So.. does this mean Dust isn't going to get it's own flavor of Mountain Dew?

Wow this is a first blame it on the reviewer for saying a bad game is bad!

You fan boys really need to take the blinders off. Everything he said is true the battles are not fun shooting is bland.

These are things that we've been saying about Dust for over a year now and then when it releases you thought people would say hey it has potential in 10 years Dust will be fantastic! WTF is gonna wait for 10 years?

The only thing that this reviewer has a good point on are the lack of game modes and the lack of eve/Dust interaction. Beyond that, he's an idiot.

In the end, he has a valid set of points. I have yet to see one instance where EvE and Dust have anything more than a symbolic relationship. And I do find myself forcing my way through match after tedious match praying to God the next enhancement I skill into changes game-play one iota. I generally think the game is pretty good, but it isn't doing anything extremely new or cool.

PSU gave a good review, and this one is good too.

http://www.cgmagazine.ca/game-reviews/ps3-review/1241-dust-514.html


Geoff, obviously didn't play much of Dust...

Care to describe HOW he is a idiot?

The entire review is a blatantly obvious comparison to COD and the rest, with the reviewer not judging it on it's own merits.

Now, if the reviewer had done a shred of research and known the future plans of this game from CCP and mentioned that in his video, his score might be fair for what is in the game already.

But no, he doesn't. He judges it in a comparison to Battlefield and COD and the like, and even goes as far as saying that dropsuits don't matter, when anyone with any intelligence can tell you that heavy versus scout are both completely different ballgames.

He's obviously a fool, and should not have reviewed the game.

Reviews have NOTHING to do with future plans of a game. All those other chicken poop reviews you been watching where they go on praising the "potential" of this game are irrelevant in a review. The whole purpose of a review is to show the audience what the game has to offer RIGHT NOW. NOT what it has possibilities to offer in the future.

I felt the guy was dead on accurate with his review for Uprising514. I don't think he was constantly comparing it to COD he threw in a little joke this isn't about KDR and getting diamond guns. Not once did I hear him say this works much better in COD.

Reviews have NOTHING to do with future plans of a game. All those other chicken poop reviews you been watching where they go on praising the "potential" of this game are irrelevant in a review. The whole purpose of a review is to show the audience what the game has to offer RIGHT NOW. NOT what it has possibilities to offer in the future.

I've honestly not bothered watching any reviews of this game because I worked in the games journalism industry for a while and know that games like this will be torn to pieces by most. The reason is that reviewers don't have the time to spend really getting deep into a game and that is what is required to get the full experience of Dust 514. This is not the sort of short term arcade shooter that can be reviewed after a week of playing and the problem that this produces is that the only people who have played enough to be able to give a full and accurate review are people who have been playing a long time because they already love the game.

The reason is that reviewers don't have the time to spend really getting deep into a game and that is what is required to get the full experience of Dust 514. This is not the sort of short term arcade shooter that can be reviewed after a week of playing and the problem that this produces is that the only people who have played enough to be able to give a full and accurate review are people who have been playing a long time because they already love the game.

Guess we play Dust differently than, since 90% of my time spend in dust is "Shoot&Gun" like any other "short term arcade shooter" out there? So while i care about "potentially" plans with EvE integration, all i care atm is to have fun playing "Shoot&Gun" or using Vehicles.
So while the AUR/RM points of this review are misleading, anyone out there that ever played a FPS can judge and compare its core gameplay to any other FPS out there. Thats because at its core Dust does nothing spectacular new or special, that is relevant to your FPS experience.

So i don't get why Dust should get a special treatment, judging its core FPS mechanics, which are indeed just average?

I don't know why people are bashing on the review. The only outright lie I noticed right off the bat was him saying the scrambler rifle was behind a pay wall. Other than that, the rest of what he said was pretty accurate about the game...

If Activision, EA, and Valve were paying this guy to blatantly leave a big steaming pile on the game he could have at least talked about the real problems instead of making stuff up.

-Horrible hit detection and server latency.
-Unplayable levels of lag on complex maps and different server hosts.
-Flawed terrain rendering that causes invisible walls.
-Imbalanced weapons.
-Constant nerfings to niche playstyles while priority is given to generic ones.
-Lack of matchmaking and tutorials for new players.
-Seemingly pointless interaction with EVE Online, even in PC and especially FW.

See that? I just listed several things that could have been covered to warrant such a bad score but I used actual facts. You don't need to lie about Dust 514's problems when there are so many that are as subtle as a kick to the groin.

You are assuming he played the other builds to know that it isn't on par with the other builds. He is oblivious, some people don't play beta's his job is to review the final version of the released product. Perhaps he thought the game was running the way it was intended to be ran. He couldn't tell it was lag because he had nothing to really compare it to as far as other builds. He prob just thought his aiming was bad.

He was doing work with the SP and HMG which actually do work so his aim isn't that shotty. But my point is that you can tell he simply played for ~5 battles in the academy and went on to almost completely bash the game with the bias of a greased palm. MMOHUT spends more time reviewing games than this guy did reviewing the game. Nothing about vehicles, the different suit classes, weapon types, or anything about the squad dynamic. Quite frankly, I'm disappointed because he was aiming for half ass but wound up with 1/16th. The only thing he did get right were the tutorials and the lack of EVE involvement.

He played more than 5 battles. Other morons are saying he lied that SR are Aur he didn't say they were he said the name of the variant that is Aur based. He was only honest in the entire review he didn't bash the game for the sake of bashing he was just pointing out a few flaws and did it hilariously