Monster Energy Supercross 25 Feature Scores
Explore all 83 feature scores for Monster Energy Supercross 25, organized into pros and cons.
Scores by Feature
Summary
83 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.05 (6%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.432 (39%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.423 (28%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.420 (24%)
-
Very negative below 1.53 (4%)
Pros
Sort
-
Evolving ruts give laps a changing rhythm and are often the standout addition. Others find the berms too predetermined, restrictive, or more visual than physical, especially on some tracks and builds.
-
Shared helmets, gear, bike graphics, and tracks are among the most warmly received features. Downloading talented players' creations gives even non-designers access to striking custom setups.
-
The strongest praise goes to helmet, suit, sticker, and shared community designs. Faces and some base gear choices remain limited, while level-gated unlocks can delay a desired look.
-
Mastering jumps and linking a clean lap can be exhilarating. Enjoyment falls sharply for players who spend more time fighting steering and grip than finding a racing rhythm.
-
Crossplay is widely welcomed for connecting PC and console players and expanding the pool of opponents. It makes racing with friends easier, although it cannot solve every lobby restriction.
-
Lighting, dirt, weather, and detailed bikes often make a strong impression, particularly during races. Off-track models and some close details can look dated, and not everyone sees a major leap over earlier games.
-
Custom liveries and community graphics are major highlights, with impressive coordinated setups possible. Base designs, career restrictions, and slow unlocks can limit access to the desired bike appearance.
-
Detailed tracks, evolving surfaces, engine sound, and controller feedback can make races feel convincing. Weak off-track presentation and sparse-looking venues sometimes break that connection.
-
Detailed stadiums, attractive outdoor scenery, and convincing dirt are frequent visual strengths. A smaller group finds the textures flat or the terrain too similar to older games.
-
Career ranges from a standout, immersive progression mode to a predictable sequence of races. Team synergy and rivalries help, but their depth does not satisfy everyone.
-
Career, quick races, championships, Time Attack, and Rhythm Attack provide several ways to ride. Opinions differ on whether this is enough variety or merely the same racing repackaged.
-
Official circuit replicas and large fictional motocross tracks often earn praise for their rhythms and scenery. Oversized SMX courses, similar-looking stadiums, and uneven launch layouts attract criticism.
-
Post-launch track, animation, and physics updates receive credit for sustained attention. Some changes improve riding substantially, though new handling quirks mean each patch does not please everyone.
-
Main menus are often quick and easy to navigate. The track editor is the exception for one critic, whose missing piece previews and confusing navigation make building frustrating.
-
Creating and sharing circuits can greatly extend the game, but editor quality is contentious. Restricted jump sizing, awkward tools, and testing bugs disappoint players seeking more freedom.
-
This is a sharply divisive Supercross entry with strong visuals, customization, and potentially rewarding racing. Its recommendation hinges on whether the revised handling feels satisfying or remains an obstacle.
-
Moving up classes, attracting teams, and developing a bike can provide satisfying direction. Other players find the career predictable or dislike long level-gated cosmetic reward tracks.
-
Convincing engine roar and distinct bike notes are frequent strengths. Exhaust variety, relentless revving, and annoying crowd noise draw criticism in other accounts.
-
DualSense vibration and trigger tension can communicate track texture and racing intensity very well. Collision feedback is less convincing in another account, leaving bumps feeling disconnected.
-
Bike development and team synergy add useful strategic goals, and upgrades can make a substantial difference. Critics find the system simplistic or question starting factory-team bikes with weak performance.
-
PS5 Pro enhancements earn strong praise for visual quality and controller feel. PC ultrawide support works well in races but leaves menus and replays bordered.
-
Opponents can deliver fast, aggressive battles that challenge experienced riders, and some consider them the series' best. Others report poor awareness, inconsistent pace, and collisions that feel unfair.
-
Local split-screen is widely welcomed, with Rhythm Attack a particular highlight. Its extra resource demands make it a weaker proposition on Steam Deck.
-
The challenge can feel demanding and rewarding, but even easy settings may punish newcomers. Some later tuning makes mistakes fairer, while uneven AI difficulty remains a concern elsewhere.
-
Some players love the clear, stylish menus, while others find the oversized lettering and bright branding excessive. The interface's personality is as divisive as its visual energy.
-
Racing itself can be enjoyable, but the public-lobby structure divides opinion. Critics particularly miss browsing, voting, class choice, and race-director tools.
-
Weight transfer and rhythm management provide satisfying depth for some racers. Others find the same flow-based demands as frustrating as they are rewarding.
-
Rain and adjustable outdoor conditions add grip changes and strategic variety. The praised effect is how weather changes riding, rather than merely how wet tracks look.
-
Connection reports range from stable, lag-free racing to frequent frustrating network problems. A later update-focused account finds improved consistency, so experiences vary across builds and setups.
-
The racing HUD makes good use of ultrawide displays, with elements correctly positioned across the wider view. Menus and replays do not receive the same full-width treatment.
-
Manufacturer progression unlocks bikes and upgrades without extra payment in the cited account. That free reward structure is explicitly appreciated.
-
PS5 and a powerful tested PC can deliver steady performance, while Steam Deck shows dips and occasional long stutters. Another PC session suffers substantial drops before graphics adjustments restore smoothness.
-
Lowering graphics settings restores a smooth 120 FPS in one troubled PC session. That improvement depends on the particular hardware and configuration.
-
Amusing butt-patch options add a playful touch to rider customization. They offer a small bit of personality away from the demanding racing.
-
Career contracts provide neat short-term objectives alongside the races. These goals give advancement useful direction.
-
One extended review finds the servers work well once a lobby is running. Its larger complaints concern setting up and choosing races rather than server performance itself.
-
The cited career assessment values skills that specialize a rider and unlock improved control. That extra progression adds personalization beyond simply winning another race.
Cons
Sort
-
The academy frequently explains which inputs exist without showing when or why to use them. Several players turn to community videos to learn techniques the game leaves unclear.
-
Removing the Compound takes away a valued place to ride freely, experiment, and take a break from formal races. For its fans, that loss substantially narrows the experience.
-
The removed Compound is one of the most consistent feature complaints. Fictional motocross tracks offer enjoyable racing but do not replace unrestricted exploration and practice for its fans.
-
The academy is a frequent weak point, with checklists and basic inputs replacing deeper explanation. A few find it useful, but many want clearer guidance on timing, weight transfer, and racing technique.
-
The missing Compound is a recurring loss, particularly for fans of free riding. Restricted access to some tracks and absent multiplayer tools also leave parts of the package feeling incomplete.
-
Coordinating rider weight, steering, throttle, and brakes can feel mentally cumbersome. The changed countersteering logic is especially difficult for players accustomed to earlier games.
-
Career repetition can feel laborious, and cosmetic unlocks attract sharper criticism. Very high rider levels can block a complete custom look for far too long.
-
Collision bugs and oversized-feeling opponent boundaries can undermine close racing. Contact sometimes pushes the player off line or fails to feel physically convincing.
-
Steering is the most divisive part of the game: many describe sluggish turns, snap corrections, or confusing input changes. Others praise accurate control, especially after practice or later updates.
-
Physics oddities, editor slowdowns, camera-setting faults, and occasional rendering problems remain notable complaints. Some testing finds only minor quirks, so the severity varies by build and setup.
-
The critical price assessments favor waiting for a deep discount or considering older entries. Rough handling, removed modes, and limited longevity weaken the full-price case.
-
Expect a substantial period of practice before riding reliably. For some that process is rewarding, but weak technique explanations and unfamiliar countersteering make it needlessly frustrating for others.
-
Fairness can suffer from unusually weak starts, one exceptionally fast AI rider, or collisions that seem to favor opponents. Competitive pace and collision behavior do not always feel consistent.
-
Announcements are often repetitive and can give incorrect race information. Familiar voices add authenticity, but limited and occasionally jarring lines weaken the broadcast presentation.
-
Career offers little meaningful drama or character development for players seeking a story. Basic text exchanges do not fill that gap for the critics.
-
The limited practice track is a poor replacement for open-world learning. The cited review finds it extremely basic and insufficient for mastering the new controls.
-
First-person racing can feel intense, but shaky framing and unwanted rotation are recurring complaints. One update still lets the camera rotate during big whips even with that option disabled.
-
Some players dispute the description of ruts as fully dynamic because similar berm patterns recur each race. The feature adds visible change, but its predictability can disappoint expectations.
-
Having many bikes does not always create meaningful handling variety. The cited critics find that changes in sound and stats fail to make each choice feel distinct enough.
-
Nailing jumps and flowing through rhythm sections can feel excellent. Cornering is much more contentious, with heavy steering, inconsistent grip, and sudden overcorrection repeatedly interrupting that flow.
-
Stadium energy is uneven. Attractive lighting and convincing engine acoustics help, but static crowds and empty-feeling venues repeatedly weaken the sense of a live event.
-
Rider movement divides opinion: some enjoy smoother motion and convincing weight, while others see rigid bodies, awkward whips, and legs popping off the bike. Later animation updates improve matters for some players.
-
Playlist matching is convenient for some, while others dislike losing lobby browsing and control over bike classes. Small player counts can also leave races sparsely populated.
-
Career responses make their moral direction obvious and offer little subtlety. The small number of reply choices limits how nuanced a rider's personality can become.
-
One returning PC player encounters repeated crashes that interrupt races. Driver and graphics changes eventually help, leaving the precise contribution of the game and that PC uncertain.
-
Restrictive level requirements can keep desired parts unavailable despite active play. One customization-focused player would prefer earning credits and directly buying the items they want.
-
Browsing and equipping community designs can involve conspicuously slow waits on PC. The customization itself is highly valued, but accessing it feels less smooth.
-
Career and reward structures can feel borrowed from older sports games and seasonal progression templates. The criticism centers on familiar design rather than a lack of racing content altogether.
-
Text-only rivals struggle to feel like people the player knows. Limited meaningful interaction weakens the sense of a personal racing relationship.
-
Basic riding can feel awkward enough that even small turns become work. A controller and repeated practice make the experience easier for some players.
-
Reputation, team chemistry, and rivalries can make career races more personal. Repeated two-choice messages also feel shallow, dated, or intrusive to several players.
-
Minimal story interruptions keep career moving for some players. Others find long repetitive races or mandatory side events slow the experience down.
-
Spanish text remains available, but English-only voices are criticized as a step backward. Players who valued Spanish spoken presentation lose part of that experience.
-
Steam Deck needs low settings, reduced resolution, and a 30 FPS target to stay playable. CPU load and occasional freezes prevent a fully smooth portable experience.
-
The presentation has a recognizable sense of style, but its loud Monster Energy aesthetic can feel excessive. Menu flair appeals more to some players than the aggressive branding does to others.
-
Official riders help capture the championship, but the selection does not always feel meaningfully diverse. Critics note reduced numbers or riders who handle too similarly.
-
Rock and metal can provide energetic racing accompaniment, but opinions are widely split. Some find the selection generic, harsh, or distracting enough to switch off.
-
Sponsors, rivalries, and events can keep career goals interesting, but repeated seasonal objectives and limited side-event types reduce variety for others. The balance depends on how engaging the core racing remains.
-
Steam Deck performance is playable with reduced resolution, low settings, and a 30 FPS target. It is a compromised option, especially where stutters or online timing matter.
-
Some see a meaningful rebirth through new physics, ruts, and career changes. Others consider it an incremental update that advances too little while removing useful features.
-
Presentation ranges from slick menus and a convincing broadcast feel to unfinished details and rough launch tracks. The degree of polish is uneven across modes and builds.
-
Perfecting a clean lap can create a compelling drive to improve. That rhythm is less successful for players who find repeated career races monotonous.
-
Assists can automate shifting and weight transfer, slow the action, and soften the physics, but their usefulness varies sharply. Several players still find the game punishing or wish for better control tuning.
-
Lighting, rain, roost, and dirt accumulation can look excellent. Dated fireworks and missing mud splashes expose weaker parts of the effects work.
-
Custom tracks, time improvement, and enjoyable career progression can encourage repeated play. Limited mode variety and restrictive multiplayer leave other players feeling finished surprisingly quickly.
-
Weighty bikes, free aerial movement, and changing grip can produce convincing racing. Random falls, slippery surfaces, and inconsistent turns remain major points of disagreement, even across later updates.
Use Cases
Best for
Sort
-
Patient racers can find a rewarding test in learning jump rhythms, managing grip, and beating fast AI. The appeal depends on enjoying practice and the satisfaction of gradually mastering difficult laps.
-
Simulation-racing enthusiasts can find a rewarding specialist racer if they enjoy practice and precise jump timing. The strongest recommendations come from players who enjoy mastering the revised physics.
-
Career is the main attraction for many, with team management, rivalries, and bike development offering sustained goals. Others find the same structure shallow, repetitive, or too familiar to carry the game.
-
A controller is consistently preferred for managing steering and rider weight. It provides the fine control this simulation needs, including on PC and Steam Deck.
-
Editors and sharing tools offer substantial creative appeal, especially for custom gear and circuits. Track-building praise is tempered by complaints about restricted pieces and unintuitive editing.
-
Split-screen, particularly Rhythm Attack, can be excellent for quick races with a visiting friend. Steam Deck is the notable exception, where extra rendering demands make two-player use hard to recommend.
-
Experienced riders are better positioned to appreciate advanced physics and the substantial mastery challenge. This is where the more demanding handling receives its clearest audience recommendation.
-
Time Attack's ghosts turn lap improvement into an engaging competitive pursuit. Chasing the next fastest run gives repeated attempts a clear target.
-
Rhythm Attack is a particularly strong option for two friends on the same screen. Straight-line races make it easy to experiment and enjoy quick competition together.
-
Dedicated Supercross enthusiasts can still enjoy the authentic racing focus despite its shortcomings. The recommendation is qualified by rough handling and the feeling that fans will continue wanting more.
-
Single events let players get useful track time or pursue achievements without committing to a full race series. They provide a convenient way to play in smaller blocks.
-
Good headphones make the praised engine roar especially engaging. The detailed bike audio is a strong reason to use them.
-
Rhythm Attack provides quick, enjoyable races without a full championship commitment. Its compact format works well for brief play.
-
Quick Rhythm Attack matches deliver an accessible burst of competition. They suit players who want a short race rather than a lengthy series.
-
Offline modes are the safer recommendation for Steam Deck, where low settings make racing playable. Online timing is less appealing because of occasional stutters.
-
Single events let players work on achievements without completing a whole race series. Customizable race conditions make this a convenient route for focused attempts.
Conditional or not ideal for
Sort
-
Franchise newcomersBeginner recommendations are sharply split. Supporters find satisfying progression with patience, but many warn that weak tutorials and unforgiving handling make this a difficult starting point.
-
Mouse and keyboard playKeyboard and mouse make fine steering and weight transfer extremely difficult in the tested experience. A controller is the much stronger choice.
-
Infrequent play between other gamesReturning after a long break can be frustrating because the unusual steering demands readjustment. Familiarity with earlier Supercross controls may make relearning the new stick logic harder.
-
Players sensitive to low frame ratesSteam Deck's occasional long freezes are conspicuous and jarring. Players especially bothered by stutter should treat its otherwise playable 30 FPS presentation cautiously.
-
Ranked competitive playLag and connectivity problems make serious competition frustrating in the cited online experience. Reliable execution matters too much for those interruptions to feel minor.
-
Budget-conscious buyersA deep discount makes more sense to the price-conscious critics than paying full price. Missing features and limited lasting appeal are their main reservations.
-
First playthrough on HardStarting on hard can become frustrating when moving from Futures into 250cc competition. Lowering the setting to medium resolves the cited difficulty spike.
-
Handheld gamingSteam Deck offers workable offline racing at low settings and a 30 FPS target. Occasional stutters and extra demands from split-screen limit the handheld recommendation.
-
Casual gamersSimplified physics help less experienced riders, yet the underlying game still demands timing and control. Recommendations range from broadly welcoming to cautioning casual players away from the serious simulation.
-
Returning playersVeterans receive welcome physics, visual, and career changes, but the transition is far from universally comfortable. Some see the best entry yet; others prefer earlier handling or struggle to readjust after a break.