MAG - Massive Action Game

  • Page

    of 132 First / Last

    Previous
  • Ged42 16 Jul 2008 10:06:08 7,641 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Trailer for new 256 player war game

    Could be cool or could be crap depending mostly on whether your teammates are complete idiots or not.
  • FixedInfinity 16 Jul 2008 10:11:58 1,682 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I can easily see the that 256 coming down to a more reasonable number, but I still think this could end up being good.
    Obviously would like some more information...
  • greenthumb 16 Jul 2008 10:12:00 307 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    is this going to be first person or third person? if its third person it will suck balls
  • Deleted user 16 July 2008 10:34:07
    It's probably the worst title I've heard for a game in recent years.

    Next from Zipper, Generic Action Shooter. Standard Racing Competitive Game. Boring Monotonous Spreadsheet RPG Masquerading As A Real Game. Advanced Lawnmower Simulator.
  • deathdealer619 16 Jul 2008 10:45:41 751 posts
    Seen 5 months ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Its basicaly Planetside by sony online but for consoles, and I hope its as good as that used to be.
  • Pirotic Moderator 16 Jul 2008 10:45:59 20,646 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    it's a meta game, you get split into squads and you can only see and interact with your direct team-mates, the other 'squads' just appear on the radar and depending on how successfull they are it will indirectly affect your squad. so if another squad manages to capture an area, a gate will open in your area so you can proceed and so forth.

    you don't get 128 team-mates all on screen at once :p
  • JediMasterMalik 16 Jul 2008 10:49:06 11,826 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    It sounds like Resistance's 60 players, but with more. So 8 player squads all effecting the same game.
  • Tiger_Walts 16 Jul 2008 10:49:58 16,516 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I remember when TF2 was going to be a 128 player game.

    IT Monkey and StickyPiston Minecraft Hosting Support

  • Pirotic Moderator 16 Jul 2008 10:50:59 20,646 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    yup.

    plus if you think about it, if it were possible to have 256 player games on todays broadband connections you'd of seen it on PC long before now. the amount of projectiles data (bullets, people etc) goes up almost exponentially! not to mention the how many levels of detail you'd need to do with everything.

    It would be so bloody cool to have something like the normandy beach landing all with real players, but we're miles away from having the connection speeds or computer specs to handle it properly
  • Res 16 Jul 2008 10:55:54 1,814 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Pirotic wrote:
    yup.

    plus if you think about it, if it were possible to have 256 player games on todays broadband connections you'd of seen it on PC long before now. the amount of projectiles data (bullets, people etc) goes up almost exponentially! not to mention the how many levels of detail you'd need to do with everything.

    I was in a 150 player game in Joint Ops about 4 years ago, on a 1mb connection.

    I haven't seen anywhere suggest that you will only be able to see the 8 players in your squad, only that everyone will be grouped into 8 player squads so that it is easier to manage.

    I should also say that game calculated bullet travel time, bullet drop and had vehicles. All without lag.
  • Whizzo 16 Jul 2008 10:56:53 42,758 posts
    Seen 24 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    150 player games of Joint Ops were insane, fun, but completely bonkers.

    This space left intentionally blank.

  • the_dudefather 16 Jul 2008 10:58:53 8,976 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Post deleted

    (ง ͠ ͟ʖ ͡)

  • the_dudefather 16 Jul 2008 10:59:27 8,976 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Pirotic wrote:

    I haven't seen anywhere suggest that you will only be able to see the 8 players in your squad, only that everyone will be grouped into 8 player squads so that it is easier to manage.

    It would be tricky if you couldn't see the enemy, only your own team ;)

    (ง ͠ ͟ʖ ͡)

  • ruttyboy 16 Jul 2008 10:59:52 7,949 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Res wrote:
    I haven't seen anywhere suggest that you will only be able to see the 8 players in your squad, only that everyone will be grouped into 8 player squads so that it is easier to manage.

    That's the thing though, how is it 'easier to manage'? Unless the people in your squad want to follow your orders anyway it will be meaningless as team tactics are already commonplace in todays online shooters without a designated 'leader'.

    I'm pretty convinced that this is spin allowing them to claim it's 256 players while in reality it is 8v8 with the getout that they have mentioned the squad thing.

    Happy to be proved wrong of course, but I'd put money on it.
  • LetsGo 16 Jul 2008 11:00:21 5,069 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    You do know the Xbox (last gen) had a 50 player FPS?
  • Pirotic Moderator 16 Jul 2008 11:01:12 20,646 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    That's just what I've heard. the chain of command stuff sounds far more interesting than the combat to me anyway. Hope I can jump straight into commander role without having to work up from cannon fodder :p
  • keyboardmonkey 16 Jul 2008 11:03:10 409 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    FluffyTucker wrote:
    32 players on release or I eat my cock

    Sounds more of a bet now.
  • Res 16 Jul 2008 11:03:53 1,814 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Well each squad would be given a high ranking player who should know what (s)he is doing, and if they can be bothered he would be able to organize their squad to work together. This is how it would be easier to manage.

    Of course the system may not always work like that, but it seems like a better idea than just throwing you in with 127 other players and telling you to try to group yourself with some people, while listening to those 127 players bitching at each other.

    Oh, I assume the two teams would be given a commander of some sort as well (hopefully one that you can vote for like in BF2 on the PC) so he would also be able to manage the squad by giving them all orders, something like you would expect in a RTS. After all it is much easier to give a few squads orders rather than 128 individual players.

    /really should start proof reading before posting
  • ruttyboy 16 Jul 2008 11:10:21 7,949 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I hope so Res I honestly do, but Sony's promise/deliver ratio is way too low for me to accept this at face value.
  • Psychotext 16 Jul 2008 11:12:14 52,774 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Pirotic wrote:
    That's just what I've heard. the chain of command stuff sounds far more interesting than the combat to me anyway. Hope I can jump straight into commander role without having to work up from cannon fodder :p
    It's the chain of command thing that worries me about this game. Far too many cunts online with ego issues as it is.
  • Res 16 Jul 2008 11:13:50 1,814 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Of course, you are right about Sony. But saying that it is impossible to build such a game is simply not true, whether they actually will or not is up to them.
  • FixedInfinity 16 Jul 2008 11:13:55 1,682 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Res wrote:
    I was in a 150 player game in Joint Ops about 4 years ago, on a 1mb connection.

    I haven't seen anywhere suggest that you will only be able to see the 8 players in your squad, only that everyone will be grouped into 8 player squads so that it is easier to manage.

    I should also say that game calculated bullet travel time, bullet drop and had vehicles. All without lag.
    It was also possible to play Joint Ops with a 56k connection as well.
    Didn't try it myself, but didn't see too many complaints about it!
  • Pirotic Moderator 16 Jul 2008 11:14:35 20,646 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Well, if the FMV is anything to go by. When it finds the players it decides the chain of command itself based on rank. and I'd assume people who don't follow orders are never going to do well enough to reach a rank where they can boss others about.

    I say that, but I know that little 12 year old twats who sit at home playing the game non-stop will be bossing me about most of the time in it probably.
  • glaeken 16 Jul 2008 11:15:08 10,976 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I think this was the most interesting thing Sony announced. I guess we will have to see how it pans out. I do remember BF2 64 player match's being fairly amazing though so anything that can approach this on a console would be pretty impressive.
  • mcmonkeyplc 16 Jul 2008 11:17:55 38,882 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    This actually interests me! Well done sony, try not to fuck it up.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Ged42 16 Jul 2008 11:19:58 7,641 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I imagine that you'll rank up as you gain XP by completing objectives, giving you access to better equipment, at a certain rank you'll be able to drive jeeps, then a bit higher tanks, then once you get to commander level you'll be able to call in airstrikes and the like. The problem will be once everyone has a high rank there will be no one who will want to be just a normal grunt.

    Unless the game randomly selects what you are based on your rank, then you choose a speciality eg. demolitions, sniper, medic etc

    Shame there probably won't be epic 256 player battles, would be cool if all the 8 player teams eventually joined up for an massive assault on the enemy stronghold
  • ruttyboy 16 Jul 2008 11:20:05 7,949 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Res wrote:
    Of course, you are right about Sony. But saying that it is impossible to build such a game is simply not true, whether they actually will or not is up to them.

    I never said it was impossible technically, merely that Sony are misrepresenting what they actually have. And that's if they have anything other than a CGI trailer and a crap name at this point...
  • phatb0y 16 Jul 2008 11:21:16 868 posts
    Seen 2 weeks ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    This could go one of two ways. Either really good or really, really (Haze) shit.

    If it turns out like a contemporary version of Planetside then it has great potential. 256 players is mighty ambitious though.

    Relying on high ranking players to organise anything is fucking lethal. If we're assuming points = rank then the commanders of the future are going to be experts in vehicle repair, throwing ammo/med-packs and OCD stat-padding like a motherfucker. Basically the sort of people you wouldn't put in charge of a plug socket, let alone rely on to give you some semblance of an enjoyable game.
  • Res 16 Jul 2008 11:31:00 1,814 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    ruttyboy wrote:
    I never said it was impossible technically, merely that Sony are misrepresenting what they actually have. And that's if they have anything other than a CGI trailer and a crap name at this point...

    The rest of the post wasn't aimed at you, the first bit with me agreeing was.
  • ruttyboy 16 Jul 2008 11:33:25 7,949 posts
    Seen 6 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Res wrote:
    ruttyboy wrote:
    I never said it was impossible technically, merely that Sony are misrepresenting what they actually have. And that's if they have anything other than a CGI trailer and a crap name at this point...

    The rest of the post wasn't aimed at you, the first bit with me agreeing was.

    No worries :)
  • Page

    of 132 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply