MAG

As you know, MAG promised to deliver massive online battles with 256 players at once. Many of you, and with good reason, were skeptical of these claims. As I am one of the few people on this forum to have experienced MAG first hand. I'll start off by assuring you this; it works.

I don't pretend to understand the engineering behind the system, but whatever they did the game runs flawlessly and out of the many sessions I have played I've only experienced minor lag in one of them.

Now on to the game itself. While the number 256 seems to be displayed on every add and brought up with every mention of the game, this is only one of the three game modes. There is also sabotage (64 players) and acquisition. (128 players)

While reviewing the information one would often come to the conclusion that the difference in faction is skin deep, and while this assumption has some technical weight to it, it would be incorrect for me to say that this difference is simply mere visuals. If there was evidence to support the categorization of personality, the difference between factions in MAG is it. When confronted with the choice, specific factions appeal automatically to the unconscious mind, and the similarly thinking players tend to end up on the same team. For example, members of Raven tend to be the COD type. These people have little to none team cohesion, while individually they are good players. Unlike Raven SVER players tend to operate as a group and coordinate attacks. Valor comes somewhere in between.

Which brings me to the next biggest part about MAG; the teamwork. I cannot count how many times we have been promised games that emphasize on teamwork and coordination, and how many times our expectations have not been met. Common, and accurate I might add, speculation is that the general gaming community is incapable of such a feat as "teamwork" MAG has challenged my views concerning this long held rule of mine. It would seem, that only certain kind of people are incapable of teamwork, and only certain kind of people go out on their own and snipe/rambo. These people seem to be focused mainly in Raven. In my experience playing as Raven I have never seen any remarkable display of coordination or communication among the team. However, playing as Valor certainly changed this streak. While Valor does not operate on the level of SVER, I have played several games where the chain of command was proactive on every level, and every occurrence where this happened we crushed the opposing team.

One glance at the global stats and it is evident that SVER rapes everyone up the shitter. This observation is correct. Why? While SVER players have no major advantage in the commons player's skill, they tend to work together. The game is set up so that every squad has a specific objective to complete that will benefit the group as a whole, and every platoon has a common goal. Coordination and communication between squad mates and squad leaders gives you a huge advantage over an unorganized enemy who aimlessly goes for kills first and objectives second. Making progress with CO given objectives gives you tones of experience which you can later spend on upgrading weapons and equipment. Often a squad will be assigned an objective that will not directly complete the mission at hand, but will give your team the edge and make the goal easier to reach. For example, instead of being ordered to secure the main objective, you would be told to destroy a bunker, destroy a sensors array, a mortar battery, a motor pool, or anti air. Accomplishing such tasks will benefit the group as a whole. Therefore those who are organized and can accomplish such missions better, working for the group instead of the individual, end up preforming individually better than the opposition due to the advantages that completing each objective brings.

If you have a PS3, buy it.

Huh, funny...

When I went and pre-ordered AVP today at my local GS, I had a conversation with the store manager and several other people who all said whenever they played MAG it wouldn't work. They said the servers were bad.

I guess they just got to playing a bad day or something went wrong for them. Maybe their PS3's were bad. IDK.

Well, anyways, if it really does work and work well then more power to the PS3 for gettin' it done and havin' it.

Shame its not for the xbox. At least if it was both I wouldn't have to hear all the Ps3 fanboys screaming into my ear about it.

Death no more wrote:Shame its not for the xbox. At least if it was both I wouldn't have to hear all the Ps3 fanboys screaming into my ear about it.

Scream into their's about Mass Effect 2.

Screams about the pointlessness of console wars.

I seriously didn't think they could pull it off, as the only game that even got close to proper 'teamwork' was Left 4 Dead, and even them it was too tempting to go Rambo and break off from the group.

It's an interesting premise, and looks promising if clans really set up a strong community, but right now I'm more in the mood for solo gaming.

If I ever get a PS3(Drop your price in Europe Sony, and have a few more good exclusives and we'll talk about it) I'll be sure to check this out.

Eh, the only games i still want to play are Heavy Rain and every Team Ico game. =/

Baconsen wrote:Eh, the only games i still want to play are Heavy Rain and every Team Ico game. =/

Yes. I really wish they'd put those damn Ico games on PSN though. I don't have a PS2 :/

well ill have it, and i was already going to be SVER because of pre-order

dud ill see you on there

Maybe I'm just naive but I thought people (with PS3s) might care more about this. It looks to me like a game of Battlefield that's not ruined by EA!

CivBase wrote:Eh, I dunno. With a game that big, it seems like your involvement is pretty insignificant. At least with Battlefield, you can still get a ton accomplished by yourself.

No, normally an individual will not turn the tide of battle by himself. Winning a battle requires the group as a whole to operate as a team and for each individual to have no other goal than the betterment of his faction. An individual, can, however be responsible for a local breakthrough. He can single handedly hold the line when his squadmates could not, he could demolish a mortar battery that would have undermined their position. The knowledge that you yourself had enabled your team to accomplish that which they otherwise could not have, possibly effecting the outcome of the entire battle, gives one the satisfaction that he has played his part well.

Felix wrote:

Felix wrote:Wait... is it out?

Why has no one answered this? If it's out, please tell me, I can't wait to get this game.

Yes, it is out.