MAG'nificent

Look into "MMOFPS" before you make another topic about MAG.

Two weeks to go. The greatest team based shooter to ever hit since Battlefield 2 for PC. To think we are gaming in an age where 256 people are squaring off inside your living room is hard to realize. Get ready gentleman, the new year has ushered in the future of gaming. This is it, prepare for the Shadow War.girl_pounder

Best username I've seen in awhile here.

Wow MAG is so underated,graphics are not sooo bad and graphics dont make a game....gameplay is not broken,i played the beta and it was just fine.You will never learn what teamwork is in gaming is until you play online games(specially Metal Gear Online) with japanese people.

Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.StealthMonkey4

EDIT: also i want to point out i hated the game in the first two betas, it had a ton of problems but i played on. When the public beta was put out last week that is when i was won over.

If you honestly care about MAG's graphics then good riddance to you.

Secondly, the gameplay is not buggy or broken. And it's almost entirely lag-free. I think someone is just a sad panda because they had to wait in a queue for a couple minutes. ='[

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.Sully28

Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.StealthMonkey4

You're really over MAGnifying the game's quality.Skittles_McGee

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.girl_pounder

You're really over MAGnifying the game's quality.Skittles_McGee

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.Sully28

What MAG were you playing? I never saw any teamwork. MAGs biggest gimmick is what really holds it back its hard to get 8 people to work together let alone 128 people. I really like the gunplay but the lack of teamwork and repetativness really holds it back.

It's looking to be a great shooter, but i prefer smaller tactical based teams rather than 64 players on each side.

I don't understand how it's a game's fault for what the players do.

The game can only do so much. They offer XP incentives to follow your Squad Leader and Platoon Leader's orders, it's really on the player's shoulders to figure it out from there.

There was a lack of teamwork, but it was also the beta. I think I played with maybe ten squad leaders the entire time, and most of them knew what they were doing.

When people realize they get more experience when sticking with their squads, they'll learn to play as a team.

it isnt like it is all 256 in one spot. Squads are broken down so you are in relatively small battles and not large ones. It is like 10 small matches but they packaged it into one match

I don't understand how it's a game's fault for what the players do.

The game can only do so much. They offer XP incentives to follow your Squad Leader and Platoon Leader's orders, it's really on the player's shoulders to figure it out from there.

There was a lack of teamwork, but it was also the beta. I think I played with maybe ten squad leaders the entire time, and most of them knew what they were doing.

When people realize they get more experience when sticking with their squads, they'll learn to play as a team.

Wow MAG is so underated,graphics are not sooo bad and graphics dont make a game....gameplay is not broken,i played the beta and it was just fine.You will never learn what teamwork is in gaming is until you play online games(specially Metal Gear Online) with japanese people.

Regisland

[QUOTE="Sully28"]

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.StealthMonkey4

Exactly, you are helping my point. The regular sabotage missions(64 players) play like a normal shooter, you go to point A, shoot some guys, blow up the objective, and go to point B. The sabatoge games are basically just a way of working you up for the 256 player battles which are locked untill you reach level 10(takes maybe 2-4 hours to reach, depending how good you are.). In sabotage there is no chain of command, squad leaders are pointless and im not even sure if there are any higher poisitions on the battlefield during those games. There is team work involved, but nothing more then an average shooter.

In the 256 player games you are given multiple objectives to attack or defend, there are an insane amount of enemies everywhere, and there is honestly not a minute for you to take a break. It is insanity. The best way to describe it is battlefield 2 on steroids. If they put out a demo i highley reccomend you try it untill you get to play a few 256 player battles, thats when the fun starts.

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.Sully28

EDIT: also i want to point out i hated the game in the first two betas, it had a ton of problems but i played on. When the public beta was put out last week that is when i was won over.

[QUOTE="girl_pounder"]Two weeks to go. The greatest team based shooter to ever hit since Battlefield 2 for PC. To think we are gaming in an age where 256 people are squaring off inside your living room is hard to realize. Get ready gentleman, the new year has ushered in the future of gaming. This is it, prepare for the Shadow War.bez2083

Best username I've seen in awhile here.

[QUOTE="girl_pounder"][QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"] Don't be so sure to count MAG out bucko. [QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"]You're really over MAGnifying the game's quality.StealthMonkey4

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"][QUOTE="girl_pounder"] Lol ok little cheesy, I know, just go with it for now. This game has heart. It's hard to find those kind of qualities in FPS games this day and age.brennan7777

The 256 player thing just seems tacked on and doesn't add anything good to the game really. I'd preferred if it stuck to 64 player or below matches.

The game is hideous. After playing the Beta i thought it was some sort of joke the devs were playing on me. Definitely not getting this

[QUOTE="Regisland"]

Wow MAG is so underated,graphics are not sooo bad and graphics dont make a game....gameplay is not broken,i played the beta and it was just fine.You will never learn what teamwork is in gaming is until you play online games(specially Metal Gear Online) with japanese people.

Midnightshade29

[QUOTE="Sully28"]

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.StealthMonkey4

MAG is horrid..

it isnt like it is all 256 in one spot. Squads are broken down so you are in relatively small battles and not large ones. It is like 10 small matches but they packaged it into one match

Colin1192

MAG is horrid..

mD-

You're really over MAGnifying the game's quality.Skittles_McGee

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"][QUOTE="Sully28"] You really must not have played for more then 10 mins, or havent even played a 256 player game. The graphics are nothing to brag about, but the gameplay and teamwork is where the game shines. I havent experienced this level of team work since playing battlefield 2 on PC. Everyone was communicating in every game i played, the squad leaders listened to requests of squad mates, and everyone just generally worked together.

Sully28

Exactly, you are helping my point. The regular sabotage missions(64 players) play like a normal shooter, you go to point A, shoot some guys, blow up the objective, and go to point B. The sabatoge games are basically just a way of working you up for the 256 player battles which are locked untill you reach level 10(takes maybe 2-4 hours to reach, depending how good you are.). In sabotage there is no chain of command, squad leaders are pointless and im not even sure if there are any higher poisitions on the battlefield during those games. There is team work involved, but nothing more then an average shooter.

In the 256 player games you are given multiple objectives to attack or defend, there are an insane amount of enemies everywhere, and there is honestly not a minute for you to take a break. It is insanity. The best way to describe it is battlefield 2 on steroids. If they put out a demo i highley reccomend you try it untill you get to play a few 256 player battles, thats when the fun starts.

[QUOTE="mD-"]

MAG is horrid..

illegalimigrant

[QUOTE="Sully28"]

[QUOTE="StealthMonkey4"]Except the gameplay is broken, the graphics are terrible, and hardly anybody even works together.WilliamRLBaker

EDIT: also i want to point out i hated the game in the first two betas, it had a ton of problems but i played on. When the public beta was put out last week that is when i was won over.

I thought the game sucked personally. No originality, horrible gun play, abysmal sound...

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="mD-"]

MAG is horrid..

mD-

2 faction with 256p in a single game is not a big innovation.

if they make it 3 factions (parties) with a lot of players in a single game and organized, it would be revolutional like starcraft.

anyway, I think it will have less than 100,000 ppl online in a month.

probably less than 5,000ppl online in an year, like killzone 2...then what's point having 256p maps, if it doesnt have enough players.

I thought the game sucked personally. No originality, horrible gun play, abysmal sound...

Wasdie

2 faction with 256p in a single game is not a big innovation.

if they make it 3 factions (parties) with a lot of players in a single game and organized, it would be revolutional like starcraft.

anyway, I think it will have less than 100,000 ppl online in a month.

probably less than 5,000ppl online in an year, like killzone 2...then what's point having 256p maps, if it doesnt have enough players.

oajlu

Bf2 is 10 time's the game Mag will ever be!

I thought the game sucked personally. No originality, horrible gun play, abysmal sound...

Wasdie

x2. MAG was a huge dissapointment for me.

256 players only seems impressive. It looks kinda cool seeing that many people shoot at eachother, but that's the extent of the praise I have for this game. The gameplay is entirely unoriginal and uninspired - the guns are unsatisfying to use and the graphics/sound leave a lot to be desired. I don't usually care about things like top-notch graphics and sound, but this game lacks in so many other areas that it feels like just more fail added to a pile of suckage.

I didn't enjoy playing with 90% of people who had no headsets. If anything, this is the kind of game that should come packaged with a damned headset. To focus so heavily on tactical organization of teammates yet have no consistent means of communication with said teammates is beyond frustrating. Oh, and being killed 9 out of 10 times by enemies you can't even see is just icing on the cake.

To top it all off, this game just isn't fun. It somehow lacks a replay value that even more generic multiplayer FPS games have. Maybe it's the super-limited amount of maps, maybe it's the throw-away contract system, maybe it's the crappyness of the game as a whole.. There's just very little to this game aside from throwing large amounts of players together in an un-coordinated deathmatch. It's not the type of game I could see myself pulling all-nighters with. I'd get bored after an hour, if that.

Can't wait. It's much more fun stalking victims when you don't know where they are going to come from. Takes a lot more skill as well. I can't stand small, crowded maps where I have to kill the same 4 people over and over again.

the game preoorders are unexpectdly high, around 200 k.+according to Vghcartz , it may turn out to be better than we think, but i am not intrested, rightnow i wanna get KZ2 b4 anything else.

Just like with SOCOM, I think MAG will polarize people. It has a better appeal than SOCOM though, so i I think scores will be better and public reception will be much more appreciative. Its just that MAG really relies on teamwork and the whole faction loyalty angle sort of serves to get you into the team mentality and into a clan. Even if you don't play team wise (which is the best way to play), the normal go out and shoot play style can work in the absence of friends, even if it isn't a CoD game in regards to this playstyle.

It will definitely make a huge splash if all the MAG threads here are any indication.

A PC shooter already did ~400 people on a map, back in 2003.

where have you BEEN?

/thread.

Wow MAG is so underated,graphics are not sooo bad and graphics dont make a game....gameplay is not broken,i played the beta and it was just fine.You will never learn what teamwork is in gaming is until you play online games(specially Metal Gear Online) with japanese people.

Regisland

wow, when I try that one, the PS3 fanatics just ignore it and play with their 'graphics king' terms when Crysis sits back in 2007, always unnoticed.

the animations are simply pathetic. Even Left 4 Dead, that gets attention for poor graphics does everything better, including multiplayer.

If you honestly care about MAG's graphics then good riddance to you.

Secondly, the gameplay is not buggy or broken. And it's almost entirely lag-free. I think someone is just a sad panda because they had to wait in a queue for a couple minutes. ='[

airshocker

the game preoorders are unexpectdly high, around 200 k.+according to Vghcartz , it may turn out to be better than we think, but i am not intrested, rightnow i wanna get KZ2 b4 anything else.

2mrw