that the fight demands more time, more awareness, more cooperation. Today's typical FPS game doesn't require any of that. So when typical FPS junkies jump in, they loose interest. You have to walk in. You have to be willing to cooperate. You have to be flexible and patient. Then you'll get your fun. And you'll get a lot of it.… Expand
  43. pre_-cision-_
    Aug 6, 2011
    8
    Having played the MAG beta to much I never purchased this game at launch. Well here I am now and well this game is really underrated still to this day. However the only good gamemode in this game is the 256 domination matches hence the reason you would want to buy this game to begin wtih for the large scale warfare. Im being serious tho, every other gamemode is complete crap.
  44. The_Schnelks
    Aug 29, 2011
    8
    Overall MAG is a much better game now than when it was first released. I got it at launch and I would have initially given it a 6.5. Now I would give it an 8-9. Don't read any of the initial reviews from the release. The game is totally different from then. The skill tree is huge, with so many skills that even with 70 points (level 70, highest level) with each skill worth 1 point, youOverall MAG is a much better game now than when it was first released. I got it at launch and I would have initially given it a 6.5. Now I would give it an 8-9. Don't read any of the initial reviews from the release. The game is totally different from then. The skill tree is huge, with so many skills that even with 70 points (level 70, highest level) with each skill worth 1 point, you can't get them all. There is now a currency system that allows buying weapons, equipment, accessories, uniforms, etc. Maps are much more balanced now that any faction can attack or defend any map in any game type. There are 5 game types, with two game types available as DLC. One is free, the other is 4.99. Both are worth it, but they don't normally have high traffic.

    The gameplay is good, lag is non existent. My only gripe would be that SVER seems to have markedly better players. At first I had attributed this to map imbalance, but with the changes this can't be true anymore. The other PMCs (Raven and Valor) seem to have less skilled players and playing with them can be frustrating. The developer has no control over who/how many join which faction. I think that many of the reviewers here started with Raven or Valor, struggled hard, and gave up. Those that stick around will find a game that has good team based gameplay with plenty of skills, weapons, and maps to stay interested. Just be aware, if you join Raven or Valor, be prepared to be challenged. I've played with all three, and am finally with SVER after playing through the other two. SVER wins most matches, and dominates some. If you think you have what it takes, play Raven or Valor, join up with friends and prepare for the largest maps and games ever. Just be aware that its not COD Black Ops with smaller maps and more intense close action. With this many people, you are going to get killed sometime by the fact that you are outnumbered. COD Blops is a game where you can definitely succeed on your own. In MAG, even if you are not communicating (no headset) you can still follow squad objectives to help the team and score more XP. If you start out, with no skills, and try to run in guns blazing all the time you will get frustrated. I don't think all gamers really even want to play team based games, they just want high kills and to "pwn". For those that want more, try MAG. At the price the game is at now, you don't have much to lose.    … Expand
  45. rmdashrf
    Sep 26, 2011
    8
    This was a fantastic experiment in large-scale FPS action. It shines in rewarding team coordination, and in capturing the scale of its largest battles. A fundamental flaw that was never addressed was that MAG locked a player into a faction (one of three), and gave every incentive for the most competitive to gather together in one of them. There was no balancing mechanism, and so SVERThis was a fantastic experiment in large-scale FPS action. It shines in rewarding team coordination, and in capturing the scale of its largest battles. A fundamental flaw that was never addressed was that MAG locked a player into a faction (one of three), and gave every incentive for the most competitive to gather together in one of them. There was no balancing mechanism, and so SVER became, and remained, the "easy mode" for MAG. The oft cited map and weapon inequity issues are minimal or nonexistent; the fundamentals of this game are excellent, and if they'd added a real incentive to balance factions I would still be playing it.… Expand
  46. Greenfox
    Feb 1, 2013
    8
    This game could have been great, but it relies too much on team-work. For example, many times you have to defend or secure an area. If your fellow squad members ignore you or don't have a mic, you can't win. You find out fast that trying to lock down an area by yourself when 12 people are attacking is impossible. This along with the fact that half of the people playing are around 12This game could have been great, but it relies too much on team-work. For example, many times you have to defend or secure an area. If your fellow squad members ignore you or don't have a mic, you can't win. You find out fast that trying to lock down an area by yourself when 12 people are attacking is impossible. This along with the fact that half of the people playing are around 12 years old and simply try to kill people, makes winning difficult. In order to enjoy playing this game, you need friends to play with you.… Expand
  47. MarkH.
    Feb 1, 2010
    7
    First of all, I have a lot of experience with these types of games. I played hundreds of hours in both Battlefield 2 and 2142 on the PC, so I have some high expectations for team based games. It's a good game for anyone who enjoys teamwork. I would like to say that aiming in this game is EXTREMELY hard on a regular TV. I upgraded to an HDTV and HDMI and the difference in aiming was First of all, I have a lot of experience with these types of games. I played hundreds of hours in both Battlefield 2 and 2142 on the PC, so I have some high expectations for team based games. It's a good game for anyone who enjoys teamwork. I would like to say that aiming in this game is EXTREMELY hard on a regular TV. I upgraded to an HDTV and HDMI and the difference in aiming was phenomenal. It completely changed my opinion of the game. Please consider this before buying. Overall the game is fun, but you do need to be with a good squad, and a good team. However, the game does suffer some balancing issues. SVER has more players (people from beta realized that SVER maps are better, and also several game stores had preorder incentives for SVER), leading to more wins towards the "shadow war". (They get more matches). SVER's maps are also easier to defend than others, leading to more wins on their part. As a result, their team has more high level people. It's a snowball effect, with SVER getting better and better. This balancing issue needs to be fixed. (I personally play Raven full time, but I also have played SVER) It is kind of annoying how you can't switch sides, (yes, you can only have ONE character when you start) but it also prevents everyone from switching over to SVER. Also, the system for upgrades is by spending points, but you can only relocate those points by earning "respec points". It makes you think before you spend points, but the system is pretty unforgivable with testing out new weapons, as you will need to spend the points to respec. Really the balancing issues are all that is wrong with this game. I have a lot of fun with it, it can be very frustrating at times, but I still enjoy it. If you don't like working with other people, don't bother picking up this game.… Expand
  48. IanP
    Jan 31, 2010
    7
    Nowhere near as good as Killzone 2 or CoD. Resistance 2 online is slightly better too!! This is very much Bad Company with 256 players - which may cause the makers of BC to sweat, what with BC2 out soon!! But it is fun and worth checking out if you can find it cheap!!
  49. YarekG.
    Jan 26, 2010
    7
    Nothing special execpt the number of players. But MAG do it well lag free and interesting scenario. Must for ps3 owner
  50. Entropia
    Jan 17, 2011
    7
    I am not used to play multiplayer fps games but I must admit that I have enjoyed this one. But even with that I agree with most people that says that the contents is not enough and besides I find sometimes pretty boring to die so often (but I understand that this is a problem of my lack of skills).
  51. horne242
    Oct 10, 2011
    7
    I really wanted to love MAG. As in, by now I've devoted a great deal of time to progression and unlocking, just to get a real insight into all three factions. the good news is, its a deep game, progression of sorts is never ending, with a (potentially) constantly evolving conflict. the key word there is potential, and that's where the cracks start to show. MAG felt more like a proof ofI really wanted to love MAG. As in, by now I've devoted a great deal of time to progression and unlocking, just to get a real insight into all three factions. the good news is, its a deep game, progression of sorts is never ending, with a (potentially) constantly evolving conflict. the key word there is potential, and that's where the cracks start to show. MAG felt more like a proof of concept, a taste of something grander in a stale genre. I just hope lessons are learned for the next installment as the combination of 50%+ sniper teams, exploitable spawn points and dart control system make this a hard game to truly enjoy...… Expand
  52. Unknown22
    Dec 28, 2011
    7
    This game is pretty good, but it was a bit boring. Still it is better than playing mw3, and black ops. I thought this game was garbage at first, but i wasn't. It was so much fun.
  53. gregthreet
    Dec 22, 2012
    7
    MAG works well and is fun even to today. The shooting is solid and the graphics are also looking good. This is even more impressive when you consider that you can download the game for £0.00. When it comes to the multiplayer game experience its your standard FPS, this means that it depends on who you're playing against and what map you are on. Thus it must be a 7. As it ticks all theMAG works well and is fun even to today. The shooting is solid and the graphics are also looking good. This is even more impressive when you consider that you can download the game for £0.00. When it comes to the multiplayer game experience its your standard FPS, this means that it depends on who you're playing against and what map you are on. Thus it must be a 7. As it ticks all the right boxes. But relies on its community to remain a fighting chance against other FPS.… Expand
  54. rjfoxtrot
    Mar 22, 2013
    7
    Some people say MAG stands for Massive Action Game. They are absolutely right! This game is massive. In some modes, there can be as many as 256 players playing together. The action part is spot on too. Many times I found myself in the middle of a huge battle and couldn't decide where to go, because every direction looked dangerous. There are some things it could work on though. One thingSome people say MAG stands for Massive Action Game. They are absolutely right! This game is massive. In some modes, there can be as many as 256 players playing together. The action part is spot on too. Many times I found myself in the middle of a huge battle and couldn't decide where to go, because every direction looked dangerous. There are some things it could work on though. One thing is it can take as many as 20 minutes to join a game. The only other thing I can complain about is you can't choose which map to play at. The network chooses for you, which can be really annoying because I once played on the same map 8 times in a row! While it's no where near a perfect game, MAG is an excellent substitute to CoD and Battlefield.… Expand
  55. Cerberus0
    Jan 15, 2014
    7
    DO NOT BUY! Servers are shutting down the end of january. Plus the game is pretty dead as is, only 1 mode is played and you usually have to wait over 5 minutes for a game. The fact that I'm seeing this game everywhere in retail for a rly good price is kinda sad. This game will probably be sold as a used game even after the servers are down....and this game is absolutely nothing without itsDO NOT BUY! Servers are shutting down the end of january. Plus the game is pretty dead as is, only 1 mode is played and you usually have to wait over 5 minutes for a game. The fact that I'm seeing this game everywhere in retail for a rly good price is kinda sad. This game will probably be sold as a used game even after the servers are down....and this game is absolutely nothing without its servers. This is why fps belong on the pc. Consoles are such money whores it's not even funny. They have this unspoken rule of being the cheaper to play model. Well they aren't. Stores make their money from console games. People return them and they resell them. In comparison you can't return a pc game or trade it in to a large vendor etc.

    The game? So I started playing this in 2012. This is probably the best fps console game for clans. Basically this is for alot of reasons, but one in particular.

    After you die you go into a dying state, and can be revived to full health with the click of a button by a teammate that is even 10m away from you! you can literally be killed....be rezed...be killed.....be rezed....etc etc...in a never ending loop.
    It makes for some interesting gameplay. When you are in this dying state the enemy has to shoot your remaining health to 0...and this usually amounts to more than half a clip from an assault rifle. It takes about a whole clip to kill some1 with heavy armour and 120 health....then you have to reload...and then empty another 12 rounds into the corpse to prevent any nearby enemies from reviving the guy you just killed. It rly doesn't matter how many kills you get in the game, what matters is how many you "finish off" after you kill them. As you might imagine an army of 2 is many times stronger than an army of 1. This is rly a team game and staying with your squad and team is how you win the matches.

    ALot of good cool things about this title though. in sabotage (the only game type with people in it right now) you spawn from an aircraft and parachute in after you succeed in the first 2 objectives. While parachuting in the enemy can shoot and kill you before you even make it to the ground. I like this. I like that a team is rewarded for playing well together. Spawn protection is a rly stupid thing in fps imo. That said, the defending team is always given spawn protection....and so are the attackers up until the final objective. If you run too far into the enemy zone you just die. So I mean..what I'm saying hardly applies to even 1/4 of your gametime.

    Other thoughts: there's 3 factions. you have to pay extra money to unlock more than 1 character profile (lol). I mean this prevents people from just going back and forth between factions (which I get makes sense), but....whatever give them money and you get an edge. 2-3 of the gametypes (it was 2 I think) were locked and you had to buy. They made one of them free a year or 2 ago...so there's 1 locked gametype you have to pay for still....which noone is playing (at all) so is a waste of money. Hell this entire game is a waste of money if you are reading this. You have till about the end of January before your rental expires. Then all you are gonna be left with is a basic basic basic 1 minute training mode.

    I didn't play this game with a clan...or with a buddy or whatever. So take my score however you want to take it.
    Also in each game type the wins per faction are tallied up and the winning faction gets an ingame passive reward. However these rewards are just for show. Were talking 5% increases in leadership range (rofl...useless) and 5% less cooldown on artillery (more rofl). It's a joke rly. If they made them worth something maybe I would take pride in every game I won or thought for a moment that it made a difference if we won or lost a match.

    Other gripes: Heavy machine guns suck in this game big time. game winning strategies sometimes amount to grenade spamming the enemy position so they stay dead when they die and can't be rez'd over and over.

    Oh and 1 more thing. If you want to know why your lovely game is so dead look no further than the community of clans. You do not want to be on a team with clan members on it. If you are, chances are they are going to be jerks and kick you either right before the match is over or half way in or right away. They either do this to make room for another clan member or because they are jerks. Either way they end up being jerks since when you are kicked you lose all exp and money from the match. The kicking system: if 4 members on the squad vote yes you are gone! It is rly easy to get kicked. I mean this is great for kicking team killers and guys abusing their mic. But typically you will have 4 members of the same clan in your squad, and they can boot you anytime they want to. There's no repercussion for kicking an innocent player. So maybe clans should ponder that for a while when they complain that "everyone is a cod or bf noob, that's why there are no players left".    … Expand
  56. AspenT.
    Jan 27, 2010
    6
    I have mixed feelings about this game but I can say one thing for certain. It is not going to make game of the year. First off, the controls are really really poor. Why on Earth does SCEA still not provide options to configure controls to the industry standard of COD
  57. TimothyP.
    Jan 26, 2010
    6
    Game has some really nice features, fluid game play and fun missions. But the game completely lacks content, has no single player campaign and the little content that it does have can be played through in about 2 days
  58. TheMaster
    Jan 29, 2010
    6
    An honest review, this game isn't anything special and little has been done since beta to make it playable/enjoyable. It is a sub-par FPS and a sub-par MMO, and worse it is tagged with a ludicrous price tag. I was excited for MAG, I was there in beta day one. And sadly the final copy is just bad. Still all of this said, it is better than anything on the xbox-three-shitty.
  59. tom1980uk
    Nov 1, 2010
    6
    The only good thing about this game is the amount of players you can have on a map in one session, other than that the game is slow, has awful graphics and is nothing like the standard the call of duty games have set for online first person shooters
  60. Capn_KA
    Mar 29, 2012
    6
    Bought this game as a sub for Battlefield 3 as I don't own a PS3 copy of BF3.. Honestly? It would've been an awesome concept and execution.. If it were the year 2003. As it stands, you have archaic gameplay wrapped around a great concept. Graphics being dated? Don't mind. Gameplay being that dated? Game breaker. The game was released in 2010 with gameplay flaws not seen in theBought this game as a sub for Battlefield 3 as I don't own a PS3 copy of BF3.. Honestly? It would've been an awesome concept and execution.. If it were the year 2003. As it stands, you have archaic gameplay wrapped around a great concept. Graphics being dated? Don't mind. Gameplay being that dated? Game breaker. The game was released in 2010 with gameplay flaws not seen in the genre since half a decade before. ANY war shooter that allows players to run directly INTO gunfire and knife the attacker before the ASSAULT RIFLE rounds take them down is awfully dated at best, terribad at worst. If you're a sucker for big battles, RENT this game and try it out. Do NOT make the mistake of BUYING this game based on this or ANY review.… Expand
  61. emlugo123
    Feb 23, 2015
    6
    Love the idea of 256 player battles and it really works. However the respawn system is tedious and quite annoying as it takes a long time to respawn..
  62. HuevoAlce
    Jun 26, 2022
    6
    There was so much promise demonstrated in this game. It was a great idea executed adequately. It's a damn shame Zipper Interactive was shut down. This certainly deserved a sequel.
  63. FrankieT
    Feb 3, 2010
    5
    MAG's biggest feature is 256 players. Significant cutbacks in areas like graphics, framerate were required in order to accomodate 256 players. Zipper was successful in getting 256 players online at once, so what's the problem? 256 players is the problem, because it simply doesn't make MAG better and more players definately doesn't make it more fun. Simply put, MAG is a MAG's biggest feature is 256 players. Significant cutbacks in areas like graphics, framerate were required in order to accomodate 256 players. Zipper was successful in getting 256 players online at once, so what's the problem? 256 players is the problem, because it simply doesn't make MAG better and more players definately doesn't make it more fun. Simply put, MAG is a gigantic turd that flatout sucks. Take a mediocre game like this and throw it in a community that struggles to support even the stellar online mp games and you are left with stinky FAIL.… Expand
  64. AbdelK.
    Jan 28, 2010
    5
    256 players do not make a game good. Gameplay machanics do. It lacks fun gameplay. MAG doesn't have anything special gameplaywise.
  65. Robest
    Jan 26, 2010
    5
    the game is fun to an extent. killing is always fun but when your kills gets revived faster than the time you kill them, that breaks the fun you get. i gave mag 5 out of ten.
  66. TheChaser1985
    Mar 19, 2011
    5
    Terrible maps. 256 players is too many, especially since they all have mics. No single player. You're paying full retail price for half a game, if that. The graphics are good but players don't stand out the way they should. You'd think enemies are chameleons. I couldn't find a way to shoot with my trigger. Seriously? We have to shoot with the bumper? That alone can ruin it. The controlsTerrible maps. 256 players is too many, especially since they all have mics. No single player. You're paying full retail price for half a game, if that. The graphics are good but players don't stand out the way they should. You'd think enemies are chameleons. I couldn't find a way to shoot with my trigger. Seriously? We have to shoot with the bumper? That alone can ruin it. The controls just don't feel crisp and tight. This game provides a lot of "line drawn in the sand" battles. It lead to camping, big time. There's only one swan area on each side and it leads to spawn killing. Horrible game. I still own it, just because I don't get rid of games.… Expand
  67. Inuit_Dude
    Jan 5, 2012
    5
    this game is pretty solid when it comes to the graphics and game play but i did not like it because it is just to hard to play. unless you are a game wizard and can pick up anygame and instantly be good at it you will struggle with this. it is so hard to become good at it because no matter what class you are as soon as you step out into the open you get picked of by a sniper you havethis game is pretty solid when it comes to the graphics and game play but i did not like it because it is just to hard to play. unless you are a game wizard and can pick up anygame and instantly be good at it you will struggle with this. it is so hard to become good at it because no matter what class you are as soon as you step out into the open you get picked of by a sniper you have almost no health in this game that a stray bullet can and will kill you. as well there is a big emphasis on team play in this game that no one seems to get because unless you use the mic that came with the game there is no way to comunicate with your teammates therefore making the team element disapear since no one uses thier mics there is usually a small group of about 5 people using a mic that will stick together and play the game properly but other than that and when you need to defend a spot (which results in everyone camping around the objective anyway) the teamwork element gets compleatly thrown out the window. i wish there was a story line as well as online play but im trading this in because it is just to hard to play and get good… Expand
  68. SeungchulL.
    Jan 28, 2010
    4
    Far less than stellar, what a letdown. lots of ambition, but executed poorly. controls are loose and sloppy, gameplay is confusing at best, guns sound like toys while explosions sound like firecrackers, too steep a learning curve (and this coming from a fps vet), a poorly constructed level up system, server problems, not to mention the visuals seem to suffer considering everything elseFar less than stellar, what a letdown. lots of ambition, but executed poorly. controls are loose and sloppy, gameplay is confusing at best, guns sound like toys while explosions sound like firecrackers, too steep a learning curve (and this coming from a fps vet), a poorly constructed level up system, server problems, not to mention the visuals seem to suffer considering everything else they were trying to do. granted, the game isn't without its merits considering the sheer size... liked the concept, bummed by the product.… Expand
  69. karmasleeper
    Aug 14, 2012
    4
    What disappoints me most about MAG is how the PS3 hardware is incapable of coping with the 256 player game modes MAG boasts. Game maps are larger than normal but not terribly so, but large enough to separate the players into different hotspots during the 256 player modes. Teams of 128 are split into different segments so initially the game feels like a 32 vs 32 game. As the game modeWhat disappoints me most about MAG is how the PS3 hardware is incapable of coping with the 256 player game modes MAG boasts. Game maps are larger than normal but not terribly so, but large enough to separate the players into different hotspots during the 256 player modes. Teams of 128 are split into different segments so initially the game feels like a 32 vs 32 game. As the game mode progresses, more players meet in flashpoints and the framerate tanks under the pressure. My PS3 locked up numerous times during the 256 player game modes, even after cleaning the dust out of it. Because the controls are so sloppy and wonky, people seem to mostly nade spam in the hopes of downing the newbs who blindly rush into the meat grinder. The weapon variety is stale and you'll find yourself grinding for in game currency to get better guns of which there are only a couple meager improvements. You'll also struggle to keep up as you grind for XP to invest in enough skills to increase your survivability and make the game playable. Coordination is essential in this game, and yet so few people have mics. The game had ambition, I'll give it that, but it utterly fails in execution.… Expand
  70. DartmouthR.
    Jan 26, 2010
    3
    The graphics sucks the controls are slugish and first game was laggy returned the game and got my money back.
  71. FredH.
    Jan 26, 2010
    3
    Mostly lame. 256 is way too many people walking around without headsets. The maps get too huge, and you end up walking around without seeing anyone for most of the match. The other alternative is walking two steps and getting shot. Neither is very exciting. Perhaps the game will pick up as more people buy it. Oh wait...
  72. JustinC.
    Jan 28, 2010
    3
    256 players is the draw, to bad they didn't supply a good shooter to back up the large numbers that can play this... got me a trade in I guess. Should have came to Metacritic earlier before buying to learn up on it :(
  73. WillC
    Feb 1, 2010
    3
    Not worth full retail price. The game lacks variety which I feel will be added later on via paid dlc. Wait to buy this till it's in a bargain somewhere and even then just give a quick google to see if the online community is still around.
  74. Vonschna
    Jan 27, 2010
    2
    This game is imbalanced, some factions have very strong base maps while others have very weak maps. So it makes for a very imbalanced game straight up. It's like one team in a strategy game getting a hut while the other gets a fortress. The lvl system is flawed, when you get lvl 60 you can buy almost everything and have 1-2 main weps fully upgraded. The xp system is flawed, go medic This game is imbalanced, some factions have very strong base maps while others have very weak maps. So it makes for a very imbalanced game straight up. It's like one team in a strategy game getting a hut while the other gets a fortress. The lvl system is flawed, when you get lvl 60 you can buy almost everything and have 1-2 main weps fully upgraded. The xp system is flawed, go medic and get lvl 60 in 2 days or go another route and spend 150+ hours getting to lvl 60. Sometimes it's nice to have 5 medics fighting to revive but when they are running into the open to res 1 guy who will get shot down as soon as he's revived you know it's flawed. The graphics are sub par and it wouldn't matter too much, but the game has no colorblind option or team colors the whole game looks brown and every team looks brown.… Expand
  75. TonyP
    Jan 27, 2010
    2
    A prime example of Sony over-hyping your typical very below average shooter. Laggy controls on top of lackluster game types makes this game fail short of almost any shooter I have ever played. If you want large battles with actual teamwork, go play Battlefield 2. Also no one talks on this game. Mostly the PS3s fault but also the demographic of this game appeals to the people who lack the A prime example of Sony over-hyping your typical very below average shooter. Laggy controls on top of lackluster game types makes this game fail short of almost any shooter I have ever played. If you want large battles with actual teamwork, go play Battlefield 2. Also no one talks on this game. Mostly the PS3s fault but also the demographic of this game appeals to the people who lack the knowledge to hook up a blue-tooth device.… Expand
  76. SethB.
    Jan 29, 2010
    2
    Zipper Interactive shows their true colors with this garbage. I have not seen such a bug infested game since Quake 2 was released and the multi-player didn
  77. FPSgamerGamerq
    Feb 1, 2010
    2
    This game leave much to be desired as a shooter...it's bland and repetitive.
  78. DanielT.
    Jan 27, 2010
    2
    Kinda disappointing. sure it has the capability for lots of players playing at once, but its no executed correctly. kinda frantic, kinda confusing, but not a whole lot of fun. rent first before even considering buying.
  79. Lava625
    Dec 30, 2010
    2
    Horrible, the game does not have enough content period. There are barley any guns at all and the guns are even very different from each other. Its like they made the the game half way then sold it. Plus if your on SVER it takes 20 min. to get into a match. If you buy this game be ready to get killed by the people who sit around all day and play it. You never get that sense of scale thisHorrible, the game does not have enough content period. There are barley any guns at all and the guns are even very different from each other. Its like they made the the game half way then sold it. Plus if your on SVER it takes 20 min. to get into a match. If you buy this game be ready to get killed by the people who sit around all day and play it. You never get that sense of scale this game just fails everything. DONT BUY… Expand
  80. VmanB
    Feb 2, 2010
    1
    Well where do you start with this load of crap. I would love to defend any ps3 only game but this is possibly the worst fps game of all time. Even worse than COD MW2 and thats saying something. I don't know where all these great user scores are coming from but they must be playing a different game to me. Terrible graphics, sub par sound, very dodgy controls and no fun or excitment at Well where do you start with this load of crap. I would love to defend any ps3 only game but this is possibly the worst fps game of all time. Even worse than COD MW2 and thats saying something. I don't know where all these great user scores are coming from but they must be playing a different game to me. Terrible graphics, sub par sound, very dodgy controls and no fun or excitment at all. If your idea of enjoyment out of a decent multiplayer game is being killed by snipers all the time or frag grenades ever two seconds then this might be the game for you. All that happens is you spawn at base then make your way to the objective(If a sniper doesn't kill you first) then usually get killed straight away on arrival. Then you do the same thing over and over again for about 20mins each game. There plenty of bugs that probably will get sorted out with a patch or two but there's no fun to be had here anyway. Bought my game on friday and i'm just on my way back to trade in 5 days later A.S.A.P. I think i'll stick with Killzone 2 for now because this is a joke to any PS3 FPS fan. DO NOT BUY. Wait for Bad company 2 is my advise. You have been warned.… Expand
  81. WhiteTiger
    Feb 1, 2010
    1
    HAZE 2!!! Its a freak game, poor graphics and the sound is terrible... 256 players this is not the way of good game!!
  82. NomaDz
    Aug 10, 2011
    1
    Zipper and Sony Sell this game on PSN in Europe, Australia and Asia. Shame they closed ALL Servers OUT SIDE OF THE USA. Until around June last year I might have given MAG an 8/10, Shame Sony and Zipper Doesn't care to provide the same equal service to those which bought the game in their own countries OUTSIDE of USA to find themselves forced to play on U.S servers with an Average ofZipper and Sony Sell this game on PSN in Europe, Australia and Asia. Shame they closed ALL Servers OUT SIDE OF THE USA. Until around June last year I might have given MAG an 8/10, Shame Sony and Zipper Doesn't care to provide the same equal service to those which bought the game in their own countries OUTSIDE of USA to find themselves forced to play on U.S servers with an Average of 200>300+ ms PING! Futhermore Zipper NEVER Commented on this fact on their Official Forums, likewise about the Euro Servers for Socom 4, These DEVS should understand how important it is to have a Dedicated server on a Regional/Local level especially due to the fact that this game is an ONLINE ONLY FPS. Therefore to provide European Players without the same service as US players is ridiculously. FPS games and high pings just don't mix. It's bad enough with P2P games but this game without Dedicated servers in Europe and Australia just takes the piss.… Expand
  83. davidshepard
    Jan 28, 2010
    0
    best game ever
next
Page:

Awards & Rankings

81
#81 Best PS3 Game of 2010
8
#8 Most Discussed PS3 Game of 2010
91
#91 Most Shared PS3 Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 83 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 54 out of 83
  2. Mixed: 29 out of 83
  3. Negative: 0 out of 83
  1. Destructoid
    80
    Massive Action Game delivers on the promise of its name. It's certainly massive, and there is more than enough action to go around. MAG's biggest draw, however, is that it's perfect for both hardcore multiplayer FPS fans and newcomers alike.
    Read full review
  2. TheSixthAxis
    80
    The challenge of branding MAG with a number (much smaller than its trademarked 256 and between 1 and 10) to denote its quality is akin to rating World of Warcraft after a weekend of gold-farming, long before the full majesty of the game has blossomed and shown its true potential. The best we can do is rate our early impressions, undoubtedly influenced by the game’s prospects for the future.
    Read full review
  3. Meristation
    80
    256 players in the same battlefield is clearly a new step beyond what console online gaming was offering. Spectacular in its size, MAG allows at the same time a deep approach for the hardcore FPS lovers, and also an easier gameplay appealing for those more casual action gamers. The lack of any non-online mode can limit its influence, and the visuals are not over the top, but in the end, MAG achieves success delivering the closest experience to fighting on a living battlefield.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »