Mag was the main reason I bought a ps3 aside from the blu ray player attached to the ps3.

Now I've been noticing that LOTS of people are saying that MAG wasnt going to be that good....and these are people with a ps3 to begin with.

Now I had high hopes for the game and am still buying it on day one but it's kind of disheartening to know that even the ps3 community doesnt have high hopes for this game and it isnt even out yet.

Why are people ragging on this game already, I think it looks really fun yes a little chaotic but still fun nonetheless.

I also have higher hopes on this game then borderlands, since gearbox made hells highway and that game was sub par to begin with and I was so dissapointed in that game especially since I am a huge fan of the bia franchise....hope they dont ruin the avp license.

Anyone here going to buy mag and what are you opinions on the game?

PS: If anyone ie mr sweden wants to flame in my thread go ahead...my most recent post was in ps3 hardware :) .

256 player game but it feels like a 32 player game...

I have played the Qore beta but it just didn't hook me. I didn't like the shooting mechanics, it felt generic. There are better games coming out around the same time I would rather spend my money on. If this game came out 1 year earlier I probably would of got it.

 

I wasn't in the beta, but it doesn't look great to me either.  Graphics look pretty bland, and the gameplay looks very mediocre.  But then again, maybe its really fun, I don't know because I haven't played it.  

"You get my nomination for "dumbest avatar ever" :) Seriously though wtf is that besides a triangle with a rainbow coming out?" -Kigmal 

Are you serious that Mag was the reason you bought a ps3.  That is a really weak reason of all the games you had a choice from.  From what I seen it looks meh with even more Meh graphics.  Get Uncharted, Uncharted 2, MLB the show if you like baseball. 

Psn-Smokeymicpt GT-smokeyyymicpot 
The place to be.

I can't stand it... I've played three or four games so far in the MAG Beta and they've all sucked. I never know where I am, there's no sense of teamwork, no sense of actually aiding your giant army succeed... I just head to the highlighted objective, kill some guys before getting killed myself and end up spending the next 30 seconds waiting to respawn. How that's considered fun, I'll never know.

X12Celtics3


I wasn't in the beta, but it doesn't look great to me either.  Graphics look pretty bland, and the gameplay looks very mediocre.  But then again, maybe its really fun, I don't know because I haven't played it.  

yes this is pretty much what i think of the game but i got in the beta but i can't play it since everytime i try it has 2 save the 2GB update but i only get about 3% and then it says unable to connet to sever which really pisses me off 

Really its that bad?

I didn have a ps3 when the beta came out on "Qore," But lots of people are saying the same thing that it isnt that good.

This game and Bad company 2 are 2 of the games I am really looking forward to FPS wise that is, but it still looks decent for this type of game.

Plus smokey- Ya I basically got a ps3 for mag in the first place, the gameplay looked really fun albeit like some people have said a little chaotic but nonetheless fun and I am not that into platformers so I didnt really get into the hype of Uc2.

Dang, seems that lots of people dont like the game which makes me kind of frustrated since I was looking forward to the game, I hope that in the coming months since they still have some time that the game gets better....heres hoping.

Thanks guys for your feedback since I didnt get to play in the beta, oh and does anyone have any feedback on gamestop still giving out beta codes to preorders??

I have the MAG beta.  In it's defense, it's insanely fun, especially when you're any type of leader and you are totally "in the zone" and holding back or advancing on the enemy.

However, it's a coin toss because if you're not in a game with your clan or group, I find that most of the time NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN YOUR SQUAD WILL LISTEN TO YOU.  Sometimes there will be a wonderful OIC or squad leader that alleviates this problem, but in general I find I lose about 10 times as much without my clan backing me up.

If you have a group of friends who want to go at it, it's a great game.  From my experience in the beta, however, going solo just doesn't cut it.

It's a very fun game and very active.  They need to make some damage tweaks but things are moving along very fast.  The graphics are not it's strong point and if you're not a leader then you really don't get the whole sense of the massive battle, but you still get up to 64 players on your side of the map.

The graphics are really nothing to write home about.

xplosneer


I have the MAG beta.  In it's defense, it's insanely fun, especially when you're any type of leader and you are totally "in the zone" and holding back or advancing on the enemy.

However, it's a coin toss because if you're not in a game with your clan or group, I find that most of the time NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN YOUR SQUAD WILL LISTEN TO YOU.  Sometimes there will be a wonderful OIC or squad leader that alleviates this problem, but in general I find I lose about 10 times as much without my clan backing me up.

If you have a group of friends who want to go at it, it's a great game.  From my experience in the beta, however, going solo just doesn't cut it.

It's a very fun game and very active.  They need to make some damage tweaks but things are moving along very fast.  The graphics are not it's strong point and if you're not a leader then you really don't get the whole sense of the massive battle, but you still get up to 64 players on your side of the map.

The graphics are really nothing to write home about.

I'm glad someone likes it that gives me a glimmer of hope for the game...can you tell me are the balancing issues a problem?

The only thing I see is when the game ships Raven is going to have lots of players as opposed to the other two factions.

I played it a few times and thought shat. ... game... than I gave it a real go...
I love it... I wish I had the money to get it when it comes out.... once you get passed the where the hell am I and figure out what to do... cause there is a ton of things you can do in the game to help out the team...

You get someone that can lead and the game is stellar so in time cause this is the beta will know a lot more...

talk about having to work together or sink... and there is so many options to choose from that makes you an asset

The game plays excellent as a FPS it may not look stellar but this is beta and I know the bump will not be huge it does not take away how fun the game is.. you just need to play to get the feel of what to do...

It is going to be a fun game...

Well as an online-only game it REALLY needs to impress otherwise it will be skipped by many. This also means you'll rarely be able to experience the 256-player action. Also, they've gone the Resistance 2 route and tried to split up people into squads doing different things around the map. Now that's great and all, but it means it kind of defeats the purpose of having 256 players in the first place. It just feels like you're having smaller battles all the time. Besides that, it doesn't do anything new in those battles.

Now a game like Warhawk would be great with 256 players (as long as it had larger maps). Because Warhawk is all about strategy, and getting the upper hand on your opponents by being in a better position, or being in a better vehicle. Could you imagine calling a binoculars strike that takes out 20 people? Getting in a Warhawk and dominating hundreds of ground troops? The problem with MAG is that every player has roughly the same strength, meaning there's no tactical variety. There's only so far that the usual rifles/smgs/sniper rifles can get you.

thor


Now a game like Warhawk would be great with 256 players (as long as it had larger maps). Because Warhawk is all about strategy, and getting the upper hand on your opponents by being in a better position, or being in a better vehicle. Could you imagine calling a binoculars strike that takes out 20 people? Getting in a Warhawk and dominating hundreds of ground troops? The problem with MAG is that every player has roughly the same strength, meaning there's no tactical variety. There's only so far that the usual rifles/smgs/sniper rifles can get you.

But that is what MAG is like, your team will get nowhere on that game if your team didnt have some sort of strategy..

Anyway i love the game, there are still lots of things that need to be changed and fixed but the game still doesn't come out for another 5 months-ish so they'll obviously fix most of the issues. Ive only experienced lag once and that was when the game started to run at about 7fps and it was happening to everyone because they were all saying WTF on their mics lol. 
The shooting feels a bit like COD4 so i dont know why everybody is hating on it (i hate the shooting in COD4, its too easy, just like MAG)

There is also lots of different upgrades you can buy but you can only buy a limited number of upgrades so if your going to be mainly a sniper you will spend most of you upgrade points on that and vice versa. So because of this youll have to create different characters.

Im hoping there will be lots of maps since its online only, the maps are soo big though that sometimes if you play the same map twice but spawn in a different location you could mistake it for a different map.

- The Corrupt -


I can't stand it... I've played three or four games so far in the MAG Beta and they've all sucked. I never know where I am, there's no sense of teamwork, no sense of actually aiding your giant army succeed... I just head to the highlighted objective, kill some guys before getting killed myself and end up spending the next 30 seconds waiting to respawn. How that's considered fun, I'll never know.

That's what it felt like to me. I just stuck to my old COD4 routine. Kill as many people as you can and stay alive. The whole healing yourself thing is a little annoying IMO.

walker01

thor


Now a game like Warhawk would be great with 256 players (as long as it had larger maps). Because Warhawk is all about strategy, and getting the upper hand on your opponents by being in a better position, or being in a better vehicle. Could you imagine calling a binoculars strike that takes out 20 people? Getting in a Warhawk and dominating hundreds of ground troops? The problem with MAG is that every player has roughly the same strength, meaning there's no tactical variety. There's only so far that the usual rifles/smgs/sniper rifles can get you.

But that is what MAG is like, your team will get nowhere on that game if your team didnt have some sort of strategy..

Anyway i love the game, there are still lots of things that need to be changed and fixed but the game still doesn't come out for another 5 months-ish so they'll obviously fix most of the issues. Ive only experienced lag once and that was when the game started to run at about 7fps and it was happening to everyone because they were all saying WTF on their mics lol. 
The shooting feels a bit like COD4 so i dont know why everybody is hating on it (i hate the shooting in COD4, its too easy, just like MAG)

There is also lots of different upgrades you can buy but you can only buy a limited number of upgrades so if your going to be mainly a sniper you will spend most of you upgrade points on that and vice versa. So because of this youll have to create different characters.

Im hoping there will be lots of maps since its online only, the maps are soo big though that sometimes if you play the same map twice but spawn in a different location you could mistake it for a different map.

You misunderstand the genius of Warhawk.

EVERY SINGLE GAME is such that if you play as a team with strategy, you'll win. This is obvious. The trouble is, that most teams aren't organised - furthermore, it's only the guy giving the orders who isn't just running around following orders and blasting people.

Warhawk is different. It builds team strategy, even if everyone is acting independently. Individual strategy is there as well. It's because of all the many ways there are to kill someone, the variety in vehicles and the one-shot kills. There's NOTHING YOU CAN DO if someone's about to call a binoculars strike on you. Chasing infantry with a tank? They're going down. It's all about making one guy powerful, not because of his reflexes, but because of his tactical decisions. I can tell you that most players of MAG will be average skill (by definition of average), and they will kill one guy before dying, making them feel as though their effort is futile. If you gave them a Warhawk, however, they could mow down a load of troops to get to the objective. A sniper rifle guy could pick off enemies travelling in jeeps. A tank could devastate infantry. A guy in a turret could pick off enemy Warhawks. Of course the balance of Warhawk couldn't be replicated in MAG, mainly because it requires some unrealistic elements. But this is how Warhawk manages to fully take advantage of the 32 players per game.

To the OP I suggest preodering the game and get into the beta. If you do not like it you can always get your money back.

To the people running around like headless chickens, you don't get what the game is about.
To the people running ALONE to objectives and getting blown to bits, maybe you should rethink your strategy.

I have played many many hours in the beta and have had a lot of fun and equally frustrating moments. At lvl 40 I have upgraded all the gear I could and respeced twice to see what the other items do.
I have single handedly brought down an entire teams frontline by infiltrating with a silenced automatic rifle and radar jammer and proceeding to take out their air defenses and scanners.
Inversely I have had the pleasure of being in suads of sensible people communicating and sticking to objectives and we got the job done splendidly.

Simply put the game can be a lot of fun but it depends how you approach it and the people on your team.

 

I LIKED HELL'S HIGHWAY :(

  O Jerusalem, wash thine heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved. How long shall thy vain thoughts lodge within thee?- Jeremiah 4:14

False tears bring pai

I'm currently in the M.A.G beta, and I can honestly tell you that the game gets better as you go. As you start off, you will (like most modern shooters) start off in the ****ter, in regards to weaponry and costumisation. 

Eventually you get to specialize (ala Planetside) and this is where the game TRULY shines trough.

It's a standard shooter, with some exceptions. Complete objectives, snipe, raid, stealth or drive to complete objectives ala Battlefield...

As you progress to a commander / squad leader etc level - the game's level of entertainment REALLY catches on.

It's little to no fun, if all your teammates faff about like rejects playing COD style TDM - without cooperating. 

You'll easily learn the maps - and if you're lost, there's always a waypoint to follow or a 3d map to whip out.

thor


You misunderstand the genius of Warhawk.

EVERY SINGLE GAME is such that if you play as a team with strategy, you'll win. This is obvious. The trouble is, that most teams aren't organised - furthermore, it's only the guy giving the orders who isn't just running around following orders and blasting people.

Warhawk is different. It builds team strategy, even if everyone is acting independently. Individual strategy is there as well. It's because of all the many ways there are to kill someone, the variety in vehicles and the one-shot kills. There's NOTHING YOU CAN DO if someone's about to call a binoculars strike on you. Chasing infantry with a tank? They're going down. It's all about making one guy powerful, not because of his reflexes, but because of his tactical decisions. I can tell you that most players of MAG will be average skill (by definition of average), and they will kill one guy before dying, making them feel as though their effort is futile. If you gave them a Warhawk, however, they could mow down a load of troops to get to the objective. A sniper rifle guy could pick off enemies travelling in jeeps. A tank could devastate infantry. A guy in a turret could pick off enemy Warhawks. Of course the balance of Warhawk couldn't be replicated in MAG, mainly because it requires some unrealistic elements. But this is how Warhawk manages to fully take advantage of the 32 players per game.

You misunderstand the genius of Me.

Warhawk is really different to MAG, there's no point of me trying to compare them. I think Warhawk is much better though but MAG is still really good. The whole "if you work as a team, you'll win" thing is the only thing the same about them.
I would've wrote a proper responce to your post but i think im going to (being forced to otherwise i get kicked out of maths) do maths homework for the first time this year.

Violater


To the people running around like headless chickens, you don't get what the game is about.

Maybe the game should be clearer on that, then? I mean, it basically just throws you into the game with less than no tutorial - so how's someone supposed to just know what the game is "about"? You run to the objective, find yourself shooting at a group of enemies, kill a few, then die yourself. Spend the next thirty seconds waiting to respawn, only to rinse and repeat.

To the people running ALONE to objectives and getting blown to bits, maybe you should rethink your strategy.

Tried running in a team. All I got for that was shot in the back of the head. Or the side of the head. Or anywhere, really, that meant I couldn't go for cover and react because I was dead before I could even change my position. Having three or four other people running next to you doesn't increase your odds of survival at all, it just paints a bigger target on your back since a group is easier to spot. When I ran to the objective alone, moving around buildings and generally sneaking around, I seemed to be less of a target and survived longer for it. Not that it matters much since you're rarely ever going to walk out of a firefight alive.

It just feels like the only actual immersion this game will offer is knowing that your actions will actually affect the story of the game as it progresses. If you do badly, it'll possibly reflect on the fact that one of your losses could make your army lose control an important area - something that'll be noted online or whatever in the on-going narrative. If you do well and shine brighter than everyone else on the field, you might even get named as a legendary soldier who won a campaign almost entirely by themselves and secured an area for their army.

I wonder if Zipper even knows how to make a game that's a little easier to swallow for those of us who haven't been playing SOCOM games for the last seven years.

grifter024


PS: If anyone ie mr sweden wants to flame in my thread go ahead...my most recent post was in ps3 hardware :) .

Ha! You know I'll come in here and nitpick your posts when you type something like that (calling you out on your bs is not flaming btw). Just one question. I promise. Are you on your second PS3? Did the old one break or did you sell it and recently bought a new one?

On topic: MAG really isn't a game for me.

Edit: I'm off now but I'll check this thread out tomorrow.