RSS
When the tagline said “World in Flames,” we didn’t… Never mind. IGN’s given the PS2 version of Mercenaries 2 3.9/10, which for IGN is pretty, pretty bad. Snip:
The original Mercenaries came out three-and-a-half years ago. But instead of giving us a game with more than three years worth of updates, Pi Studios has actually taken three steps backwards. Mercs 2 looks worse, plays worse and is just plain worse than the groundbreaking original. Why this watered-down version was even published is a mystery. Were this game fun, with the missions structured in a way that made them enjoyable, then there’d at least be a reason to rent. But there’s nothing here to recommend. Mercenaries 2 on PS2 is a bad game. ‘Nuff said.
More through the link. Don’t say we didn’t warn you, though. Video review after the break.
Viewing 7 responses
Shatner said:
Heading refers to the PS3, article talks about the PS2.
Freudian slip?
SplatteredHouse said:
IGN reckon you’re better off just getting (back in to) Mercs one, if PS2’s your only option for playing the game, at all. The PS2 port of World in Flames should’ve been shelved, from a creative standpoint; although I still think it may make the moneyz from the mainstream – just before it makes the return bin.
According to their commentary, the PS2 version’s essentially falling apart at the seams, managing to backtrack even on the good work of the first game.
patlike said:
Whoops. Changed. Ta.
Blerk said:
What I can’t quite figure out is why they even bothered with a PS2 version.
Quiiick said:
@ Blerk
Money? …
No_PUDding said:
I was sickened by the first one, but this is now justifiable.
The PS2 has a lot of other games worth investing in before this one.
pjmaybe said:
That won’t stop it selling by the buttload to the masses.