MAG Gameplay Trailer + Previews

biggestmuff

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2001
8,201
2
0
meh. still needs some work. I was expecting them to get a lot farther with it. Having 256 players sounds interesting, but it looks no different than any other game. It's objective based, right?
 

hans030390

Diamond Member
Feb 3, 2005
7,326
2
76
Originally posted by: biggestmuff
Having 256 players sounds interesting, but it looks no different than any other game.

Unless you're talking pure visuals, I'd disagree. Just the idea of 256 players in one FPS game itself could make it an entirely different game than the others.

I also recall Warhawk looking pretty crappy in the trailers. However, I personally think they did a great job with the final game (I know not everyone likes it).
 
Oct 19, 2000
17,860
4
81
Doesn't look that enticing to me. 256 players is nice in theory, but when that's your only bullet point for a game when it looks like any other shooter that's been done in the past 3 years, that might not be a good thing.

The people above say they are cautiously optimistic.....let's just say I'm cautious.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
Can anyone really say that a 64 player battlefield map was more fun than a 32 player match?

I dont see the big deal. Especially when I read that the command structure will be just like it was in BF2 - the commander is still a foot soldier, which as we all know, outside of extremely structured matches, never worked as well as it should have. The only time I've ever seen the squad/commander system work in BF2 was on a server where you'd get kicked for not joining a squad, and the commander would get kicked if he joined in the fight.

From all that I've read, it sounds like a straight battlefield ripoff from start to finish, just with more players.