Anyone think MAG graphics are pretty bad?

I understand graphics ain't everything and the point of a game is gameplay and all but anyone else think they REALLY watered down MAG's presentation to support that many players?

I think some PS2 games look better than MAG. Well of course I don't own the game and it's still in development but all the gameplay footage so far don't show any form of destruction to the environment at all. I don't expect grenade and RPG explosions to carve out a crater in the terrain at the very least create some burn marks but no, explosions do not have any effect on the environment at all. There aren't even any bulletholes when you shoot a wall or object! Ye know... Just certain things like how when you parachute down into the battlefield, your entire parachute disappears the second you land. The game seems to be missing a lot of little details and they all add up when I watch the traielrs and gameplay footage.

I didn't expect them to have to sacrifice that much polish that comes standard in AAA PS3 exclusives. I doubt adding burn marks on the ground after an explosion will make anyone lag. I don't think I'm a graphics whore but I really appreciate good graphics. It's a AAA PS3 exclusive that doesn't have bulletholes in surfaces! C'mon!

As I said, surely gameplay's more important and all and I'm considering getting it. Just that my internet speeds are miserable so I dunno how it'll play for me.

The gameplay isn't that great either. Socom 2's gameplay with less people beats the hell out of this.

Have you considered the scale of the game?

The animations look really clunky, and battlefields look like a laser show.

Well I dunno about how fun it is to play it.. The recent GameSpot interview and demo from PAX shows the player die like 10, maybe more times under 5 minutes worth of footage. So, that worries me.. I'm still interested though.

And yea I do understand the size and scale of the game but how much ping would a measly burnmark on the ground increase? That's like a spray in Counter Strike or other Valve games. At the very least, only show these details to the players around that area but no, none of that at all.

you can mark this down...put mag is going to be a huge dissapointment

I'm not going to get MAG, but I'm going to offer the game some defense. First of all with the graphics - the game is online, so the graphics aren't going to be single-player campaign quality. Factor in that the game boasts up to 256 players online,so the graphics aren't going to be the best. But let's face it - no one in their right mind is going to buy MAG for graphics. The gameplay is what the people who buy this game care about, not how good the game looks. If Zipper wanted to make a graphical showcase, they could have just slapped together another single-player game and made the graphics look great. But no, they chose the gameplay route. What other game let's you play with so many other people online? None. That's what makes MAG different. And in a good way.

they aint that bad...but they aint that great

I also forgot to mention that games generally look worse in video clips online than they do actually playing them...

I understand the game's huge in scale and all. I guess I'm just surprised how much they had to sacrifice to make the game work. I don't expect beautiful eye popping visuals with amazing draw distance (though I think MAG has a good draw distance), but I did expect bullet holes.

If you watch the recent gameplay trailer from PAX, the graphics look alot more polished than they did when it was shown at E3

i'm in the beta.
if you think the graphics look like crap just from watching the trailers, wait till you play the real game. it looks worse
the gameplay itself isnt even that great... i mean, a FPS were you have to selet your grenade just to throw it.. lame.

I think they look acceptable from what I've seen. As long as I can tell what's going on than I'm okay

Yeah but the game is friggin huge so it's pretty much acceptable. Same reason why Final Fantasy games looked better than the GTA games last gen.

I've only had the chance to log into the beta once and I'll be honest I was initially let down with the graphics, but my disappointment quickly changed over to the frame rate. It was pretty low and not very smooth. I am willing to give the game the benefit of the doubt because, as I stated before I've only played once and it is a beta. I really hope the final version feels smoother. That being said, I actually had a good time playing.

you can mark this down...put mag is going to be a huge dissapointment

jagsxxfan

i'm in the beta.
if you think the graphics look like crap just from watching the trailers, wait till you play the real game. it looks worse
the gameplay itself isnt even that great... i mean, a FPS were you have to selet your grenade just to throw it.. lame.

iamshivy

yea ever heard of uncharted?

I think they're pretty good, but not Crysis-good. :)

[QUOTE="iamshivy"]

i'm in the beta.
if you think the graphics look like crap just from watching the trailers, wait till you play the real game. it looks worse
the gameplay itself isnt even that great... i mean, a FPS were you have to selet your grenade just to throw it.. lame.

yarou1000

yea ever heard of uncharted?

[QUOTE="yarou1000"]

[QUOTE="iamshivy"]

i'm in the beta.
if you think the graphics look like crap just from watching the trailers, wait till you play the real game. it looks worse
the gameplay itself isnt even that great... i mean, a FPS were you have to selet your grenade just to throw it.. lame.

Large_Soda

yea ever heard of uncharted?

yea lol but seriously u have to select ur grenade some times in killzone 2 as well and socom...

I'm not going to get MAG, but I'm going to offer the game some defense. First of all with the graphics - the game is online, so the graphics aren't going to be single-player campaign quality. Factor in that the game boasts up to 256 players online,so the graphics aren't going to be the best. But let's face it - no one in their right mind is going to buy MAG for graphics. The gameplay is what the people who buy this game care about, not how good the game looks. If Zipper wanted to make a graphical showcase, they could have just slapped together another single-player game and made the graphics look great. But no, they chose the gameplay route. What other game let's you play with so many other people online? None. That's what makes MAG different. And in a good way.

Vari3ty

P.S. the graphics are actually prettty good, not killzone or uncharted graphics but for a 256 players online, its pretty good, as long as u can aim, kill and see the enemy thats all that matters. i could care less if the graphics got abit more watered down, as long as the gameplay of the game is solid and fun, thats all that matters. damn with all these new techs. and this gen, ppl only care about 1 THING......... graphics

I've only had the chance to log into the beta once and I'll be honest I was initially let down with the graphics, but my disappointment quickly changed over to the frame rate. It was pretty low and not very smooth. I am willing to give the game the benefit of the doubt because, as I stated before I've only played once and it is a beta. I really hope the final version feels smoother. That being said, I actually had a good time playing.

Large_Soda

Well obviously its a 256 player game its not going to have Crysis graphics and if anyone thought that then they will be dissapointed. All of my friends in the BETA say its fun and one person said he wasn't going to buy it and later said he was. So it will be a pick-up for me. I'm going to look at more things and reviews of the BETA but for now i'm buying it.

Hoping they do a polish up later on

[QUOTE="Large_Soda"]

[QUOTE="yarou1000"]

yea ever heard of uncharted?

yarou1000

yea lol but seriously u have to select ur grenade some times in killzone 2 as well and socom...

I wish all games required you to select a grenade to throw it. That way it wouldn't be so easy for people to spam grenades all the time. Maybe it would even discourage them.

It's a huge game so i'll give it some slack but it seems as if it has zero polish. Like they didn't even try to add any. Twig978

Well said.. That's what I thought and meant .

If the gameplay is solid, I can easily take in the bland graphics. After all, when you are in a battlefield you are not going to take notice of the details. Especially when I have to keep myself alive against 128 enemy players.

I just got finish watching MAG beta in HD on youtube and I've got to say, it actually looks half decent even for a beta! Killzone 2 has a pathetic storyline, but no one plays the game for the story just like those who play MAG will do so for the gameplay and not graphics. Graphics are over rated, its time a game comes along with some substance instead of instant gratification. A FPS with some depth for a change. I will give it a try before I try to shoot it down.Ninja_Zombie83

I agree

yeah for the scale of the game, I can't complain. I just want good gameplay.

you can mark this down...put mag is going to be a huge dissapointment

jagsxxfan

This for sure!

I just got finish watching MAG beta in HD on youtube and I've got to say, it actually looks half decent even for a beta! Killzone 2 has a pathetic storyline, but no one plays the game for the story just like those who play MAG will do so for the gameplay and not graphics. Graphics are over rated, its time a game comes along with some substance instead of instant gratification. A FPS with some depth for a change. I will give it a try before I try to shoot it down.Ninja_Zombie83

I couldn't disagree more. I care for the story. The gameplay doesn't have to be innovative, it just needs to be solid. So long as I'm not mindlessly mashing buttons and the control scheme isn't overly complex then I'm good to go. The sad truth is that these days graphics are top priority, and gameplay and story comes second. MAG doesn't look that great no, but considering the scale of the game it's acceptable. I don't care for MAG because I hate FPS games, but I have agree that considering the scale of this game the graphics are just fine.

Being as I was one of the lucky ones to make it into the beta, I can safely say that this will be the cream of the crop when it comes to FPS's, Gameplay is tight and graphics are just fine. The 2nd I stepped into the battlefield is the second MW2 fell off my radar. This game is amazing, its the only FPS war game that actually made me feel apart of something bigger, an actaul war, go figure.

Let me say this, if your running around worring about why the graphics aren't top of the line / KZ2 type, then you are going to be dieing alot, and I sure as hell don't want you on my team. Its 256 players running with little to barely no lag, what else do you want?

you can mark this down...put mag is going to be a huge dissapointment

jagsxxfan

I think the gameplay and graphics look poor.

i wish the mag beta was for every ps3 owner..because theyre losing sales from us just by the video gameplay

[QUOTE="yarou1000"]

[QUOTE="Large_Soda"] Yeah, it's that sweet Third Person Shooter right?

BPoole96

yea lol but seriously u have to select ur grenade some times in killzone 2 as well and socom...

I wish all games required you to select a grenade to throw it. That way it wouldn't be so easy for people to spam grenades all the time. Maybe it would even discourage them.

Excuse me, Zipper Interactive will not release anything other then stellar. The game has 256 players, a lot more then any console shooter has ever had. The game should not be judged by it's graphics, Im sure the gameplay will be second-to-none and coming up to release stay I expect improvements to continue till then.

For the average game, yeah.

But seeing how many players it has, while it's average overall, it looks ok.