I don't remember correctly but this game is now V-synced right ?
The very first beta had lots of tearing though.
The very first beta had lots of tearing though.
MAG
- Thread starter patsu
- Start date
In a 128 player team there are 16 squad leaders, 4 platoon leaders and one OIC.
The leaders have different strikes available and different buffs they can give their team (within a certain range of proximity). Also attacking and defending have a seperate set of strikes.
Check that post for details: http://www.dmclanforum.com/showpost.php?p=132789&postcount=1
corduroygt
Banned
I'm still not quite sure about the viability of charging full price for games that don't have a Single Player campaign, regardless of however short that campaign is. (MW2) Warhawk and Socom weren't full price either, and neither was BF1943.
Billy Idol
Legend
I agree with you. Without a single player campaign the game has not too much value for me!
I did buy for instance UT3, which had a 'single player campaign'...but not exactly what I expected either ...
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/mag-final-hands-on
One of the better articles about MAG I've been able to find. It also makes an interesting point about MAG's marketing at the end.
Maybe they feel they'll sell more copies this way, but pretending to be somewhat generic might be a risky move in the highly competitive FPS market. Mag's sales are going to be interesting to watch. The beta was quite popular. http://blog.mag.com/blog/2010/01/mag-beta-5-0-statistics/ And I think Mag is going to do well with Socom fans. But on the other hand, people aren't used to paying 60 Euro's for a online only game, and what Mag is actually like might not appeal to a wide enough audience. And somehow I don't think MAG is going to do well in reviews.
One of the better articles about MAG I've been able to find. It also makes an interesting point about MAG's marketing at the end.
Maybe they feel they'll sell more copies this way, but pretending to be somewhat generic might be a risky move in the highly competitive FPS market. Mag's sales are going to be interesting to watch. The beta was quite popular. http://blog.mag.com/blog/2010/01/mag-beta-5-0-statistics/ And I think Mag is going to do well with Socom fans. But on the other hand, people aren't used to paying 60 Euro's for a online only game, and what Mag is actually like might not appeal to a wide enough audience. And somehow I don't think MAG is going to do well in reviews.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
CounterStrike is how Sony is going to need to bill this game though, to give people a touchstone to base their understanding of the game on. Because if they don't get that message out, I definitely see this game as being consigned to the void.
Carl B's take on MAG mindshare at the moment: low.
I need to know whether I should get it as well or not - someone rate it for me on the 'awesomeness' scale; use Warhawk and R:foM as your take-aways for MP action I like.
This, I agree with wholeheartedly. Just saw the Mag TV advert, and it didn't really say much other than here's a new FPS. In the end the advert didn't make me want the game any more or less than I would if I knew nothing about the game.
The thing is, how to market it with a CounterStrike emphasis without confusing consumers that aren't familiar with CounterStrike?
Does this game have ultra long (say 1-2 mile/1.6-3.2 km) view range? If so, large battlefields like that + 256 players could be a total revolution in team based gameplay.
The problem I see is that for the most part even hardcore team based players tend to be small squad based (excepting MMORPGs). And with a large scale game you need to have a willingness by players to operate not only as small semi-automous squads, but as as a larger overall team. IE - needing to have players supress not only their individual desires, but also the squads desires for the greater good of the whole.
In other words, a psuedo-military mindset of the whole being greater and more important than the individual. Which is at odds with most online players (even those in predominantly team based games) wanting to shine in individual glory.
I'm quite interested in how they market this. But whatever they do, I have a hard time seeing this doing more than moderate sales (which isn't bad if dev budget isn't large).
As well, I think this is a premium case of a game needing to be cross platform. The style of gameplay and level of cooperation they are asking for seems more suited to the X360 where the majority (arguably almost all) online players are used to using online conversation.
Out of all the games releasing this year, I'm actually the most interested in seeing not only how this game is received as well as how it is marketed. This has the potential to match the rush and sense of accomplishment in good large scale teamwork that I've only ever found in the more difficult MMOs with nearly impossible raid encounters.
Almost forgot, I think they also missed the boat by not including PC, where they would have had an almost instant fan following of people that are (and most importantly were) heavily into CounterStrike. Also would have been appealing to the hardcore MMORPG players that are big into large scale teamwork (many of which dabble in FPS also). Speaking of those MMORPG guilds, I have a feeling many of them would have dominated early play in this game with already established large scale command structures and teamwork.
Regards,
SB
Last edited by a moderator:
If it's true, they could do a targeted campaign to point it out. Now, most people don't have a common idea of what MAG is. The game seems to be aimed at the hard core FPS players. So it may be ok if people like me can't relate (I may not see the campaign).
I don`t know if anyone knows those vids, they show one style of playing a large battle in a stealthy solo way and doing sabotage deep behind enemy lines only possible in a game like this. I found it pretty interesting how he avoided enemy contact unless necessary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzwy3XwdAZg&fmt=22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl4iYPxLoNE&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzwy3XwdAZg&fmt=22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl4iYPxLoNE&NR=1
This is a game more directed at the SOCOM crowd, who might be the best in terms of coordination on console. Which is a big part of the problem, like I said. It's really hard to translate what's so good about this game to others. Hopefully word of mouth will help it -- and if anything, it won't lack players. SOCOM Confrontation, for the fiasco that it was still does like 50k players on at most times (which is a lot compared to other exclusives and does mean games are regularly available).
I have Socom Confrontation. I am usually the first one to die. ^_^
The pressure there is huge because your teammates get to watch you play after they died. A friend told me he'll get an earful if he messes up. He loves the tension though. I gave up after a short while since I didn't want to invest the time to keep up with them.
At least MAG is not as stressful.
The pressure there is huge because your teammates get to watch you play after they died. A friend told me he'll get an earful if he messes up. He loves the tension though. I gave up after a short while since I didn't want to invest the time to keep up with them.
At least MAG is not as stressful.
ShadowWolf64
Regular
I played the MAG beta and somewhat enjoyed it.Its not bad though...
I wish more games would skip the SP campaign and focus solely on MP. Focus those resources where they really matter. SP focus means many don't have to buy the game; just rent it, beat it, and move on to the next one. Whereas a good MP game keeps people playing, thus allowing the dev to sell DLC and other extras.
If PS3 needs "word of mouth" buzz, then I think a great online MP game is the best way to get it.
If PS3 needs "word of mouth" buzz, then I think a great online MP game is the best way to get it.
There have been great word of mouth buzz for RPG/action games like Valkyria Chronicles, Demon's Souls or even Yakuza 3 (Japan) -- with and without MP.
I think the problem with MAG is for the most part, the beta did not show the strength adequately (e.g., clearing out stats removed the higher ranking officers, only smaller maps were opened at one stage, etc.). It was meant to help discover issues. But it was also the only exposure to the game.
Plus the game seems to have a higher than average learning curve, whereas the FPS crowd seem to cherish more casual mechanics. Not sure if people are patient enough for a "serious" play. So it may have both good and bad word of mouth at the same time -- unlike Valkyria and Demon's Souls.
It worked in Demon's Souls because the difference can be felt immediately/explicitly (Meeting a dragon face-to-face at entry-level), whereas in an FPS, the effect can be subtle (Why do I keep dying within 5 minutes while running to my objectives ? I want to kill some enemies now !). IMHO, it's important to tell/remind players what the game is about.
I guess we will see when the game is released tomorrow ? It would be the first time I get to experience the game in full.
I think the problem with MAG is for the most part, the beta did not show the strength adequately (e.g., clearing out stats removed the higher ranking officers, only smaller maps were opened at one stage, etc.). It was meant to help discover issues. But it was also the only exposure to the game.
Plus the game seems to have a higher than average learning curve, whereas the FPS crowd seem to cherish more casual mechanics. Not sure if people are patient enough for a "serious" play. So it may have both good and bad word of mouth at the same time -- unlike Valkyria and Demon's Souls.
It worked in Demon's Souls because the difference can be felt immediately/explicitly (Meeting a dragon face-to-face at entry-level), whereas in an FPS, the effect can be subtle (Why do I keep dying within 5 minutes while running to my objectives ? I want to kill some enemies now !). IMHO, it's important to tell/remind players what the game is about.
I guess we will see when the game is released tomorrow ? It would be the first time I get to experience the game in full.
Don`t you think the good pre-order numbers are a result of the beta(s) ? It seems to have left quite an impression if you consider that not all previews in the press have been overly positive.
