Battlefield: Bad Company 2 vs. MAG

These are two big online MP games coming out soon.

At first, I was debating which one to get.

Then I tried the betas for each of them.

There is no comparison at all - The BF:BC2 beta was incredible and the MAG beta sucked.

BF:BC2 has gorgeous large lush environments, while MAG just looks like crap (I know it has to account for a zillion players online at once, but still, it's painful to watch).

BF:BC2 has tons of polish, whereas MAG is clunky and awful (for example, when you press L1 to aim down the sights in MAG, instead of smootly moving the gun up to your eyesight, the screen simply abruptly switches to a different shot where you are looking down the sights).

I am actually a huge fan of Zipper (the MAG developer) but I am not feeling MAG.

Very few people who have played both will honestly disagree with you. Mag is a total disappointment while BFBC2 is way better than I expected.

Bad Company 2 is the sequel of my favourite multiplayer game this gen so it will most likelly be my favourite

i played the beta to both and thought both really werent all that great. it just makes me appreciate what Killzone 2 is.InfiniteBlak

I prefer Bad company 2. Which is what I will buy.

I will disagree on the supposed "horrible" quality of the mag beta; I actually thinkthe beta is quite fun with friends.

That being said, I agree 100% that BF:BC2 is the superior game. I just don't think Mag is as horrible as everyone makes it out to be

These are two big online MP games coming out soon.

At first, I was debating which one to get.

Then I tried the betas for each of them.

There is no comparison at all - The BF:BC2 beta was incredible and the MAG beta sucked.

BF:BC2 has gorgeous large lush environments, while MAG just looks like crap (I know it has to account for a zillion players online at once, but still, it's painful to watch).

BF:BC2 has tons of polish, whereas MAG is clunky and awful (for example, when you press L1 to aim down the sights in MAG, instead of smootly moving the gun up to your eyesight, the screen simply abruptly switches to a different shot where you are looking down the sights).

I am actually a huge fan of Zipper (the MAG developer) but I am not feeling MAG.

Jason_A

I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.theMarshell

I liked MAG better, sniping people is fun but it also gets annoying when you get sniped.Arctic_Grillz

[QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Kennysolidsnake

[QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Kennysolidsnake

bfbc2

when almost every1 on sw is hyping mag 6.5- you know its gonna be a bad game and mag will not flop its to low

If I was totally ignorant of both titles, I'd root for BC2 instantaneously just after discovering how MAG depicts its weaponry.

Deeeesgusting.

I've got both betas. Liking the MAG beta far more. The scale of the battles is crazy. Bad Company 2 is good, don't get me wrong, but MAG has it edged in terms of multiplayer IMO. Especially with this new MAG beta. The closed beta for MAG was pretty bad but the newer one is great. Zipper has scored again IMO. But, either way, I'll end up getting both. Bad Company 1's single player was awesome. No way i'd pass up the 2nd one.

I really thought it was just me when I posted this topic, but looks like most people agree.

BTW, for those dissapointed with MAG, I would recommend SOCOM: Confrontation. You may notice it got bad reviews but virtually every review says it was some technical issues that ruined it and that the potential was there - well, the patches have fixed it up and it is now the single best tactical shooter this generation imo, plus they just released a giant DLC with new maps, snow effects, new music, new weapons, etc.

[QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Kennysolidsnake

If I was totally ignorant of both titles, I'd root for BC2 instantaneously just after discovering how MAG depicts its weaponry.

Deeeesgusting.

Verge_6

For the record, that's only 1 faction. :P

SVER is more of a freedom fighter group so they aren't going to have advanced weaponry like Raven. Valor is modern time weaponry. It's good there's a difference between the 3 IMO.

[QUOTE="Kennysolidsnake"][QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Wasdie

I love rolling out on Battlefield in a heavy Abrams. It just feels so sick driving tanks in that game. Gotta love them T90's too.

MAG was horrible. Pretty bad game. And people defending it are in denial. I'm sorry, but it's just not good.

These are two big online MP games coming out soon.

At first, I was debating which one to get.

Then I tried the betas for each of them.

There is no comparison at all - The BF:BC2 beta was incredible and the MAG beta sucked.

BF:BC2 has gorgeous large lush environments, while MAG just looks like crap (I know it has to account for a zillion players online at once, but still, it's painful to watch).

BF:BC2 has tons of polish, whereas MAG is clunky and awful (for example, when you press L1 to aim down the sights in MAG, instead of smootly moving the gun up to your eyesight, the screen simply abruptly switches to a different shot where you are looking down the sights).

I am actually a huge fan of Zipper (the MAG developer) but I am not feeling MAG.

Jason_A

Very few people who have played both will honestly disagree with you. Mag is a total disappointment while BFBC2 is way better than I expected.

Wasdie

Bad Company 2 is the sequel of my favourite multiplayer game this gen so it will most likelly be my favourite

PAL360

I prefer Bad company 2. Which is what I will buy.

RadecSupreme

MAG was horrible. Pretty bad game. And people defending it are in denial. I'm sorry, but it's just not good.

wapahala

Bad Company 2 is the sequel of my favourite multiplayer game this gen so it will most likelly be my favourite

PAL360

[QUOTE="Jason_A"]

These are two big online MP games coming out soon.

At first, I was debating which one to get.

Then I tried the betas for each of them.

There is no comparison at all - The BF:BC2 beta was incredible and the MAG beta sucked.

BF:BC2 has gorgeous large lush environments, while MAG just looks like crap (I know it has to account for a zillion players online at once, but still, it's painful to watch).

BF:BC2 has tons of polish, whereas MAG is clunky and awful (for example, when you press L1 to aim down the sights in MAG, instead of smootly moving the gun up to your eyesight, the screen simply abruptly switches to a different shot where you are looking down the sights).

I am actually a huge fan of Zipper (the MAG developer) but I am not feeling MAG.

Kennysolidsnake

I really thought it was just me when I posted this topic, but looks like most people agree.

BTW, for those dissapointed with MAG, I would recommend SOCOM: Confrontation. You may notice it got bad reviews but virtually every review says it was some technical issues that ruined it and that the potential was there - well, the patches have fixed it up and it is now the single best tactical shooter this generation imo, plus they just released a giant DLC with new maps, snow effects, new music, new weapons, etc.

Jason_A

I think it would be a better comparison between MW2 and BC2

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="Kennysolidsnake"] you and everyone else bash MAG because of grahpics.. MAG has Bad company 2 beat in overall gameplay and customization, its just a deeper game.. People here that say MAG is bad only played it maybe 10 mins and got mad they couldnt own noobs with dual shotguns from 10 miles away.. MAG is awesome and everyone on my PSN friends list says the same thing.telefanatic

I love rolling out on Battlefield in a heavy Abrams. It just feels so sick driving tanks in that game. Gotta love them T90's too.

I think it would be a better comparison between MW2 and BC2

Colin1192

MAG was horrible. Pretty bad game. And people defending it are in denial. I'm sorry, but it's just not good.

wapahala

Yes, since opinions between people never differ. Obviously that would mean that your opinion is just like everyone elses in the world. :roll:

To be honest I thought both betas were just ok. I wont be getting either day 1

it just makes me appreciate what Killzone 2 is.InfiniteBlak

mag is no doubt going to be better becoz its a sony exclusive n sony knows how to make their exclusives great

[QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Kennysolidsnake

MAG is disappointing, even though I'll stand up for some of its shortcomings. It doesn't feel like one big concerted war effort, just large scale death match or objective based maps. I really want a more modern PlanetSide.

I haven't tried BFBC2 but I have no doubt in my mind it'll be far better than MAG, even if it doesn't have the massive battles.

Well I stopped by my bro's pad last night and he was playing the new MAG beta. I was expecting it to be horrible from everything I've read in SW but it actually managed to pique my interest. I love BC1 and BC2 is a day one buy for me, but depending on how MAG turns out I could see myself having two new shooters to play with :D

[QUOTE="Kennysolidsnake"][QUOTE="theMarshell"]I had them both (BF:BC2 first) MAG dissaponted me, I left my ps3 on all night for that update only too see that the game fails. Anyone who likes this game over BF hasn't played played BF.Wasdie

Which was my main problem with BC2. The medic machine gun was way too accurate. I could run and spray and get many many kills with what should be a very heavy and inaccurate weapon. Despite this, the game as a whole seemed very solid to me, and I would have to say that I prefer it to MAG.

BC2 is better but its beta was disappointing. The map was too straightforward and there are only 4 different types of vehicles which makes it feel limited.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="Kennysolidsnake"] you and everyone else bash MAG because of grahpics.. MAG has Bad company 2 beat in overall gameplay and customization, its just a deeper game.. People here that say MAG is bad only played it maybe 10 mins and got mad they couldnt own noobs with dual shotguns from 10 miles away.. MAG is awesome and everyone on my PSN friends list says the same thing.shakmaster13

Which was my main problem with BC2. The medic machine gun was way too accurate. I could run and spray and get many many kills with what should be a very heavy and inaccurate weapon. Despite this, the game as a whole seemed very solid to me, and I would have to say that I prefer it to MAG.

bad company 2 was an incredible experience when I played it on the PS3 beta. f bombs were flying everywhere, the combat felt intense and satisfying, and tanks aren't overpowered when you have competent players to work with, which unfortunately, was quite rare in that beta.

the upgrades are spot-on, they don't feel too far stretched and are difficult to unlock.

as to the comments above, I too am rather baffled that the LMG weapons were given to the medic this time around, they should have been given to the assault/support class, and the unsupressed submachine guns/ assault rifles to the medics post-balance.

I didn't like either beta. MAG locks out the 256 mode until rank 10 which took awhile without the healing others/revive ability and the Battlefield beta was one map and a few vehicles.