MAG: Massive Action Game, massive action trailer

by Randy Nelson { Jul 16th 2008 at 3:00AM }

You'll need to decide for yourself if you're massively excited about Sony's 256-player online shooter, MAG. Thankfully, you now have the above video – along with our liveblog info – to reference during your decision making process.

It should be noted that developer Zipper Interactive has seemingly taken a cue from Guerilla (with its infamous E3 2005 trailer for Killzone 2) and decided to saunter down the entirely pre-rendered CGI route with this trailer. We're fairly confident that the visual style will carry over to the final product, but everything else? The label reads: "Take with one very large grain of salt."

Oh, and 256-player online? We don't doubt it will work ... we just doubt our brains' ability to process 255 racial slurs and/or homophobic remarks simulatenously.

Tags: E3-2008, MAG, Sony, Zipper

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

JontheNinja @ Jul 16th 2008 3:05AM

I don't think my mind will be able to process 255 littel girls screaming words that are much too vulgar for an 8 year old to be saying.

KingOfGods @ Jul 16th 2008 8:23AM

you don't have to worry about that on PSN...no one uses mics on PSN anyway. It will be all keyboard chat like MGO. No communication at all.

Kizzle @ Jul 16th 2008 3:05AM

Prerendered = who cares. This is the same nonsense Sony has been pulling for years now.

MAG could be fantastic, but this isn't worth getting excited over.

MastrCake @ Jul 16th 2008 3:07AM

A 256-friggin-player game? How long would I stay alive for? How big are the maps? Do they really have 256 people in their studio doing internal tests? If they don't (which they probably really don't), then how do they do internal tests with 256 people?

Well, I for one have my doubts. But if they can pull it off, then I can say hello to the "new" $400 80GB PS3!

James @ Jul 16th 2008 3:07AM

I don't think I would be able to stand the lag involved in a 256 player battle.

klitorisaurus @ Jul 16th 2008 3:16AM

Ha! That last statement is a perfect example of why I love you guys!

Nightvortez @ Jul 16th 2008 3:18AM

Who said everyone's mic is going to be linked here? From what I got in the trailer you would only be able to communicate with your squad, which consists of eight people, and the team leader would be able to communicate with other team leaders to tell them what's up. Seems like Battlefield 2 on a large scale, which is good. Will there be lag? Not if it uses those nice little dedicated servers Sony set up.

I'm sure random games will be horrible but once you actually start getting people who know what they are doing in there, it should be fun to see.

Omega2k3 @ Jul 16th 2008 3:25AM

You don't hear all 255 other people, only 7. You work in squads, damnit.

Boom! @ Jul 16th 2008 3:34AM

I don't think you'd live very long in this game.

eNrique @ Jul 16th 2008 4:28PM

you will respawn as reinforcements

Nick8708 @ Jul 16th 2008 3:46AM

I don't see any video, though I wouldn't doubt that it's my browser. It occasionally has 'issues' with Joystiq. Anyways, the concept sounds intriguing, but of course the implementation would be difficult to pull off. What I'm hoping for, some day, is a 3D version of Infantry, a game that was hosted, maybe not made (it's been a looong time since I've played it), by SoE. Anybody know what I'm talking about?

waynski1457 @ Jul 16th 2008 4:02AM

Damn, didn't see your comment, lol.

waynski1457 @ Jul 16th 2008 4:01AM

Above video? Is it just me not seeing it? I know it's on GT so that's probably where it's supposed to come from, but I don't see anything above the text.

phinnvr6 @ Jul 16th 2008 4:17AM

This game will be amazing when it ships. SOCOM was always an awesome online game for PS2, and the SOCOM for PS3 coming soon (32 players) I'm sure will top it. This company made those, and they'll be able to pull of this.

Charlie_Six @ Jul 16th 2008 4:19AM

I'll believe it when I see it. Still, if the video is saying we can fly planes and drop bombs on people, potentially fragging a hundred different players in one carpet bomb run... that'll be awesome :)

Boo @ Jul 16th 2008 4:21AM

No video =[ just text. Wonder why some can see it and some can't...

Vii @ Jul 16th 2008 4:42AM

@Nick8708

I remember Infantry. My friends were part of clan MPT (Monsterous Plush Toys) even before Infantry got picked up by Sony. However, it was quickly usurped when Counter-Strike was released as a mod for HL1.

Nick8708 @ Jul 16th 2008 5:54AM

I've never played Counter-Strike, but I've heard good things. If it felt like a 3D Infantry I'd definitely look into it. The top-down gameplay was pretty cool, but I always thought the class system, weapons and equipment system, levels, etc., pretty much everything lol, would be pretty awesome as a full 3D title. It'd be really sweet if a good developer picked it up and made it into a mainstream game. I've tried going back to it a few times over the past several years and it's disheartening that there's rarely more than a couple hundred players spread across the many different zones, unlike the good ol' days.

Hmm. Talking about it is making me all nostalgic. Perhaps soon I'll give it another go...and I encourage everybody else to look into it as well. It's free! http://www.station.sony.com/casualProduct.vm?Id=039

Nick8708 @ Jul 16th 2008 6:12AM

You know what, I probably didn't understand what you meant by usurped haha. I'm guessing now you didn't mean that it was like Infantry, but your clan got moved to that game instead. Yikes, I shouldn't comment at 3 in the morning :-O

GreyFox @ Jul 16th 2008 4:44AM

Filling up 64 player slots in Battlefield 2 was difficult at the best of times. Filling up 256 is hilarious nevermind that, again, BF2 has proven you can't put pub players in command positions or else you get "LOL ARTY ON TEH HELIPAD" instead of the 20 guys rushing your last cap point.

Nick8708 @ Jul 16th 2008 6:05AM

There are ways to prevent issues like that in-game. For instance, having to "earn" the right to command, perhaps through in-game accomplishments, or approval from the majority of those under your command, that way the players can ensure that they aren't stuck with somebody who is just screwing around. Granted, I've never played BF2, but just because it failed at that doesn't mean there aren't ways around it. Of course, it won't be easy. I'm interested in seeing their approach to this issue.

Tmoney @ Jul 16th 2008 8:52AM

@Nick8708 - "For instance, having to "earn" the right to command, perhaps through in-game accomplishments, or approval from the majority of those under your command"

Battlefield 2 had both of these options and it did little good. The highest ranked player who requested to be commander won, and he could be booted by in game vote anytime. Didn't help because people wanted to run and gun and not play commander usually, and you could never get people to follow your orders, people just did what they wanted, leading to a clusterf@#K.
That is the essential problem with this game and any of its type. PUGS, which is what you play with 99% of the time, become clusterf@#ks since there is no way to force order on people and they don't do it willingly.

GreyFox @ Jul 16th 2008 3:10PM

@Nick8708:
Unfortunately BF2 did have features like this as Tmoney has stated and even with the ability to kick incompetent retards the votes never passed because no one cared enough to vote. Having any sort of voting system for players will never work because each and every player is out for themselves so even if they were to decide commanders by popular vote they'd never get anywhere.

Dwag @ Jul 16th 2008 7:51AM

Yeah but even if he earns his way to command we'll end up with a lot of people bitching about why he is in command and then we got the massive amount of quitters.

OMGOMG @ Jul 16th 2008 8:37AM

MAG=LAG

GreyFox @ Jul 16th 2008 3:11PM

I LOL'd.

Rob @ Jul 16th 2008 10:22AM

lol, ill bet the speaking will be done something like battlefield bad companys, where you can only speak to your squad (3 other people within a short distance of you) and i think this could work perfectly and put online games like gears 2 with only 5 a-side matches to shame! Lets hope its visuals can keep up with the idea!

Obie @ Jul 16th 2008 10:52AM

Wow, not to mention this is ANOTHER CG trailer for the PS3....but it totally failed to show how 256 idiots act online.

Still, nice number.

Dralthi @ Jul 16th 2008 11:37AM

When will these developers learn the concept of the color wheel?

Seriously, what is it with this generation of games having a color palette of monochromatic brown?

Someone needs to tell these developers that color is your friend!

Nightvortez @ Jul 16th 2008 12:28PM

I'm sorry, were you expecting rainbow colours on a battlefield?

Dralthi @ Jul 16th 2008 5:57PM

Not expecting rainbows but skies are blue and grass is green. Games now-a-days tend to keep everything in the gray and brown spectrum.

Halo takes place on many battlefields and they manage to have a multitude of color in them. Call of Duty 4 manages to have color in it.

BigNate @ Jul 16th 2008 11:45AM

Looks like a scaled down, not so futuristic Planetside.

Rahabib @ Jul 16th 2008 12:39PM

knowing SONY they will probably do subscription like Planetside and will utterly destroy any hope of MAG catching on.

Besides, its going to be at least a year before we see that game. Mark my words.

Oh and apparently the Duke Nukem Forever team is making HOME as well.

Shaq-Fu @ Jul 16th 2008 12:43PM

Are there even 256 people online at any given time? Its going to lag like hell due to bad connections, or its going to be you and 40 others running around just ridiculosly huge maps.

Nugent @ Jul 16th 2008 1:01PM

Odds are they'll handle matchmaking like Planetside. Rather than waiting until you've got 256 people ready to go, it drops you in on a 1:1 basis, to make sure the teams are even. If someone drops out, that team is left under-manned until a replacement shows up. If they don't, and make you wait until you have a full game... well, let's just say that I won't be buying it then.