MAG Had a great concept, just executed poorly. Developer should go back to SOCOM and focus on more realistic tactical games.KukicAdowell said, they could have done Socom but with atleast 120 players MAX :)
Generalmojo's forum posts
What planet you on?!?[QUOTE="Generalmojo"]
[QUOTE="siddhu33"]
Oh....
So, on behalf of PS3 fans, this level 3 is not one of your own?
siddhu33
Game of the year and Shooter of the year are two diffrent things. :lol:
Now, looking at that, I think I need to sleep more. Good night, and thanks.
Your quite funny ill give you that lol :DRe-Read what the level 3 dude wrote then come back to me yh.[QUOTE="Generalmojo"]
[QUOTE="siddhu33"]
Multiplats never win GOTY; Isn't that what cows have been telling us all along????
siddhu33
Oh....
So, on behalf of PS3 fans, this level 3 is not one of your own?
What planet you on?!?Game of the year and Shooter of the year are two diffrent things. :lol:
Its going to be overshadowed by other shootersYou never mentioned exactly why MAG will fail, but I agree with your prediction.
Gxgear
look how Halo Wars was compared to other RTS's - 6.5
M.A.G has a high chance of lag issues just like the latest SOCOM on ps3 - 6.5
i smell a big flop :)
No BadComany 2 will, or maybe Killzone 3 ;)[QUOTE="Generalmojo"]
[QUOTE="jim_bojones"]MAG is going to win 2010 Shooter of the Year.siddhu33
Multiplats never win GOTY; Isn't that what cows have been telling us all along????
Re-Read what the level 3 dude wrote then come back to me yh.[QUOTE="jim_bojones"]MAG is going to win 2010 Shooter of the Year.siddhu33
I wondered when you will arrive.
The next Sig-Worthy Quote is here!
quoting level 3s isnt that great, i mean look at mine ;) i got mine from the great lv30 bioshockowns :twisted:he will soon it hes words coverd in poop if you ask me :evil:
MAG is going to win 2010 Shooter of the Year.jim_bojonesNo BadComany 2 will, or maybe Killzone 3 ;)
Bah wall of text :evil:While I don't think it will score well because it is priced at $60 compared to its content and people are whining about teh graphics, I do think it is fun and addicting. If that is a fail then so be it. It doesn't really matter what the players who don't want to play it thinks or that they would rather play hyped up graphical beasts.... it is what the people who do enjoy it think and how well they can help shape it going forward post release. They are going to be playing it with or without you Battlefield/Modern Warfare fanboys. Allthey really need for a good multiplayer game isfun competition and an addiction to it and to Zipper to listen and deliver on issues asap on things post release. Graphicsor art style aren't extremely important in multiplayer games imho. People oftenbashed Warhawk for the same thingslike graphics , mechanics , animations , art atyle , controls , "teh generic"argument, etc. It overcome all of those things and so coulddepending on how Zipper handles it. Hopefully they can incorporate more game modes and layouts within those large maps free of charge. At $60 that would be my hope.
I can definitely see why the hardcore gamers are attracted to it. With the leadership roles , objectives , getting your friends orclans together in squads , the fragos and skill point/perk system , the ability to mix and match abilities and have a bunch of custom loadouts , etc. I really don't care if it is not casual enough for the gamers who are more impressed with blowing a hole in a building or having some bad arse visceralfeeling weapons ,vehicles , or graphics.One can still find satisfaction in other ways with a team based multiplayer game. Peoplecan get that through various ways in the game. Whether that is leading , whether that is working together with a person in an apc , whether that is repairing or destroyingartilary , bridges , roadblocks , gates , vehicles, whether that is healing teammates , etc. There's a lot of depth and satisfaction to it while staying simple with it's pick up and play mechanics and highlighted objectives.
This will probably be my last post on teh failure that is MAG. There's not much pointin talking about agame thatso manyothers thinkis a laughable or pointless game over and over again.
Nike_Air
im too lazy to read this but no doubt your post is amazing and i hope others find it a good read ;) L0L
[QUOTE="Drakes_Fortune"]Thers really no point in the 256 player thing if you dont get to even see them. Its all divided into areas with a few squads in it. So the 256 players thing is like an illusion. And there goes the innovative thing about this game. But ill have to play it more to judge.antifanboyftwyou can see them. however, thats only if you try to be a "rambo", break off from your squad, and don't follow your objectives. then you are probably going to die as stated above for why "rambos" will hate this game. and what one squad of your overall team does on one side of the map will affect you and the rest of the team. following objectives will eventually give you more control. it may not seem that fun to you, but I'm sure some people will like this interesting playstle Hey that sounds pretty intresting :D but still not enough to get me fully pulled into the game
Log in to comment