Support NeoGAF

[Lan Dong Mik]

Scores are definitely mixed but I'm happy to see some good scores out there now. The game looks beautiful. I'll probably pick this up next month

 

[Slackbladder]

Scores seem about right and it has the kind of gameplay I like. But I doubt I can fit it in this month. Maybe October before Fallout 4 comes out and stomps on everything!

 

[AlterOdin]

9\10 Gamer.no (Norwegian site)

And they are pretty sparse with the high numbers. (IE they tend to use the the 1-10 range properly).

High points: (PS4 reviewed)
- Looks really good
- Lots to do
- Survival mechanics
- Great Action
- Great combat (after some progression)

Some annoyance, but the say the sum is greater then it's parts.

 

[Kensuke]

Reading through the reviews, I think whether you like it or not could depend on how you feel about gameplay elements that have become somewhat common. If you've had your fill of Batman style combat and Assassin's Creed mission design this game will probably bore you. It might have been a different story if it one-upped the originals in that regard, but that isn't the case here it seems.

Shadow of Mordor was the same, but it at least had the Nemesis system wildcard. Mad Max has cool vehicular combat, but that doesn't seem as interesting.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Uh, you kind of just did.

Naw, what I meant is that I'm not going to say its good before I've even played it. All I can say right now is what I've seen looks good and I still think it will be when I play but I can't say with 100 percent certainty. I could care less about tropes and complaining about the latest game design trends. If the hand to hand combat is good, I figure I will enjoy this. I don't see this as one of those games where the issues can be patched out. From an outsiders perspective, it seems like a game whose design either gels with you or doesn't.

 

[FatalT]

Why no updates in the OP? Reviews are up son

IGN - 8.4

GameSpot - 6

Game Informer - 7.5

GamesRadar - 8

Polygon - 5

God is a Geek - 7.5

Hobby Consolas - 9

OP is a stan accidentally making the game look worse

Krappadizzle's Last Activity: Today 08:44 PM

Thankfully Steve Youngblood just edited the scores into the OP for us. Do we have any sort of accountability on this type of thing? I really don't want to see this guy create another OP when he doesn't even follow up on it.

 

[DOWN]

Seems like basically some of the reviews say if you're a sucker for the atmosphere and a bit of crude brawling, it might be your thing. But the roughness and some unoriginal mechanics mean there's a good chance this game is not fit for a day one buy at the $60~ console price.

Krappadizzle's Last Activity: Today 08:44 PM

Thankfully Steve Youngblood just edited the scores into the OP for us. Do we have any sort of accountability on this type of thing? I really don't want to see this guy create another OP when he doesn't even follow up on it.

I messaged him so I have no clue why he's ignoring a time sensitive thread that he created

I'm on mobile and this is kind of a pain in the ass, but I quoted this in the OP a couple of minutes ago.

Thanks

 

[FatalT]

Seems like basically some of the reviews say if you're a sucker for the atmosphere and a bit of crude brawling, it might be your thing. But the roughness and some unoriginal mechanics mean there's a good chance this game is not fit for a day one buy at the $60~ console price.



I messaged him so I have no clue why he's ignoring a time sensitive thread that he created


Thanks

He just posted in the "F*ck Konami: MGSV FOBs beyond the first must be bought via macrotransactions" thread at 07:56 PM which was plenty of time after the reviews started dropping at 7:00 PM and was active at 08:44 PM on the site so I dunno.

 

[NullPointer]

From the Polygon review:

Maybe it goes without saying in a near-dead, post-apocalyptic world, but Mad Max's wasteland is lifeless. Layouts change, but every oil refinery and gang hideout feels identical. Certain building types, like a run-down gas stop, are repeated over and over. Mad Max has a handful of memorable locales, such as an airport that's been buried beneath the sands, but they're few and far between.

That monotony is compounded by a dearth of unique objectives in these locales. You're always fighting the same groups of enemies, blowing up the same fuel tanks, tearing down the same sniper's nests with your car. The side content in Mad Max is textbook open-world bloat, providing plenty of the same things to do, over and over. It even recycles boss fights — there are two types of bosses, large/powerful and small/fast, and it reuses them multiple times with the exact same mechanics but under different boss names.

And the Gamespot one:

Mad Max is too focused on providing you with an open-world that's filled with missions, and not focused enough on making those missions worth your time.

I'm really getting the sense that a weariness with the Ubisoft open world formula is going to keep me from enjoying this.

 

[KefkaTaran]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

 

[Altairre]

Talking about in general. I don't know what you're referring to.

Then that's a really weird thing to mention here. Since people were already complaining about polygon again I thought it was what you were referring to. Otherwise what does it have to do with Mad Max and your desire to play the game?

 

[TheDarkKnight774]

I can wait for the next open world game design evolution. Just like all popular game designs throughout history when so many followers show up it wears that genre/style out to the point you don't want it at all. I'd like to see focused open world gaming take off. Not cluttered with the kind of open world distraction game design

Note: havent played witcher 3 yet. Not sure if that is one

 

[SolidSnakex]

They've said that they wanted a fresh take on the Just Cause franchise, and figured giving it to a new team made up of fans would be beneficial.

I'm not surprised that the reviews are ending up being divisive, considering it isn't going to be for everyone. I've seen more than enough gameplay to know I will have a blast with it.

Ahh ok, that definitely makes sense. The reaction to MM is kinda reminding me of the first JC. They laid the groundwork with it, but it was obviously rough, then they blew people away with JC2.

From the Polygon review:



And the Gamespot one:



I'm really getting the sense that a weariness with the Ubisoft open world formula is going to keep me from enjoying this.

It seems like MGSV and The Witcher 3 leveled up what people expect from open world games now.

 

[FatalT]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

Are you planning on playing through a bit of the game again with the new Day Zero patch updates to see if it influences your old review of it?

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net...s4-includes-lots-story-gameplay-improvements/

 

[DOWN]

From the Polygon review:



And the Gamespot one:



I'm really getting the sense that a weariness with the Ubisoft open world formula is going to keep me from enjoying this.

I'm particularly troubled by games that fail to get a grand scale and a sense of isolation despite a setting that demands it (and based on every screenshot of Mad Max showing ruins and hideouts in view, Mad Max fails horribly at giving 'lost in the desert' vibes for more than mere seconds).

I sure hoped I was wrong, but hearing that they have a world littered with enemies, hideouts, and fast traveling, it just doesn't sound like it ever actually makes you feel like you are traveling across a desert and instead may be hopping around a Ubisoft bandit town.

Right now, I know I'll buy the game, but I don't think that will be until it's dropped in price

 

[DOWN]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

Is there room to drive for a couple of minutes in the desert without seeing landmarks/enemies/hideouts? Or is it like other games where you are pretty much always in view of the next POI on the horizon and will likely run into enemies pretty quick?

 

[Chris Metal]

Not that this is important, but they gave TLOU a 7.5, not a 6.

Yeah ok... 7.5, same reviewer. I just don't agree with Philip Kollar on reviews it seems, but opinions and all.

 

[KefkaTaran]

Are you planning on playing through a bit of the game again with the new Day Zero patch updates to see if it influences your old review of it?

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net...s4-includes-lots-story-gameplay-improvements/

Yeah! As mentioned in the review, I played it on a PS4 debug and want to test it on retail to see if the tech issues I ran into are fixed. Hopefully the patch helps!

Is there room to drive for a couple of minutes in the desert without seeing landmarks/enemies/hideouts? Or is it like other games where you are pretty much always in view of the next POI on the horizon and will likely run into enemies pretty quick?

There are some areas without much in the way of landmarks or enemies where you can just drive, especially the big desert in the northeast part of the map.

yeah, ok... 6/7.5, same reviewer... I just don't agree with Philip Kollar on reviews it seems.

That's fine! I would never expect everyone to agree with me.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

Was the Day Zero patch available to you? Not a veiled anti-reviewer trap, I'm just looking for information.

edit: Ok, thanks.

 

[Kensuke]

I can wait for the next open world game design evolution. Just like all popular game designs throughout history when so many followers show up it wears that genre/style out to the point you don't want it at all. I'd like to see focused open world gaming take off. Not cluttered with the kind of open world distraction game design

Note: havent played witcher 3 yet. Not sure if that is one

Yeah, you should definitely play Witcher 3. It does a great job of making you care about almost all missions.

 

[NullPointer]

It seems like MGSV and The Witcher 3 leveled up what people expect from open world games now.

As a huge fan of open worlds I'd definitely like to see them move beyond the formula of tacking on dozens of tiny snack side missions revealed via towers. We get maybe one small side mission type that caters to player choice and creativity and persists within the open world (Borgia Towers or Far Cry outposts), with everything else being short, ultra repetitive mini-game side missions or else medium length ultra-linear cinematic story missions.

There is so much room to grow and evolve, and there has been for a long time now. Don't know why I'm not seeing much of it though, at least when it comes to the overall organization of missions and their scope and formulaic nature. What about changing the world in meaningful ways? Or meatier missions that persist in the open world - not as disconnected instances.

Guess I need to try the Witcher. And I will, once I'm in the mood and can set aside some quality time for it. But I'll also check on this from time to time because driving through the wastes still sounds pretty cool.

 

[CaLe]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

I found Shadow of Mordor's combat tedious and repetitive, is it worse or similar in Mad Max ?

The Nemesis system did nothing for me in SoM, yet I still finished the game regardless of the sparse story, ubi-fication of the map and disappointing combat. I'm wondering if Mad Max feels similar.

 

[NotLiquid]

EDIT: Wrong thread

 

[KefkaTaran]

I found Shadow of Mordor's combat tedious and repetitive, is it worse or similar in Mad Max ?

The Nemesis system did nothing for me in SoM, yet I still finished the game regardless of the sparse story, ubi-fication of the map and disappointing combat. I'm wondering if Mad Max feels similar.

I've heard a lot of people making Mordor comparisons. Personally I found Mordor a lot more engaging, in terms of variety of stuff to do, and I was really pulled into the Nemesis system. Mad Max's combat is very similar to Mordor's, and the story is also sparse, plus no Nemesis system.

 

[Moze]

Really getting sick of Arkham combat in every third person action game tbh.

 

[Yurikerr]

Yeah ok... 7.5, same reviewer. I just don't agree with Philip Kollar on reviews it seems, but opinions and all.

Ohh sure, and I'm with you. Me and Phil don't share the same tastes, but i don't discount his reviews just because lol polygon.

And I think he's one of the best in describing why he enjoys (or not) the games.

I just think that the Polygon scoring system is really dumb, as the score doesn't reflect the text many times.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

Yeah! As mentioned in the review, I played it on a PS4 debug and want to test it on retail to see if the tech issues I ran into are fixed. Hopefully the patch helps!

Why would you review the game based on a PS4 debug unit instead of the retail PS4 model that gamers have? Why not just wait? Also, how much of the game did you complete overall?

 

[SmoothRunningGun]

Ignoring polygon's review (which I always do) it seems to be doing ok. Black Friday game for me.

 

[CaLe]

I've heard a lot of people making Mordor comparisons. Personally I found Mordor a lot more engaging, in terms of variety of stuff to do, and I was really pulled into the Nemesis system. Mad Max's combat is very similar to Mordor's, and the story is also sparse, plus no Nemesis system.

Thanks for the info, I enjoyed reading your review.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Why would you review the game based on a PS4 debug unit instead of the retail PS4 model that gamers have? Why not just wait? Also, how much of the game did you complete overall?

I'm sure he'll answer himself, but it's due to wanting/needing to hit deadlines. Retail copies didn't start getting out into the wild until a couple of days ago. It takes time to play and review a video game.

 

[DarkJedi24]

My distaste over this game's boring use of tropes has absolutely nothing to do with "morals", nor does Phil's review at Polygon hint at anything of the sort.

Yeah the three act structure causes me to dislike movies enough that I don't consider giving them a chance.

 

[neogaffer1]

Well. This game is more fun than Shadow of Mordor, imo. Both games don't offer good characters or a good story, both games are using a similar combat system. One of them has better graphics, more sidequests, a huge wasteland and brutal finishers. And that's Mad Max.

i was referring to what i said a week ago

i feel like it's in a similar position in the minds of many gamers as shadow of mordor was.

some people know about it, but not many are very interested in it, and few expect anything special out of it.

the difference here is SoM turned out to be surprisingly good, so much so that it won a bunch of GoTYs and was able to become a huge success due to great wom.

mad max has had mixed previews (all of SoM's were positive iirc), so we're going to have to wait and see if it is good enough to break out of the hole it seems to be stuck in like SoM did.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

I've heard a lot of people making Mordor comparisons. Personally I found Mordor a lot more engaging, in terms of variety of stuff to do, and I was really pulled into the Nemesis system. Mad Max's combat is very similar to Mordor's, and the story is also sparse, plus no Nemesis system.

I played and completed Mordor 100% on PS4 last year as I bought the game at launch and to be honest, the story was very short. Only 20 missions and some upgrades didn't even become available to you completed the 17th or so mission. Solid 8/10 game for me personally and while the nemesis system was great at first, it too became repetitive.

I think that what Mad Max really needs is some on/off options for the HUD, in game pop-ups and the button prompts during the melee combat. With that said, im getting the game tomorrow and very much looking forward to playing it as it's definitely my type of game.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Ignoring polygon's review (which I always do) it seems to be doing ok. Black Friday game for me.

Ok, earlier, I cautioned to ignore reviews when there's no desire to address them earnestly. Just to be clear, I meant "ignore" in a more literal sense where you just opt not to acknowledge the review at all. I wasn't advising to do so passive aggressively to note your disdain for the outlet.

 

[bryanee]

I've heard a lot of people making Mordor comparisons. Personally I found Mordor a lot more engaging, in terms of variety of stuff to do, and I was really pulled into the Nemesis system. Mad Max's combat is very similar to Mordor's, and the story is also sparse, plus no Nemesis system.

I could be remembering it wrong but as much as I liked Shadow of Mordor I thought it lacked variety.

 

[viHuGi]

Will buy it later anyway

 

[samn]

welp. there it goes to the summer sale fodder

Damn you Bioware !!

 

[Krappadizzle]

Sorry about the delay on updating OP. Not my intention at all. Life and shit. Thank you whichever mod that updated it initially for me.

 

[Mikey Jr.]

Hello, I reviewed Mad Max for Polygon, and I think that X-Men Origins Wolverine game is pretty alright, AMA.

How sensitive are you to graphical problems?

I am just not sure the pop in you describe would impact the same way that it would me.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

I'm sure he'll answer himself, but it's due to wanting/needing to hit deadlines. Retail copies didn't start getting out into the wild until a couple of days ago. It takes time to play and review a video game.

I would blame the publisher and not the reviewer in that instance. I know they can't always get a retail copy to them and have to settle for something that comes close but the patch notes seem substantial enough that it hurt them here. Maybe they couldn't delay the game and certification took longer than expected but the timing of things is certainly unfortunate.

 

[Theecliff]

Sorry about the delay on updating OP. Not my intention at all. Life and shit.

fek yo life man, updating op is priority rn

 

[Deleted member 471617]

I'm sure he'll answer himself, but it's due to wanting/needing to hit deadlines. Retail copies didn't start getting out into the wild until a couple of days ago. It takes time to play and review a video game.

I know that it takes time to play and review a video game, especially when it's open world but having to hit deadlines is one of the many reasons why I don't go by any critic reviews regardless of the site/mag because they're all the same. They're all supposed to give the gamers out there a fair and impartial review but yet, let's be honest, it's rarely the case. Granted, this is more on the site/company than the reviewer himself/herself but it's simply misleading and not right.

If the reviewer didn't have enough time or WB didn't send him a review copy/code earlier than they should have, just delay the review. I would much rather wait a few extra days for a full 100% fair, honest and impartial review compared to the review possibly being rushed. And gamers will still go to the site and read it if they want to.

The only site I seem to usually agree with is GamingBolt as their scores are usually within a point of what I would rate the game but the main thing is that they will sometimes, review a game a week or two later, if not longer to make sure they fully go through it.

I respect and appreciate that because they give the gamer what they want the most - a fair, accurate, honest and impartial review. To me, sites/companies shouldn't have deadlines on reviews especially if they don't get the game at least two weeks before the game gets released.

Just wish that sites/companies/mags cared more about the gamers themselves instead of deadlines and other corporate bullcrap especially when they're posting their reviews and scores for us gamers in the first place since we're the ones who read them.

 

[noshten]

Don't you guys thing SoM would have reviewed worse if it was released an year later, I think same thing can be said about Watch Dogs and DA:I? One of the positives was it at least it had new elements like the Nemesis system - you probably might want to incorporate something new in any Ubisoft'ed open world.

Honestly 2014 was pretty meh year for a lot of major Western publishers - which will only become more apparent as time passes. I was barely interested in most of the games that came out.

 

[dEvAnGeL]

this is getting great reviews on steam, the only reviews i care about

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I know that it takes time to play and review a video game, especially when it's open world but having to hit deadlines is one of the many reasons why I don't go by any critic reviews regardless of the site/mag because they're all the same. They're all supposed to give the gamers out there a fair and impartial review but yet, let's be honest, it's rarely the case. Granted, this is more on the site/company than the reviewer himself/herself but it's simply misleading and not right.

If the reviewer didn't have enough time or WB didn't send him a review copy/code earlier than they should have, just delay the review. I would much rather wait a few extra days for a full 100% fair, honest and impartial review compared to the review possibly being rushed. And gamers will still go to the site and read it if they want to.

The only site I seem to usually agree with is GamingBolt as their scores are usually within a point of what I would rate the game but the main thing is that they will sometimes, review a game a week or two later, if not longer to make sure they fully go through it.

I respect and appreciate that because they give the gamer what they want the most - a fair, accurate, honest and impartial review. To me, sites/companies shouldn't have deadlines on reviews especially if they don't get the game at least two weeks before the game gets released.

Just wish that sites/companies/mags cared more about the gamers themselves instead of deadlines and other corporate bullcrap especially when they're posting their reviews and scores for us gamers in the first place since we're the ones who read them.

I think you're being a little harsh and impractical here and probably overestimating the difference one patch will make. Given the kind of post-release support that happens nowadays, is a game ever truly done? And how is waiting several days going to help the person sitting there with an unopened copy from Amazon decide whether to open it or ship it back.

I'm not saying that there isn't room for some outlets to let the dust settle more before finalizing a review. But I don't think what you're proposing is really all that beneficial to the people out there really clamouring for day one reviews.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

Don't you guys thing SoM would have reviewed worse if it was released an year later, I think same thing can be said about Watch Dogs and DA:I? One of the positives was it at least it had new elements like the Nemesis system - you probably might want to incorporate something new in any Ubisoft'ed open world.

Honestly 2014 was pretty meh year for a lot of major Western publishers - which will only become more apparent as time passes. I was barely interested in most of the games that came out.

Pretty much agree. Nemesis system was great but after a while, the novelty wore off and I definitely think that games would have scored lower if they came out this year especially with all the other games coming out. Plus, nearly every game was cross-gen which really needs to end.

 

[TheSlySoul]

Wow, this is a mixed bag from 5 to 9...
Sale it is then!

 

[Krappadizzle]

fek yo life man, updating op is priority rn

What more can GAF take from me?

Edit: I for one am very satisfied with what I've seen from these reviews. It's about what I expected and has me excited to play Mad Max here in a few hours.

 

[Chubzdoomer]

this is getting great reviews on steam, the only reviews i care about

People actually review games on Steam? I thought they just wrote horribly unfunny jokes followed by "10/10" or "11/10."

 

[KefkaTaran]

Why would you review the game based on a PS4 debug unit instead of the retail PS4 model that gamers have? Why not just wait? Also, how much of the game did you complete overall?

In order to have a review at launch. This is also the build that was presented to us by the publisher as final. In some cases they provide actual retail builds in advance, and in some cases they don't. We're always careful to note in our reviews at the end which console and under what conditions we played, so if you're concerned about that affecting our coverage, the information is out there for you.

re: completion, I ended the game with just under 50% of everything completed. That includes all the story missions, most of the story-based sidequests, and a lot of other open-world objectives and activities. That took me around 30-40 hours. Still lots left to do, of course. If you want to 100% this game, it will take a lonnnnng time.

How sensitive are you to graphical problems?

I am just not sure the pop in you describe would impact the same way that it would me.

I tend to be less sensitive to it than others. The pop-in definitely didn't heavily impact my experience, but it was very noticeable at certain points. The framerate drops are real bad though. Hopefully the patch fixes those.