IGN posts first Mercenaries 2 review, no bed of roses seen

Sunday, 31st August 2008 10:31 GMT By Patrick Garratt


IGN’s given Mercenaries 2 7.9/10, citing “numerous bugs, the terrible AI, and the lackluster missions.” Snip:

Mercenaries 2 is like a newsstand; it has a lot of issues. Still, I can’t deny that there were some hootin’ and hollerin’ moments. For every time I cursed the stupid AI, I cheered at the demolition of another building. For every bug that got me stuck in some bushes, there was an attack chopper waiting to be jacked. If Mercenaries 2 had more polish, it would have been a great game. As is, it’s still worth playing – and enjoyable – but falls far short of its promise.

And that’s that. Video review after the break.



  1. Quiiick

    8 out of 10! That’s more than I expected, to be honest.

    I played the first Mercenaries game on PS2. It wasn’t bad but I got bored after about 6 hours into gameplay and never picked it up again.

    Let’s wait what has to say in it’s review …

    #1 6 years ago
  2. patlike

    IGN though, innit. The review’s pretty scathing. The “.1 under 8″ thing’s deliberate, probably.

    #2 6 years ago
  3. Quiiick

    The AI really seems to be “dumber than dirt” … :(

    And just being able to “blow things up” is not incentive enough to buy this game IMHO.

    #3 6 years ago
  4. No_PUDding

    Seems a shame.

    These guys worked pretty hard, but that long in development I guess can make you pretty ignorant of problems like that.

    I think Red Faction looks great though.

    Even if I am not one for mindless pointless destrcution, the afct that they got actual architecturally sound structures is pretty amazing.

    #4 6 years ago
  5. scuz

    looks like it deserves less than an 8.

    #5 6 years ago
  6. Blerk

    I wasn’t really interested in this at all, then I watched the review on Playr at the weekend and thought it looked alright!

    /goes against the grain

    #6 6 years ago
  7. Quiiick

    Yeah, it “looks alright”! But unfortunately that’s about it. For a game that had such a long development-cycle “alright” is not enough.

    EA was clever in launching Mercenaries 2 already in early september. This game wouldn’t stand a chance if released in october or november. So many other games which are way better will hit the market in this upcoming holiday season.

    #7 6 years ago
  8. Quiiick

    OMG !!! OMG !!!
    Eurogamer’s Review of Mercenaries 2 is out and they gave it a 5 out of 10 !!!


    #8 6 years ago
  9. No_PUDding


    Eurogamer are such idiots when it comes to reviewing.

    I don’t even care, about bugs. I am sorry but it’s free roaming, destrctible environments …

    I just don’t undertand such a low mark.

    #9 6 years ago
  10. patlike

    Blimey. Well, there we are.

    #10 6 years ago
  11. Psychotext

    You don’t care about bugs No_PUD?

    #11 6 years ago
  12. Truk

    “I don’t even care, about bugs.”


    /closes all open bugs
    /informs producer no more bugs will be fixed
    /goes on holiday

    #12 6 years ago
  13. No_PUDding

    Well, I do, but I have seen videos and it’s not unplayable, so 5/10 just seems harsh.

    Ironically as I was writing that as I was listening to 1up yours, and the English bloke said 5/10 as I typed it. That confused me.

    But yes, it just seems a bit of an injustice with so much work, for a game that ultimately was never going to be enjoyed for anything other than the free roaming destruction which seems very much intact.

    #13 6 years ago
  14. Blerk

    Remember kids, 5/10 is ‘average’, not ‘broken’.

    #14 6 years ago
  15. No_PUDding

    That’s the reason I am cross, by todays standards that’s not true.

    5/10 is a nasty game to play. It’s playable but it’s not fun. Haze was 6/10 for gods sake!

    This game deserved a 6-point-something.

    Average is 7 nowadays.

    #15 6 years ago
  16. Blerk

    And therein lies the problem with modern videogame reviewing standards.

    #16 6 years ago
  17. No_PUDding

    Yep, maybe I am cross with Eurogamer unjustly.

    Just becuase they are breakign the incorrect paradigm.

    Eitehr way though, you should follow the crowd, otherwise you do soem damage. It’s like the government chnaging the amount of cash a mint is prodcuing outside of growth.

    It creates an inbalance.

    Perhaps a rubbish analogy, but I am sure you catch my drift.

    #17 6 years ago
  18. Blerk

    Over-score stuff because everyone else does? That doesn’t sound like a very good idea to me. Shouldn’t everyone else be reviewing stuff properly?

    Scores out of ten are mostly meaningless anyway. A score out of 5 should be the absolute maximum, then you know precisely where you are.

    #18 6 years ago
  19. Quiiick

    From the Eurogamer scoring system:

    “Five – good enough to survive?
    Five is where you really start to fear for a game’s quality. It’s the score that says “don’t buy it unless you’re the sort of person who has to have all the games in a particular genre”. It’s a game that had the potential to be good, but simply ended up saddled with a catalogue of issues that the majority of gamers will not put up with. It’s still playable, but the chances are it’s so generic and uninspired that you begin to question how it was released in the first place.

    A five won’t be a disaster. In fact those who won’t have played the better games in the genre might even get a great deal of enjoyment out of it. In a lot of cases scores come down to user expectations, but the standards games are built on are constantly shifting sands; what is ground breaking in one generation is the bare minimum standard a few years down the line, and things we once tolerated routinely can suddenly become very irritating. We hear regularly of games built to brutally tight deadlines, and compromises are inevitably made. Sometimes a key member of the team leaves midway through; sometimes it’s just down to a lack of talent. But it’s not bad as such, it just inspires little but the feeling you could do far better than consider picking up a five out of ten.

    One thing to clear up is whether five is the “average”. The law of averages suggests that a five should equate to the woolly notion of what an “average” game is worth. We all know this is rarely the case because it’d be very tough to play every single title in a particular genre to really have a true handle on what the average game actually is; and even then it’s a subjective reasoning that’s inherently flawed. With about 1,000 games being released every year it’s a task of unreasonable magnitude to cover even half of them given the size of our team, but we do play a phenomenal number of games between us at EG (over 250 a year), and will attempt to play all the important games in any give field. The chances are, if it’s not on Eurogamer there’s a good reason why not. Either we’re not sent the game, we don’t have a person qualified to review it, or we’ve too many games to review at any one time, and thus have to deal with them in order of priority. But should five be the average? Yes, but it’s not an exact science. We’ll always try to position a five as our opinion of what an average game represents, but the more significant notion is that it’s the score that tells you to approach with extreme caution.”

    #19 6 years ago
  20. patlike

    Heh. That was written a while back. Sounds about right though.

    #20 6 years ago
  21. Hydraulic Valves

    It’s more than I expected, to be honest.

    #21 5 years ago
  22. bugmenot

    you can say that again, worst case of necrobump i’ve seen on vg247 so far

    #22 5 years ago
  23. mescalineeyes

    It’s just SEO spam.

    #23 5 years ago
  24. sickpuppysoftware

    At last a place to get my Merc 2 branded hydraulic valves!

    #24 5 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.