Milestone releases a large number of racing games every year. Some of them aren’t half bad, such as Gravel, while others, chiefly its motorcycle games, leave something to be desired. Unfortunately, MXGP Pro is one of the motorcycle games, and while this is nowhere near as bad as the absolute debacle that was MXGP 3, it’s a definite step backwards from its Monster Energy Supercross title.
MXGP Pro is the newest racing game focusing on the Motocross World Championship, and that brings with it a collective of expected features, such as all of the tracks from last year’s circuit, and a handful of modes that you would expect to find in a game such as this. But that’s the problem. Whereas Monster Energy Supercross actually exceeded expectations and introduced new ideas in a few key spots, MXGP Pro marks a return to normalcy, in that there is no more than the bare minimum of what would be expected.
The game modes are limited to a slim online mode, a couple single player modes like time attack and individual races, and a barebones career mode. And then a training mode, but we’ll get to that in a bit. Gone is the track editor from Monster Energy Supercross. Hell, even the career mode feels stripped down. There are uniform options, bike options, and the like, but the actual quantity of the options feels lesser. Everything just feels smaller in scope compared to past entries. There is, however, an “extreme” mode that offers a more realistic attempt at motorcycle handling, with more stringent physics and bike options, requiring a lot more finesse, and it’s an appreciated addition.
But to circle back to the “tutorial”, which might actually be the worst aspect of the game. The tutorial consists of a short lap of a track intercut with narration about how to play the game. It lasts about two minutes and then there are a sequence of training missions to hone your abilities. Weirdly, these training missions grant in-game bonuses, like faster gate-drop reaction time or better cornering. That on its own is fine, but when you pair with the fact that these training missions don’t help anything at all, it becomes tedious. You have to do a sequence of things, like ride through a number of flags in a set amount of time, but none of the more advanced moves, like scrubbing, are laid out for you. The training missions all amount to “okay, go do this” without any sense of handholding to actually help you figure out how to do it. The end result saw us having to run through each level many times, including multiple dozens of attempts in some cases. If we didn’t have a stress ball handy with us, there were several occasions where the DualShock was in real danger of flying through the nearest window. The tutorials end up being about as fun as bashing your head into a wall, so if you go into those, be wary.
We haven’t really talked about the actual gameplay yet, though, so you might be wondering how that is. And unfortunately it’s like the previous games in the series, which is to say, terrible. We’ve taken the mickey out of the gameplay in this series several times, and this one will be no exception. While it makes strides in some areas, it ultimately amounts to just more wheel spinning. Line selection is something we’ve had a huge problem with in this series, as that is something massively important to dirt bike racing. Surprisingly, line selection is actually possible this time, sometimes.
Ultimately the bright spots of gameplay are ruined by a lingering issue this series always goes up against: the physics. The physics are complete and utter nonsense, and there is no semblance of consistency. It becomes so maddening, with the problems often cascading so extremely, that you just want to shut the PlayStation off. There was on especially memorable instance of this where we went from first place to last place because the bike “crashed” on a straightaway for nothing, and then proceeded to do this several more times on the same straightaway. And then we were back in first again, in the same lap. Meanwhile sometimes a really severe turn where you should definitely crash sees you make it out just fine, while other times the simplest turn in the world bucks off your bike so fast you don’t even have time to react. The only consistency the game has is a complete and utter lack of consistency.
If there’s something nice to be said, though, it’s that the bike models look nice. All the different manufacturers are on display, and both the sound and look of the bikes is exceptional. Additionally, the weather options, while limited, are satisfying. Racing during rain in particular, looks genuinely fantastic. The shine of the mud and the rain is handled extremely well. It’s just a shame the sound design in other areas of the game aren’t as well implemented. The crowds that come out to watch these races are borderline silent. You hear a cheer every once in a while, but it never gets electrifying. And the number of people actually shown to be at the races is so low the Arizona Coyotes could easily outpace them for attendance. It’s also recommended that you bring your own soundtrack to play to; what little music there is ultimately forgettable.
Conclusion
Saying that Milestone need to take a step back with its dirt bike games and rework everything is becoming as tired a statement as saying Telltale needs to use a new engine. But it remains true yet again with MXGP Pro. A very slight improvement over MXGP 3, but a noticeable step back from Monster Energy Supercross, MXGP Pro is largely a spectacular disaster. It gets a couple things right, and offers a new slate of tracks to race on, but you’ll be too busy slamming your head into a wall to really notice.
Comments 18
On the bright side telltale is using a new engine so there's thst
@SKC_Diamond
Are you lost ? What does that have to do with this
@SKC_Diamond I complained about it enough times!
@ShadowWarrior I likened aspects of this series to Telltale's need for a new engine in the conclusion.
@gbanas92
Ok im the one whose lost bluh never mind
Disagree 100%. I've played the game for 12 hours so far and think it's most complex motocross game around in terms of physics and gameplay, it's also very generous in terms of single-player content. If you want a sim-like experience this is the best motocross game so far, especially in how the different surfaces feel, which is significantly improved from their previous game. So 'yes', switching engine was a good idea for them.
I've also not had any significant technical issues with the game, there's some minor framedrops at the start of a race with all the drivers, but as they spread out the game runs smoothly for me. It doesn't have the weird camera-angle thing their Supercross game had.
Reviewing a genre or sub-genre you don't like or a real-life sporting franchise you have zero interest in, like MotoGP or MXGP, feels pointless to me. It would be like me reviewing Fortnite or Witcher 3, I would rate those 3/10 as well, because I have no interest in them and their gameplay.
@Bonbonetti
I know what you mean. I also think it depends on who's doing the review. Sometimes, the reviews here, on PushSquare, are quite balanced and informative, whilst at other times, they can be quite poor and misleading. A recent example of this, for me, was the review of Space Hulk Deathwing. https://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/space_hulk_deathwing
In the article, the reviewer described the game as a series of tiresome battles of attrition. He also mentioned that sealing doors had little effect.
I can imagine that he was simply closing the doors (which can then be re-opened by the enemy), and not permanently sealing them, as I've seen novice players do the same thing, when playing online with them, forcing myself to go over to the door and seal it, after they've simply closed it and then walked away. When I read the bit about doors, I knew that the reviewer didn't have a clue about the game, as sealing doors, in the title, is one of the cornerstones of the gameplay, and it has a massive effect. If that's not done properly, then the enemy will swarm you, hence his comment about battles of attrition.
@Hengist Half the time they don't seem interested at all in what they are reviewing, but are simply reviewing a game because it landed on their desk or they have no other content to make. In contrast, the games they are genuinly interested in playing get a really good score.
As your Space Hulk Deathwing example perfectly illustrates, a reviewer should do some research about a game before reviewing it. In this case, does the game capture the atmosphere of the real-life MXGP event, and does it offer a convincing simulated experience?
The bottomline for me is that a reviewer should be "into" a specific genre or sub-genre in order to make a valuable and informative comment of it. The people interested in actually buying MXGP Pro are those who play lots of motocross games, especially the MXGP series. In general it's people who play lots of racing games, not just F1 games and Gran Turismo. This review is targeted at people who had no interest in actually buying and playing the game in the first place. It certainly doesn't feel aimed at me, someone spends 70% of his gaming time on racing games.
The credibility of PushSquare's reviews has decreased significantly for me in recent months, but it's at rock bottom right now. 3/10 for this game is just absurd and grossly misleading. If this what they think a 3/10 game is like there's something very wrong with their reasoning.
@Hengist @Bonbonetti Come on guys. Please don’t suggest we don’t put effort and research into reviewing a game just because you disagree with what our view is.
Just to reference the comments about my SH: Deathwing review. I was fully aware of how to hack and seal doors, and you know what? It never felt like it made a big enough difference to what was happening.
Bottom line on Deathwing: That game’s absolute bobbins, and a poor use of the 40k license, and I can’t believe someone with a deep interest in that universe would be willing to give it a pass.
@Bonbonetti I respect (and am glad frankly) that you had a much better experience with the game, but I happen to be a long-standing huge fan of motocross. I'm not sure why not liking a game means I must not like the genre. The fact I'm a big motocross fan is specifically why it got a lower score. I expected more from it.
I definitely had more technical issues though it sounds like. Lots of weird physics inconsistencies pretty much every time out. Do you have a Pro? Maybe it was some arbitrary difference between the types of PS4?
And I did not just review this to mark a checkbox off a list. I sought it out, as I've done with Milestone's last several motocross games as well.
That being said by the ratio you offered, you do definitely play a lot more racers than I do, but I'm by no means new to the genre or anything like that. And it's also a genre I happen to like. It's not a JRPG or something, where I would consider myself firmly out of my element. I've been playing motocross games since I was somewhere in the ballpark of 5, back when the best available options were "Motocross Madness" and the like.
@AlexStinton
I never suggested that you didn't put effort and research into reviewing a game. They're your words, not mine. I did suggest that you didn't understand the gameplay mechanics, and therefore you gave a summary that was misleading. Based upon your reply above, I still maintain that.
If it's that 'bobbins', then why I have I been playing, in coop, every night, since it launched? It's one of the best squad/team based, tactical shooters that I've played in a long while. Have you ever played the board game or book that it's based upon? The reason why I ask (and it's not a necessary requirement, I'm just attempting to emphasise the gravity of it), is because if you had, then you'd appreciate the importance of sealing doors and how that is also modelled within the game, for both on and offline play.
However, each to their own, if you don't like it, then nothing I say here will change your mind.
@Hengist I have no idea how old you are, but I was playing Space Hulk games in physical and video game form before most people reading this site were born. That’s why I found what felt like a lack of impact from sealing doors so perplexing.
Now, that we’ve got comparing the size of our Warhammer 40k genitalia out of the way, may I propose a idea?
Could it be that we are both right? After all, reviews are subjective - despite what some people may say. We’re both entitled to our views and I am genuinely happy that you’re getting lots of enjoyment out of Space Hulk: Deathwing. I respect your position despite it being different to mine, so maybe you should respect mine.
@AlexStinton
I never mentioned that I don't respect you. Of course I respect your opinion, for me that was never at question, nor an issue. As for my age, going by your picture, I'll add 15-20 years on top of your age. My first computer was a Sinclair ZX80
@Hengist My picture may be slightly out of date. By about 10 years to be precise. But let’s not talk about that 😬
Since the days of dial-up on 14.4k modems, I've used this 'online' name and never used a real picture of myself. Stranger danger, 'n all that.
Honestly I thought mxgp 3 (using pro physics) was an excellent game apart from the multiplayer bugs like the track cutting. I just cant understand why they stripped back the ruts and track deformation for mxgp pro, and also didnt put in the track editor. However that remains my only qualm with the game, physics (at their most realistic setting) are fine apart from some issues with flat landings being very unreliable with how high you can jump vs in real life, as sometimes it can be only a normal jump for a professional irl, yet in the game it causes a crash. Apart from this I cant see why it gets a 3/10, it does have a learning curve and I know some games can be hard to master before this e.g. r6 siege. Or did you review it with the standard physics as I know most people play with more realism.
@RiceYZ125 Yeah I was very surprised by the omission of the track editor. And I spent some time with both physics settings, to give both a shot. The realistic physics were definitely better, (the standard physics were a complete and utter mess) but I still found them to be wildly inconsistent in the time I spent with the game.
@gbanas92 a question I would ask is how much time did you put into each track? I can’t buy it yet where I am at, but every single video I have watched, people say that every track is so different that you have to ride them differently.
@eringobragh I raced each track at least twice (a couple others more than that), and the track types definitely have different ride styles. It won't shine through too much on standard mode, but it's definitely the case with the realistic mode!
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...