MAG details

[Tagger]

Originally Posted by [SS]DatGuy

I think Zipper is giving too much credit to the character of people that play online, I still cant see how its not just gonna be a big clusterfuck

.......... but you're still gonna buy a copy to check it out right?

[DatGuy]

oh for sure Tagger, its too interesting not to check out

[Sabotage]

Once again VERY AWESOME idea the developers sound like they are doing some cool stuff and zipper has always done that, but with the youth and stupidity of the world it's going to go to shit. I really hope that these people I speak of prove me wrong because I've thought about this concept long ago and was really hoping that a company would do it.

[AEJustin1]

HUGE ARTICLE with lots of info here http://boardsus.playstation.com/play...9952#U42189952

[Tagger]

Thanks Justin. Sounds promising. The part on bandwidth doesn't ring true to me. I don't know enough to dispute what he claims about non peer to peer and excellent connections to the server. But, there's only so much water in a waterhose at one time. Bandwidth, when it comes to a home connection to the outside world, is a finite resource.

[Sabotage]

Originally Posted by Tagger

Thanks Justin. Sounds promising. The part on bandwidth doesn't ring true to me. I don't know enough to dispute what he claims about non peer to peer and excellent connections to the server. But, there's only so much water in a waterhose at one time. Bandwidth, when it comes to a home connection to the outside world, is a finite resource.

Well what these guys are trying to do is use servers like PC games do I assume. Almost all console games in the past, "Gears of War 2" was the worst, used a players connection as a hosting connection and that player became the server. This was sort of picked at random so if a player with a slow connection was picked, happened way too often, the entire game became laggy. So now I believe they are focusing on everyone playing off of the main server thus minimizing lag and maximizing bandwidth potential as much as possible.

[NEO-X]

I think on paper its a really good idea.. but IRL it will FAIL.

Conceptually it would be awesome if they could actually pull if off, but there's just no way in hell that PSN can handle the amount of load that this would require on the servers.

Even if they're "DEDICATED" I dont think that would make much of a difference, unless they change their entire network infrastructure to use this new "technology" or what have you.

I dont know... im definetly gonna wait a few months before even considering buying a copy.

Ive learned to stop trusting in anything a Dev promises...

[wrath-x-]

Originally Posted by [SS]Rator

I'm sure they'll have contingency plans for all of that stuff, but let's put it into perspective. Zippers last few games had isses with 8v8, and 16v16 and i dont know how many confrontation has 16v16 i think, but that doesnt work well either from what i'veheard and thats due to sonys servers. Who knows, they may dummy up some cash for servers to make MAG work, but honestly, i dont think the developer has enough if ANY following any more after what happened with Socom that enough people will get into it to warrant the servers from Sony.

Either way, its a wait and see. interesting concept but again, NO ONE has done an FPS with more than 16 players that's worked well since the Battlefield series on the PC which was 64 max and fantastic.

Its not the servers..........its slant 6............the engine is instable and their online interface is garbage.

If nothing else, Killzone 2 proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sony is capable of supplying ROCK SOLID servers.

oh, and Warhawk, as well as REsistance 2 back that up.

If you judge Sony on Socom: Confrontation, you are placing your blame on the wrong group, aside from them picking a psp dev to do a ps3 game.

I see potential in MAG. It has the chance to be a genre defining IP, but only time will tell.

How many times can you rehash 8 on 8 or 16 on 16 with a different IP and stay interested? Whats the point of that?

Oh, and just in case you were wondering, I know that the problem lies with socom, and not the servers, because a client patch fixed the framerate (mostly) and 16 on 16 is unstable on 2 maps, and 2 maps alone....Fallen and Urban Wasteland..........

Sony can provide stability beyond a shadow of a doubt. It has been proven irrefutably. And this is the problem with stereotypes........relying on them leaves you subject to being wrong.

[[SS]Rator]

Not judging anything yet really or sterotyping anything, just making observations based on the past. I hope it plays well and am curious to see what happens actually.

[wrath-x-]

Originally Posted by [SS]Rator

Not judging anything yet really or sterotyping anything, just making observations based on the past. I hope it plays well and am curious to see what happens actually.

As am I. I mean, if i had to put odds on this thing being successful.........I'd say 50/50. You do have some valid points about Sony, thats for sure. I just think that any time there is a possibility of a birth of a new genre (and this is really what it would be), I just can't help but get a bit excited. All of us probably started on Missile Command for Christ's sakes. I fear the current generation of kiddies don't know how good they have it.

We shall see. I'd be a fool to say "oh man, I have a ps3, and Sony is God! this game is going to be the cat's ass!" No sir.................not going to happen, but all the same, the glimmer of hope is there.

We all know Sony can mess things up on a grand scale.

Last thing I'd like to touch on. I actually give credit to zipper for trying something so bold. There was a when when they were lauded for their pioneering ways............maybe they can reach that status again (as I have visions of shooting a guy 42 times in socom 2, or playing harvester small in socom 3)

Peace.

[DatGuy]

I really hope they can pull it off, cause I know I wanna try it, and I hope its good

[Sabotage]

All I gotta say is I too hope they can pull it off because it would be awesome but I see this having a 85% of just being a huge mess.

I just hope zipper takes their time and tests the shit out of it before release.

[DatGuy]

OUCH

t the Sony booth during E3 2009 I got a chance to become a part of something much bigger than myself, stepping into the shoes of a soldier in Zipper Interactive's MAG - Massive Action Game.

What Is It?
MAG stands for Massive Action Game, and that's exactly what it is. Up to 256 players can participate in a single battle at one time between three different Private Military Companies. Wins and losses affect the global standings for your PMC, with players able to rank up to become squad, platoon, or army commanders, granted access to special powers as they grow in experience. A massive online shooter with persistent elements.

What We Saw
I played a good 15 minutes of an ongoing multiplayer match set on a cluttered industrial battlefield.

How Far Along Is It?
Everything seems to be firmly in place for a Fall 2009 release.

What Needs Improvement?
Personality Deficit: Looking through the fact sheet for MAG reveals an interesting back story about a dark future in which Shadow Wars are fought between private military companies, but the game itself doesn't seem to reflect this. It feels like any other online multiplayer game. It isn't bad, but it doesn't really stand out. Perhaps the portions outside of actual game play better reflect this, but what I played just felt a bit too plain vanilla.

Lag Issues: Even in the controlled environment of a trade show demo the lag monster rears its ugly head, and I found myself firing at enemies that were there one moment, gone the next, disappearing from my sights only to reappear as a corpse a moment later. Conversely, at least once I was shot by a guy who I swear wasn't there a moment before. I'd hate to see such an ambitious game ruined by networking issues.

What Should Stay The Same?
The Shooting Is Just Fine: The actual game play may lack personality, but it is smooth and satisfying. Perhaps a bit too smooth, as I took a tip from my nephew's running sniper Halo style, bringing up the scope and taking out enemies with headshots while running through the thick of battle, but that's exactly how I like it.

So Many Objectives: The map I played on was littered with strategic battlefield objectives, giving players many different ways to advance along the battlefield. Blowing gates to push your way into enemy territory is much more satisfying when you manage to do it on your own while the rest of your squad keeps the enemy occupied at another point along the line. Opportunities to stand out in the crowd, especially when the crowd is theoretically this big, are always welcome.

More Than Killing: As players progress they can invest in additional skills that allow them to become more useful in battle, such as the ability to revive fallen teammates and repair objects. Aside from giving players something to do, it also helps encourage little side skirmishes. I spent a couple minutes participating in a pitched battle around an anti-aircraft battery the enemy was trying to repair...a little battle within the battle.

Final Thoughts
Though MAG promises massive battles between 256 players at a time, I've still yet to see a battle on this scale. I got to drive an APC to an area where such a battle would eventually take place, but the way that battles progress makes it hard to actually demonstrate the feature. What they need to do is set up one of these massive battles and let us wade into that. Until I experience that, MAG will remain as generic as its name in my eyes.

[DatGuy]

got this today

[AEJustin1]

you lucky dog you!! I'm waiting for mine to show up in my email too (crosses fingers) I've gotten into so many betas I hope I get into this one too, since I am a G.A.P. member I hope I get the email lol