950°

MAG Beta is Underwhelming

EmotionalNinja: For me to call a game that supports up to 256 players firing at one another simultaneously is hard for me to do. Unfortunately after playing through the beta for a while I had to call it quits for at least tonight.

Read Full Story >>
emotionalninja.net
madmonkey05903d ago

I am yet to try the beta(still downloading)

but i am not sure how much this represents the full game,

my download says its 1.8GB so obviously there is alot more to come, im not sure if that is just more maps or if it will bring more weapons, game modes, and updated graphics.

Not all the best games have the best graphics.

anyway i am going to reserve my judgement on the game untill i have played it abit.

Bungie5903d ago

i'm not sure what's the point of playing with more than 200 people online

it's not like you can see the all or something

i would rather play a good shooter with less players than generic shooter with more player

that's just my opinion

OmarJA-N4G5903d ago

Too bad nobody cares about your opinion.

kaveti66165903d ago

Hey. You should talk like Yoda.

thereapersson5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

You expect, that with all the stealth trolling and bubble-grabbing that you try to pull off around here, that people will take you seriously?

edit:

lol, 2 disagrees already. You and your multiple accounts / why dis / we won, etc other fanboys disagreeing will not dissuade the obvious truth behind your motives.

Serjikal_Strike5903d ago

the FINAL game...it says so at the beginning of the game(that means graphics and controls)
Its not the best looking game but ..I liked it..it plays and reminds me of battfield bad company!

see you guys online :)

mrv3215903d ago

i'm not sure what's the point of playing with more than 200 people online

it's not like you can see the all or something

i would rather play a good shooter with less players than generic shooter with more player

And I agree... there's no point playing a generic FPS like a space marine named after an ancient greek city which played feature in the movie 300. I played the MAG beta and you see hundreds of people on screen at times. It's a good shooter but in the beta it felt wierd.

darx5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

Battlefield series is the way to go. Was underwhelmed also. Espeically when enviroments in batlefield are destructible, I now find it hard to play online shooters that do not have destrutible enviro.

DARK WITNESS5903d ago

while Bungie is an extreme fanboy of the worst kind...

on this rare occasion he does raise a point.

I own a ps3, but have always felt make was not much and was only getting hype because it's playing a numbers game.

I have downloaded the beta but not got round to playing it yet ( will give it a try when i get home tonight ).

I am not going to say he is right about MAG yet as i have not tried it. but what he is saying in principal I agree with. Resistance 2 played the we can do x number of players in a game blah, blah.. but in the end it didn't amount to greatness in my book. I played it, finished the single player, tried it online and took it back.

I have played more intense and better mulitplayer games with less players on screen.

thereapersson5903d ago

I agree with the sentiments put towards Resistance 2. However, I feel that the number of players didn't really have as much to do with the altered feel of the game so much as the changes that Insomniac made to the game. They removed a lot of the stuff that people liked about the first title (weapon wheel, for example), while not adding enough to make the gameplay feel fresh enough. It almost felt like a major expansion to me, although I know that many people will feel differently.

kneon5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

I played in the closed beta and the open beta and while it took me a while to get used to it, the game is quite good when you get on a squad that knows what they are doing. This is not a game for the COD campers and lone wolves. If you're not working as a team then you're not really getting it. Yes the graphics are not as good as many other games but really that's not the most important aspect of this game and it wouldn't bother me if that's what the final game looks like. It's all about team work and completing the objective. if kill count is all you care about then go away and play COD.

Oh and get a microphone, this is one of the few games where I actually talk to people as it really is important, especially if you are a squad leader. I haven't played too much of the open beta yet but so far it seems that too many squad leaders have no mic, that wasn't the case in my experience playing in the closed beta. Also in the closed beta it seemed to be a bit older crowd than those playing now.

And when you do get into a 256 player game it can get really intense. While you can't see all 256 players at once due to the size and layout of the maps, I have been involved in individual battles that must have had over 100 players, and it's mayhem. Just the way it should be :)

MastaMold5903d ago

ppl the beta is free try it and if u don't like it then to bad its not for u

i on the other hand played a match wit 256 players that was intense

o yea 1 more thing no lag playing wit 256 players :)

Milky Joe5903d ago

I've been playing MAG since the start of the closed beta, and what I'm going to say is just wat until you get to be a squad leader with all the air strikes and objective setting. It's great fun. Also, I'm not sure cos I only got it downloaded yesterday, from what I've seen, sabotage has been the only available mode which is only a 64 player mode. You wait until you play a game of domination with the full 256. Looking at the map and watching you're 127 team-mates all in their own battles is pretty cool. It gave me a real feeling of being part of a big push. Also, sabotage as a mode is pretty basic compared to the other ones. Aquisition has you fighting through an initial line of defence made up of a load of enemy bunkers, then once you're past them there are loads of sub-targets to desroy like AA s you can get helicopter insertions and mortars so the enemy can't call in airstrikes. there are also gates and bridges that need to be opened/protected so that once somene has got into the enemy base and grabbed the target vehicle, they can actually get it out of the area. There's a lot more to MAG than has already been shown.

insomnium5903d ago

I think it's a day 1 purchase for me now. Can't wait to play something else besides sabotage with 64 players. I want more and bigger =)

Can't wait to play more tonight after the kids have gone to sleep. Oh and this weekend our kids are going to their grandparents for the weekend so I'll be playing lots more MAG. Hooray!

Delive5903d ago

I'll use the best shooter out now as an example. Call of duty has a mode (Ground War) where it drops more players in. The down side to this is I don't feel it's managed properly. I can't count the times I spawned in front of an enemy. You have to provide the space, and a reason to not just run around randomly. I have played the MAG beta. It took a little getting used to, but I like it. It feels good and responsive, unlike confrontation. Does it still need work? Oh yea. The mode available is not the most fun either. I'm interested in what else is to come.

mac4u105903d ago

Dube why you such a fanboy not every shooter has the be MW2.

joydestroy5903d ago

i wasn't impressed. it'll be a rent so i can check out what the final game looks like.

agentace5903d ago

The open beta is crap at the moment because no one knows what there doing and no one is using teamwork!!, its full of COD n00bs that just camp & go off on there own.

The closed beta was epic everyone worked together and did there part, there was no camping n00bs, this is the best game for teamwork.

Give the open beta a fews more weeks for everyone to know what there doing but its not open for long so its not going to happen just get the full game.

Nike5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

@mac4u10:

Ah. So, by that measure, it doesn't have to be Uncharted 2, Killzone 2 or Resistance 2 either, does it?

Edit: And by disagreeing, it means MAG DOES have to be the aforementioned games? I thought PS3 gamers were all about innovation, especially when they criticize Halo and Gears of War as being too much of the same thing with each game. Interesting hypocrisy.

StanLee5903d ago

The MAG beta is underwhelming but not for the reasons listed in that poorly written article.

bacon135903d ago

This new Penny-Arcade comic excellently portrays my feelings after playing the MAG beta.

http://www.penny-arcade.com...

madmonkey05903d ago

"i would rather play a good shooter with less players than generic shooter with more player

that's just my opinion "

i suppose cod is less generic in your opinion is it?

syanara5903d ago

okay im sorry but I know 256 people is a lot but for those of you who are not seeing the reasoning behind 256 players online I will tell you.

In a game with 256 players online granted you will not always be able to see everyone but what it does is more realistically emulate a battlefeild I must say im not too impressed with the graphics they are about the same graphic quality as Modern Warfare 2 maybe a tad worse. but with 256 players you cant just try to keep a good track on where the enemy is online. For example uncharted 2 has 5v5 matches and you can probably keep a good tabs on where the entire enemy team is if you happen to be in spectator mode. in mag thats not possible you always have to be weary of every angle and and take the game slow and strategically this is NOT a run and gun game like a generic FPS even if people think or want it to be. The original SOCOM games were about such strategy and communication they inculded a headset with it. now MAG from the same developer (Zipper) is here and its the same story STRAGEY AND TACTICS this isn't just any ole shooter if you factor that in which is why I believe that the amount of people who don't understand this concept will somewhat drown the MAG experience. so in other words the IDEA is GREAT but to make it work requires not only effort on the developer side but also the consumer side in order to make the game fun and original. but thats just my opinion

HighDefinition5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

MAG is amazing, hate all you want. The people who loved Socom will love this game even more. This IS socom as a FPS, so for all you people that are use to run and gun gameplay of a game like COD4/5/6 probaly wont like this. But FYI (if that is you) this GAME IS NOT MADE FOR YOU. It`s for people like ME and the MILLIONS of other who enjoyed playing the TEAM BASED gameplay of Socom on the ps2 so much.

Thank You Zipper.

pixelsword5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

First Bacon 13:

Yeah, this game is basically SOCOM with 256 players in it: you run around in SOCOM, the same result will happen; and I doubt if you'll last even five minutes.

Now Bungie:

"i'm not sure what's the point of playing with more than 200 people online"

Translation: if the 360 could do it, I'd play it.

This is why PS3 fans go "meh" when A multiplat game comes out that tries to boast something that a PS3 game did already: it's already old news, and oftentimes it doesn't even match the quality to be excited about in the first place. And it's funny because some of the same 360-slanted writers hyping up that multiplatform game tired to shoot-down the PS3 game they are comparing it to in the first place.

Like Brink:

Every hype-creating and 360 slanting person was going bananas over the "Killzone 2-like graphics" while most PS3 owners were like... erm, so? Killzone 2 came out a year ago, and the game *still* doesn't look as good as Killzone 2 did, and it doesn't even have the destructibility, particles, or quality Killzone 2 has yet.

The next time a person brings up why PS3 fans don't go ape-scat over multiplat games, I'm going to ask why don't 360 fans go ape when a game like Killzone 2, Uncharted, or Heavy Rain comes out when there's no game can touch it, but then expects PS3 fans to poop themselves when a multiplatform game listing the qualities of an older PS3 game that doesn't match the quality?

It's like Prototype versus Infamous all over again.

So just watch:

a year from now when a multiplatform game that can do 128 or so players comes out with graphical quality inferior to MAG, 360 fans will go bananas and the hype train from the media comes out and say "PS3 fans are just jealous because it's not a PS3 exclusive... they always do that".

Yeah, that's right: PS3 fans yawn over old news; but then again, shouldn't they?

See you when the "innovative" Brink comes out.

creatchee5903d ago

My problem with this game is with the developer. Zipper created what is, in my opinion, the greatest online game ever (SOCOM II), and followed it up with the atrocities SOCOM III and Combined Assault. When they went bigger, they took away what made SOCOM so awesome - even though there was 16 people in the game and there were some larger maps, the game still felt intimate in a way and like you were never more than a few seconds away from the action.

Obviously I hated Confrontation (more due to launch bugs lasting 6 months or more) when comparing it to SOCOM II, but that's not Zipper's fault. And now MAG, which is huge and not even a third-person shooter. I mean, I understand Zipper going in a different direction and all, but I wish that they'd get back to basics and enhance something that worked REALLY well rather than making something completely different.

That being said, I hope that this game turns out fine, but in reality, I want Zipper to do something along the lines of SOCOM II, which worked and represented the height on online gaming for me (and I've been playing online in one form or another since DOOM II on DWANGO back in 94).

AAACE55903d ago

I was excited for this game so I went and reserved it a few months ago to get into the beta, but after playing it for a while, it didn't live up to my expectations! I don't know what I was expecting. I guess I thought it would be a big warzone with a more tactical approach, but to me it seemed more arcadey than anything.

I was hoping you would be able to plot attacks and such, but you never really have time to set anything up. You spawn, run a little bit, and pow dead. If you do survive, your teamates are getting killed alot. So it's just a typical shooter with a ton of people playing at once... which is a good thing, but like I said... I was expecting something different... something more like what they used to do!

HighDefinition5903d ago

You don`t get to 256 until level 10.

Also, you can plot of attacks and such but you must be a general or higher ranking officer. This game is all about get what you deserve.

thesummerofgeorge5903d ago

I think it's funny that you still think anyone cares what your opinion is. We know what your opinion is, a fanboys opinion never changes.

SmokeyMcBear5903d ago

hey blaze.. did you actually read what penny arcade said about the game?

Consoldtobots5903d ago

It seems to me that everybody but Sony and Zipper (and me) are completely missing the intent of MAG. It's very simple actually, MAG is laying down the groundwork for the PS4. That's where you will see the MASSIVE multiplayer numbers coupled with amazing graphics. I think Zipper and Sony fully expected this game to be "underwhelming" compared to other games. Once MAG is running it is going to be a running case study of how to design, program and ultimately deploy games and maps with players that number into the hundreds. Chalk this up as one of the lessons learned this gen by SOny. Some concepts take time to fully bake and if they want to be ready for primetime next-gen they have to start now.

Bloodraid5903d ago

I've been in the beta for a while now (This is the third time I've actually been in it), and I found the game brilliant. As long as it's being played with people who actually co-operate, at least.

This article is terrible. Not only are the complaints just stupid, but there's typos in it, for example:

'For me to call a game that supports up to 256 players firing at one another simultaneously is hard for me to do.' - That's the first sentence in this article and it doesn't even make sense.

Here's pretty much a recap of this whole rant article.
- 'Only one mode has 256 Players, all others are 128, 64 and 32.'
-- So what? That's like saying 'There's only one mode in Call of Duty that supports 18 players! The rest support 12 and 6.'

- 'The graphics aren't as good as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2'
-- This kinda crap irritates the hell out of me. Gamers this generation are too spoiled by games. Seriously, if they feel a game is bad because the graphics aren't mind-blowing, they're not a true gamer and just need to get the hell out.

- 'There's only three different guns you start with.'
-- So? They're standard guns for each type of player. Snipers, light infantry, and heavy infantry. You're able to purchase new weapons, as well as upgrades later on.

- 'I have to buy weapons with skill points that you earn from leveling up.'
-- Again, so what? Unlike his precious Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 that he keeps referring back to throughout the article, MAG is designed in a way that forces you to choose your upgrades wisely, so instead of being a super-soldier, you're more of a specialized class. If you don't like the way your character turned out, all you've got to do is respec your character.

- 'When people no longer play this game, it's going to die.'
-- No Sh!t Sherlock

madmonkey05903d ago

I finally got on it, and i love it probably the best online fps i have played. if anyone wants a game add me on psn, id same as here.

randomwiz5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

Just FYI, I was a beta tester since the Qore beta phase.

MAG is extremely complicated.

When I first played MAG, I was overwhelmed, but once you get used to the game, its extremely fun. Especially when you get to Squad/Platoon leader status.

My one fear is that this game will get under rated because it takes some getting used to and when this game releases there won't be any squad leaders leading to utter chaos.

I also think that it will be under rated, because most reviewers suck at video games. Anyone regular person could pick up Modern Warfare 2 and start winning... thats not the same case with MAG. It actually takes skill.

Its sad when I see a day when games do worse than others simply because it takes getting used to...

**IMHO, MAG will separate the real gamers, from the "gamers" who suck at video games

jjohan355903d ago

MAG actually isn't chaotic at all. Plus like one of the comments below me stated, there's less lag in MAG than in MW2. The entire game is very team oriented, based primarily on completing objectives.

I disliked the first 2 hours because I had no idea what was going on. After 2 hours and understanding the gameplay (plus having squadmates who communicate), the game was really fun for the next 18-20 hours. It's very revolutionary for the FPS.

But after 25 or so hours of gameplay, the game starts to fall apart very quickly. You see in most other FPS games that rely on deathmatch or capturing zones, it's you pitting yourself against another player. The maps don't get old too quickly because the challenge is primarily your skill against another player's skill.

The problem with MAG is that it's not necessarily up to individual skill. It's teamwork skill. But that's not the problem either. The real problem is that the game depends heavily on the order of objectives laid out for each game mode and each map. Therefore the maps get old VERY QUICKLY (after 20 hours of playing) because you're using the same strategy over and over, whether you're attacking or defending. There isn't much room to vary your strategy because the maps are set up to work with only a few different strategies. The maps get old, the strategies get old, and it just feels like attacking the same thing over and over again. Imagine playing the single campaign of any FPS over and over, but condensed in less time. In fact I'd say imagine playing the same few levels in a single campaign of any FPS game over and over forever. You'll catch my drift.

I don't think Zipper foresaw this problem. In the process of revolutionizing the FPS genre, they created new problems that seriously need to be addressed before this type of game reaches critical success. And please don't tell me that I haven't found a good team to play with. All 8 of us play together regularly, all with mics, all communicating very clearly on enemy position as well as FRAGOs. I've also played all three factions, all three game modes, and on all maps both defending and attacking.

BattleAxe5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

I too found the MAG Beta underwhelming. I'd rather play Killzone2 over MAG. I'm probably gonna skip MAG and wait for BF:BC2 and GOW3.

@HighDefinition,

Don't even put Socom2 and MAG in the same sentence. Socom2 is one of my favorite games ever, and MAG has nothing on Socom 2. The only thing that makes them similar is the graphics, which isn't saying much since Socom2 came out in 2003.

Consoldtobots5903d ago

just played the beta and there absolutely NOTHING WRONG with the graphics, in fact they are quite decent. Seems the fanboy FUD is starting up for this game already.

The Lazy One5903d ago

Where were these people that didn't think Killzone 2 looked good? I haven't met any. People keep making up these fictitious attacks. "What about last year when person X (who doesn't exist) said game Y was bad (which was rarely said by anybody with a brain)."

@all

The problem Mag will have once it's launched is that it will get a lot of casual people that won't want to work on a team. When they do, I'm sure it will be phenomenal. If people get huge clans together it will probably have epic clan wars. It will run into problems with casual gamers because they generally don't want to work together.

If they can figure out a better way to get people to work together instead of run and gun, then it should be great. It's going to be hard getting people to play that way though.

shadow27975902d ago

jjohan35 is the only one who has come up with a decent criticism of the game. That's something I hadn't considered. Hopefully, in this age of DLC, Zipper will keep the map packs coming fairly frequently. Though, obviously, there may be quite a few maps that no one has seen yet. I guess we won't know until the end of January.

Oh and by the way, I'm tired of people bringing up Confrontation like Zipper had anything to do with it. Slant Six made Confrontation.

Those that have played as all 3 factions, which do you prefer? I considered Valor but ultimately went with RAVEN. I'd like to try the other ones, but I really want to play in a 256 battle. Sabotage just can't compare to that.

Shepherd 2145902d ago

If you knew anything about a good story, you would know that halo is the best "space marine" story around, and is very original. Just try to name any film or game that has a story even remotely close to how Halo's universe.

Peter Jackson didnt want to make it a film for no reason.

Death24945902d ago

take COD MW plus Bad Company 2 (a little less vehicles ) and you have MAG. Except in MAG you have an actual chain of command. Not some computer AI giving you commands. People try to play it like its MW2 but its not. This game is all about communication and some RTS.

foot soldier < squad leader
squad leader < platoon leader
platoon leader < feild commander

8 players = squad
4 squads = 1 platoon
8 platoons = Army

The feild commander isnt on the ground. He's giving the orders like in a RTS. Its like playing chess, except every pawn is an actual person. Honestly there is no FPS to date on console that has that much depth. MAG is for anyone who loves FPS. OH and its 256 VS 256 = 512 players. play the beta and level up past 10, then you can really experience MAG

pixelsword5902d ago (Edited 5902d ago )

[Where were these people that didn't think Killzone 2 looked good? I haven't met any. People keep making up these fictitious attacks. "What about last year when person X (who doesn't exist) said game Y was bad (which was rarely said by anybody with a brain)."]

People who say Killzone 2 didn't look good? Are you kidding? You can look on N4G alone and see people who say that.

+ Show (40) more repliesLast reply 5902d ago
Feral Gamer5903d ago

A buddy of mine played the beta and he says it's not that good. His words were "it's dumb, actually".

kaveti66165903d ago

That's not really an appropriate word to describe a game. It's akin saying, "That film was lazy." It just doesn't really make sense.

Feral Gamer5903d ago

I didn't say that. I haven't played the beta. It was a short blurb he sent me over PSN because he doesn't have a keyboard hooked up to his PS3.

kaveti66165903d ago

Okay. I wasn't attacking you, man. You N4G guys need to stop feeling like you're being attacked. What happened to you people? F*cking fanboys have everyone's cahones in a vice.

Redempteur5903d ago

i played MAG beta since like the closed invit beta on EUR ..

And like it ..saying it's dimb IMO just means that the person saying that don't like squad based team games..

MAG is far from being dumb ..there is a real teamwork needed to win .you just can't go WILD and expect succès .

Also jumping out of a plane to flank your ennemies ( or to progress faster on the map when you respawn ) has never been this fun and usefull .
The graphics are not the best of the world but considering it's a beta (people had to download this huge files ) and the size of the map it's actually impressive

lonix5903d ago

Therefore nobody else should especially you

sure he wasn't your bum buddy

Feral Gamer5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

Hey, I'm just reporting what I've heard. I'll give it a go and let you know how I personally feel but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Quit being immature with your personal attack.

@2.4
More isn't always better. I prefer less players and better graphics. What I've seen is less than stellar. The graphics won't be better in the final game, it's impossible with the number of players they want to incorporate.

Cueil5903d ago

MAG is hardly special... Sony has already done this on a larger level with PlanetSide

Alcon Caper5903d ago

Google beta responses to Mag, it's pretty much unanimous that it's mediocre. Sorry.

Redempteur5903d ago

"More isn't always better. I prefer less players and better graphics."
then you can play socom ..

the fact is that the outcome of the battle is made by a huge bunch of people ...

you mostly won't see half of the people playing against you in a match ...
BUt they did good with MAG because even iwth all these people it's still playable AND still objective based ( IMO : not a huge mess ).
Everyone easily can see how the map objectives changes during the battle and adapt their actions to it ... it just mean that you 'll never see the same game each time you play ...

That's why i think mag is cool ..there are no camp points ... there is no PERFECT stratégy ...a single player can't survive unless you play well in team ( with your commander ).

BUt if 256 is too huge , you can play socom or MGSO ...

Baka-akaB5903d ago

@Feral Gamer

And ? Arent those fps with less people and better graphics pretty every other fps ? What's the point of just cloning them ?

Another One5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

The beta is growing on me a bit, but it really isn't that good. It's not a terrible game, but the only thing special about it is the amount of players. Everything else about it is average or below average. You can have some fun, but it's nothing close to great.

Death24945902d ago

Graphics aren't everything. Honestly, they aren't that far from COD MW2. I don't think you or your friend actually played the bloody game. This is a very good game. This is what a FPS is suppose to feel like. If you think MW2 was good then you really have to play MAG. It's just that darn good and deep. The command you are being issued comes from an anctual perrson giving them. Maybe your friend couldn't get past level 10. I was about to not play either but once i past level 10 and played in one of those huge battles, it just feels epic. It took what Resistance2 was trying to do and they made it work.

Seriously guys download the beta and play past level 10. It's not that hord to get past it. You just don't know what you guys are missing.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 5902d ago
5903d ago Replies(8)
5903d ago
mll095903d ago

If you're expecting the game to change just from a beta you're going to be disappointed. Betas are used to test the servers and sort out major issues that might occur. The points the author brings up in the article will almost certainly not be changed for the retail release.

Skynetone5902d ago (Edited 5902d ago )

its a decent effort, nice graphics, like the bleed out system, weapons are functional, my biggest gripe is with the sniper rifle, its just not cod, no proper feedback, no sense that every bullet is lethal, and the steady aim is missing

i guess its just not cod, if your going to copy cods controls why is the triangle the lay down button, i think they just threw that one in there to annoy me

throwing a smoke bomb isnt exactly brilliant either, actually its just plain bad, and what the hell does that other thing do,

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5902d ago
RememberThe3575903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

The controls didn't feel quite right, I just couldn't find a sweet spot. I can see the issues I had with it being fixed by launch, but I was not impressed, especially when it's coming form Zipper.

AngryHippo5903d ago

....I will still probably end up getting it though. I think this could be one of those titles that with constant updates,it will keep on getting better in time. I'm hoping that's the case anyway. Still going to fun I think.

CrippleH5903d ago

Sorry Zipper I'm going with Battlefield Bad Company 2. I was hoping for a proper Socom campaign experience.

morganfell5903d ago

My only question to people (that actually own a PS3 and played the beta rather than relying on a secret friend *wink wink*) is did you take the time to provide feedback?

RememberThe3575903d ago

I though about it, but really didn't want to take the time. Now that you bring it up however, I might have to do it. The game has so much potential, and it's just the little things that are killing the experience for me.

HappyGilmore23005903d ago

if you point out anything wrong in the game, the fanboys will attack you. they will tell you that you suck and need to go play CoD. the MAG forums are a joke... reminds me of the killzone forums. no one seems to want the game to get better, although they like to lecture on what betas are really for.

Budg3tG4m3r5903d ago (Edited 5903d ago )

Funny morganfell how it is that anyone says any negative thing about a PS3 game big or small it's because "they don't own a PS3 and are some secret agent from MS"

iceman065902d ago

I don't think that he was talking about reporting it to the general forums, but directly to the devs. They are ALL OVER the forums. Plus, there is a way to report bugs and issues that creep up by level. You can even capture pics of the area that the bugs take place...or the bugs themselves. I agree that the forums can be a bit "rough". But, understand that some of these people are defensive because they have put in months and months of "testing" (gaming) into a game that they believe has the potential to be great...then a new testing group comes in and doesn't really appreciate the game for what it is.

morganfell5902d ago

Funny how people make comments and do not bother to see to what I was referring. Had you looked you would have seen a poster above me talk about "their friend" and you would have clearly seen how questionable was their comment.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5902d ago
Show all comments (249)
470°

MAG was one of the most ambitious shooters ever and deserves a PS5 sequel

Zipper Interactive were once one of Sony's most important studios and became a household name due to their work on the SOCOM U.S. Navy SEALs series during the PlayStation 2's heyday. Their most ambitious title was MAG. Could it make a comeback?

Read Full Story >>
gamerevolution.com
yellowgerbil2230d ago

Best game ever. I had put over 1700hrs into that game before it deteriorated too far with cheaters getting out of the map and sadly decided it was time to let it die (Zipper had already been closed down by that time).

_SilverHawk_2230d ago

Amazing game. Hopefully sony makes a sequel

XisThatKid2229d ago

This is the game in modern gaming that even got me into shooters i spent literally days with this game Raven All the way. War against the the mighty D ride oh so edgy S.V.E.R.

NecrumOddBoy2230d ago

Original Battle Royale. No microtransactions. Definitely ahead of time.

XBox4eva692229d ago

It's almost as far from battle royale as you can get. o_O

frostypants2229d ago

It didn't have a BR mode.

Da12RespectA2229d ago

That wasn't a battle royale game at all.

rdgneoz32229d ago

3 teams of 32 fighting it out would be considered Battle Royaleish. If you're gonna saying teams are OK when you start doing teams of 2 or 3 or 4, then 32v32v32 should work. And on besides that, it had 128 v 128 which was insanely fun.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2229d ago
Muzikguy2230d ago (Edited 2230d ago )

I personally hadn't played much of it. I did spend a lot of time in PlanetSide 2 though (somewhat like MAG). Games like these tend to get overrun by cheaters and then ruined too often.

Teflon022230d ago

MAG didn't have that issue as far as I remember. I use to love the 256 matches. That game had an amazing community. Everyone actually communicated and played together. No one B****ed at the team. Everyone understood there was so much going on that if things are going wrong. Everyone had to think of new strategies.
Fav moment was when all 3 other squads 32 took their objectives but we were struggling with ours and had one more to blow up. The other leaders were communicating asking if the 2 nearest squads should send ppl. Our leader was like Naw I got a idea. So he told us all to die and set ourselves at the nearest hills prone without being seen. So we all did and surrounded the areas.
He said everyone on his count throw your grenades. Then snipers go all out and everyone else run in. They won't be able to get everyone and if needed the snipers go in about 10 seconds after.

Everyone did that and I got to the objective and set it off. 9 of us survived and got it. felt amazing to say I got the objective, cover me in that moment. Wish it was PS4 so I could have saved that moment
It was literally the coolest moment I had in a online shooter, closest since was BF4.

Muzikguy2229d ago

@Teflon

That does indeed sound like an awesome moment. One that makes games like these memorable for sure. It does seem like MAG had a lot more cooperation than most any online shooter

Teflon022229d ago

It did because you absolutely can't get no where in it without teamwork. It also didn't have an extremely big base of players. Everyone who played really wanted to play. I really hope they bring it back and do the same thing to only have serious players get into the big matches again

UltraNova2229d ago

Wow, what a run! This game looks better than PUBG!

Muzikguy2229d ago

Watching that video you wouldn't think the game was on PS3.

Spenok2230d ago

I adored this game too. Some of my best FPS online memories on it. So freaking good.

I'd love to see another game like this come out at some point. And NOT like Planetside... M.A.G. was something special.

yellowgerbil2229d ago

Yeah problem is if it existed now adays, it would likely be riddled with xp boosts and dance moves and all that other pay garbage...
MAG and Warhawk are the only 2 online games I ever got into, and both need a PROPER sequel on PS5.
Remember the first time I got 100 kills in a match, was in a turret with a repair kit and just mowed down wave after wave on Valors map.

2228d ago Replies(1)
2228d ago
+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2228d ago
PrinceOfAnger2230d ago

I had so much fun with this game

TGGJustin2230d ago

This is a game that was ahead of its time. Had it came out on PS4 it would've done much better. I put hundreds of hours into this despite the problems it had on PS3.

UnholyLight2229d ago

Really interesting as an Xbox owner at the time. This game had captured my interest as a kid but I never got a chance to play it. Being on PS4 and soon possibly PS5, I would love to see this franchise brought back to life. I imagine with the power of next gen it would be really quite fun.

From what I hear and what I remember, this game was FAR ahead of it's time. A real shame it never truly took off from my understanding.

grifter0242229d ago

I'm an xbox boy since mech warrior but got a ps3 slim for mag. If you liked halo or cod you'd have had a blast in mag. Was one of the first games you could actually do something other than shooting and still make a difference in game.

spicelicka2229d ago

PS4 needs something like it. In the multiplayer space it's far behind the Xbox, there are no quality multiplayer games on it that aren't on other consoles.

Dirtnapstor2230d ago

Yes, yes, and yes. Way ahead of it's time. Would love to see a PS5 variant of this game.

Show all comments (100)
120°

Modern Warfare Ground War mode has MAG vibes

Erina Rose, Sausage Roll writes, "Call of Duty: Modern War introduced a new, improved, Ground War game mode this weekend that reminds us of the old PlayStation 3 classic, MAG."

Read Full Story >>
sausageroll.com.au
ilikestuff2354d ago (Edited 2354d ago )

I never played mag, I did play this beta however, and if mag was like this beta then (fart noises) for mag.

2354d ago
TheGamez1002354d ago

Man do I miss mag and zipper.

TheSinsibleOne2354d ago

Seriously though. Nowadays this and next gen are practically begging for a new MAG.

zodiac9092354d ago

How did we go from having games like resistance 1, 2, warhawk with 30 vs 30 player battles, and M.A.G. with 128 vs 128 players, ON LAST GEN to now having 20 vs 20...such a step back.

JEECE2354d ago

Because Sony hadn't figured out how to market their exclusives yet. Plus at that time COD craze was at its peak. So "generic high school bro #7," who was the primary purchaser of FPSs at that time (or at least represented a crowd necessary to sustain a playerbase), if he even had a PS3, would have just seen a game like MAG as a "copycat of Black Ops, man."

Not to mention MAG was pretty terribly uninviting for new people after awhile, because it was more skill-based. This was great for veterans, but if you weren't willing to put in the time getting destroyed for awhile, you would never appreciate the game. The Battlefield: Bad Company and BF:3 games out during that gen were far more accessible to lower level players.

Vegamyster2354d ago

Battlefield 4 was at the start of the generation and had 64 players, to me it depends more on how the map/gameplay is utilized, i enjoyed the 20vs20 modes more in the MW Beta than the 64 player ground war mode.

2354d ago
moomoo3192354d ago

It feels absolutely nothing like MAG lol. Way more battlefield vibes

xX-oldboy-Xx2354d ago

And even those are very small vibes, it still feels like COD at the end of the day.

390°

MAG: The Greatest Game You Never Played

Almost 10 years ago the greatest first person shooter came out and most of you probably never heard of it, never got to play it and never will.

Read Full Story >>
sausageroll.com.au
FiLTHY ESKiMO2474d ago

Who would the next gen version nor that Zippers gone?

_SilverHawk_2474d ago

I remember this game and it was amazing. I would like it if Sony would make another one because this game was ahead of it's time.

RememberThe3572473d ago

It was an amazing concept and it was a cool game, it was just ahead of it's time. I played the sh!t outta MAG, but the game itself played just okay. I'd love to have seen a sequel, even just a spiritual successor, especially with the next gen coming and the way cloud computing has advanced a game like that nowadays would be awesome.

Elwenil2473d ago

It may have been amazing if you played for SVER, but if you played for Raven or Valor, it was an unbalanced mess. I had some fun with it, but the player count was an illusion at best and false advertising at it's worst. The map and faction balance was so ridiculously skewed you knew who was going to win as soon as you saw what team you were against. It definitely had some interesting ideas, but was far from an amazing experience in my opinion. I would have much rather Zipper have made another SOCOM game rather than MAG.

darthv722473d ago

that game would make for a great battle royale release. So many players all at once... it was ahead of its time for a console shooter.

TheGamez1002474d ago

Was such an underrated game. One of my most favorite fps of last gen. So unfortunate zipper was closed down. Imagine if it was a success and thered be a 2nd game by now.....

TekoIie2474d ago (Edited 2474d ago )

I can think of many better games that I've yet to play...

"Almost 10 years ago the greatest first person shooter came out"

HAH. So is Planetside 2 now the best FPS ever? Because it does everything MAG can and does it far better. I'm afraid that MAG is basically your standard FPS but uses scale as it's selling point. The vast majority of shooters that focus on smaller scale matches have gameplay leaps and bounds better than MAG so it is definitely not the greatest FPS.

I know many people are going to try and refute this by telling me to look at the three factions but MAG has literally no character. The game is call 'Massive. Action. Game' for gods sake which is a contender for 'The Worst Title a Game Could Have' award. I've never been a fan of Zipper but I hear great things about them from their PS2 days. However, with MP gaining popularity in the generation that followed I think it says a lot that they couldn't keep up with the competition.

Knushwood Butt2474d ago

'HAH. So is Planetside 2 now the best FPS ever? Because it does everything MAG can and does it far better.'.

It was released years later.

Was there anything offering what MAG did when MAG was released?

TekoIie2473d ago

"Was there anything offering what MAG did when MAG was released?"

Yes, Planetside 1.

Knushwood Butt2473d ago

Fair enough.

Can't say I've played it, but I enjoyed MAG for a while.

FantasticBoss2472d ago

MAG was one of the very few games trying to do scale like it did, but I think it missed the mark. Wish it could have had a sequel though as they may have been able to iterate on it to create something pretty neat.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2472d ago
Profchaos2472d ago

Sony had a awesome approach to online in the PS2 days with SOCOM co op that had games working together to achieve a tactical goal they pioneered voice chat on the PS2 for SOCOM but as they steamrolled ahead it was clear team Deathmatch would take over in popularity which shifted zippers approach so all their experience amounted for not much when designing online in the PS3 era.
It still was a decent game but couldn't stand out compared to cod which had millions of players consistently

yellowgerbil2474d ago

Loved mag had over 1700hrs into it across many accounts, remember my first 100 kill sabotage game, was insane

BLow2472d ago

Yes, so do I and not that game they released on PS3. I'm talking the one Zipper did and not Slant Six. At least Slant Six tried to do the series justice once they fixed the issues.

The one Zipper did didn't feel like Socom to me. It felt more like Ghost Recon to be honest. I absolutely loved the voice commands and I figured they would be even better on next gen hardware. They didn't even bother doing anything.

Maybe, I just wanted it more grounded and not so techy if that makes sense. I just wanted to go into jungles or missions just using my wits and patience and not have to use a bunch of gadgets. I wanted to be able to give orders with my voice to squad members. Yeah, they can at least have earpieces lol.

It's hard to explain but I know the old school Socom players know what I'm saying. Socom just had a certain feeling and the new game didn't feel that way. Slant Six yes. Zipper no...

We can only hope but if they bring it back they have to do it right. If not don't bother and just make something new. I rather have the memories I had with Socom be mostly positive than negative. Unless you pull a God of War, don't bother lol.

I've already said too much but that goes to show how much I loved Socom. Especially 1 and 2.....

Deathdeliverer2473d ago (Edited 2473d ago )

Game was simply ahead of its time. If mag came out now with improved graphics people would be blown away. Back then people whined about the graphics even though it had players literally everywhere. It was several great games in one. Battlefield, Ghost Recon, and Call of duty.

Hungryalpaca2473d ago

What exactly was it ahead of its time in? Player count? Planetside released in 2003 and and played count per match was over 300.

xkvcq2472d ago (Edited 2472d ago )

The BETA for MAG was one of my fondest gaming moments. I was highly anticipating the start of the beta servers but I had school that day. I had started downloading it that morning as soon as it was available and just when it finished downloading I found out school was cancelled, last minute, because of weather. BEST. SNOW DAY. EVER. I played the beta all day, continuing to put off my homework :P

TekoIie2472d ago (Edited 2472d ago )

Well have I got news for you pal! Planetside 2 has been available for nearly 4 years on the PS4 and longer on PC and people still aren't blown away. Maybe the novelty of scale is actually overrated and people don't care as much about it which is why MAG failed when multiplayer shooters were at peak popularity during it's lifetime?

If you were blown away by 256 players in 2010 why would you not have been blown away by 1000 roughly 2-3 years later?

Show all comments (84)