| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (127)

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 4:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
first comment by brandonk129
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
sounds like great fun, i can't wait to get on that shit with my clan mates
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:07PM Victoryismine52 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
To be honest the Beta is the reason I'm not picking up MW2. The scope of each battle is amazing, the gameplay is on par or better than MW2, and the level up system is very robust. The finished product is still a while off and with the time that zipper has to put into this game I have no doubt that this will be my new Counter Strike at least until Valve can push out CS:2. (for you PC gamers out there you know what it means to replace CS *sniff*)
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:15PM Victoryismine52 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Before you all get on my case... The gameplay is on par or better (arguably better simply due to the scope of each battle) than MW... (I haven't played MW2's multiplayer yet)


and spyder taco
Um if your refering to Single player and Multiplayer than yes. I would trade both experiences for one that was better because the dev team focused on SP or MP and not both. My point still stands.... I am actually comparing MAG's only MP to MW's MP and SP and saying yes I would prefer to have THE BEST MP experience due to the fact that I have so many SP games that I can enjoy.
Actually VALVE is the perfect example of this CS worked BECAUSE they focused souly on the MP and what would make it great. while HL is amazing as a SP experience...(I'd like to use HL multiplayer and CS condition zero as exibit A and B)
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:38PM Victoryismine52 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Spyder
Not sure about that I could see you saying that HL worked (for so long) due to Moding (even though it alone would have worked just fine) but nobody I know plays CS mods any more we for the most part play the original even though yes custom maps are used (not really modding I wouldn't say LBP has modding). However my point is that I'm in the Beta and yes it does work... very well I might add. To be honest I would go as far to say that it is bringing what CS did for computers to a console (FINALLY). in the same way that Halo was nothing new but just took what had been done on PC's FOR SOOO LONG and finally brought it to the consoles. It is the first time that I can remember on a console actually working together with strangers and careing about not dying(and that's what made CS soo great not mods). I get a little of this on L4D on the 360 every once in awhile but for the most part nobody co-operates now we'll see if this works still when you get all of the casual gamers on MAG but for now........... THE BETA is the most MP fun I've had in awhile on a console.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 8:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Im not in the beta, but I will be buying this over MW2..

1. I really have grown a hate for activision. Kodick has pissed me off sufficiently

2. The f**ers increased the price of the game here in the uk. What was that about a ps3 price cut kodick ? you two faced c**t..

3. COD's online multiplayer has major issues I bet its the same bullshit peer 2 peer bollocking system with the same bullshit antilag code and the same random host selection that ends up with you getting screwed over as host because of the aforementioned dogshit antilag code and the bullshit peer 2 peer code.

All of this basically means modern warfare 2 will only be good for one thing really and that is the single player the multiplayer will be the same bollocks with some slight modifications to the perks woohoo, count me out.. Worth a rent to clock the single player. I might buy mw2 when it hits 10 pounds in some bargain bin or second hand or if the cheap bastards change the multiplayer to

1. be more flexible and allow region based matching I dont want to play against americans, no offence but you generate lag and vice versa for us europeans vs you.

2. use a client server based setup you cheap skanky penny pinching tight fisted wunking cants
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 12:37AM Sly C said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
scooby, if you weren't an idiot, you would know that MW2's multiplayer has been changed. now it has host migration so if a host leaves, the game still goes on. and what bullshit antilag code? i never had any lag in COD4. ever. your connection must be ass if you had lag in that game.

"the multiplayer will be the same bollocks with some slight modifications to the perks woohoo, count me out.."

you mean you haven't seen the tons of new weapons, throwing knives, multi-weapon-attachments, dual pistol wielding, the host migration i mentioned before, and probably more that hasn't been announced yet? try looking things up before you knock em, idiot.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 12:38AM Sly C said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
oh but you are right about activision and that douche kotick. they do suck.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 4:05AM mahouneko said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Sly:
He's complaining about the peer-to-peer connection issues because he's in England and (apparently) most of his multiplayer games are with Americans. There's this pond that separates Europe from North America, it's called the Atlantic Ocean. Regardless of the amount of bandwidth available, the fastest communication systems still travel at the EM spectrum (read: just a bit slower than the Speed of Light).

Assuming that the closest major American city to London is New York City, the distance between the two cities is about 5585 km (~3470 mi). The speed of light is about 3.0 x 10^8 m/s. The time it takes for a signal to travel that distance is about 0.0186 seconds. There are also many other factors involved such as the client's upload rate and the number of routing hops involved (these two being the more prominent examples that I can remember). In general, dedicated servers usually have both higher bandwidth and higher throughput so games hosted on such servers are essentially receiving multi-cast broadcasts. With a peer-to-peer system, multi-cast is still possible but the host machine has to fill in the role of both host and client. This means that the host machine is receiving everyone's input and broadcasting the "results" to everyone else. In theory, this should be fine, but in practice, either the download or upload rates (or both) will choke, more so for the host machine because of their asynchronous broadband connection.

The thing that most people forget is that the connection speed doesn't change at all. It's really the amount of data that can be "carried" across the line or fiber that gives people this misconception that things are "faster". A good analogy would be shopping from Amazon. If you ordered 10 different (in-stock) items which are shipped individually, then order another 10 different (in-stock) items which are shipped as a batch, you might get the misconception that your batch shipment is faster just because everything arrived in one shipment as opposed to 10 different shipments.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 9:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
beautifully explained mahouneko and that boys and girls is our lesson for this week..
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Imagine all the people who like to yell at other people online on games like Halo playing this game.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:43PM Ficken said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Actually that won't be a problem considering 1/10 of the people on psn have a mic. So it's the same amount of chatter as you would find in Halo most likely... I wish Sony would just learn and pack in a mic with their system...
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:43PM eat it said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
yeah it's gonna be terrible for the casual online player. I'm staying out of this one.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:49PM Steven4 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It'll probably be like Killzone 2 or Resistance 2 where you can only talk to people in your squad and people within a certain distance of you. They'd be stupid to let all 256 players talk at once.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:50PM freaparn said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Shouldn't be that hard to keep under control. Limit squad communication to 8-man channel, commander overrides squad-talk, platoon-leader overrides all or is sent out strictly to commanders depending on what needs to be communicated... it'll be different from other online shooters, but not overly complicated if built well.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Actually I'm sure a lot of people have mics on PSN, just not a lot use them. I have 5 friends with PS3's all who have mics, we just don't use them.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I have a mic but I turn it off, I don't want everyone to hear me shout obscenities while I am playing. How many have the ps3 eye ? All of them have a mic too..

I only really leave it on in a few cases and that is games that have push to talk and they are few and far between.

Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Oh god. Never use the PS3 eye as a mic, the echo is unbearable.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:59PM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"It'll probably be like Killzone 2 or Resistance 2 where you can only talk to people in your squad and people within a certain distance of you."

Yeah, exactly. You can only talk to your squad team.

This game is amazing! It really took notes on what FPS's SHOULD have in it to make them interesting.

Without giving too much away, it's not just shooting the other team, there are other 'jobs' you can perform within the team.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 8:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I always use it. The quality of the mic is awesome, the reverb you still get with bluetooth headsets anyway plus your breathing and all sorts of other bullshit coming through I would rather have the mic away from my face personal preference I guess.

You need to put the ps3 eye between yourself and then lower the volume of your speakers or even play with cordless head phones (that would be the best). This is why I dont like playing with a mic and I hate having to have a headset attached to me all the time as well, I cant be arsed..

The reverb and all other reasons is exactly why I dont play with my mic on, I only put the mic when there is a push to talk function or when I am playing with my bro online thats it..
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 9:57PM ptcamn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ Ficken

Actually your numbers are wrong. If, for example, you get into a Killzone or SOCOM match you will see that 9 out of 10 people have mics. The good thing, and reason why I have great confidence in MAG's communications, is that it has been my experience that people in PSN are not talking BS, or yelling, or any of that crap you hear going on in other networks.

But I will say this as far as my experience with online combat games: we need to coordinate strategies just a little bit more gang. I still run into many loose cannons out there. :)
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 10:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah im one of them i have the ps3 blu-tooth headset but i rarely use it
Really few games demand it and on top of that most games like cod4 u only use it to scream at people blocking teh fuking door wen de grenade comes through a window or something
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 10:38PM den69 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I really hate when people say that the majority of players on the PS3 don't have headsets.
When me and my mates bought Killzone 2 we all bought headsets.
We used them when we played together.

I don't use my headset when my friends aren't there as I find it creepy talking to people online that I don't know... lol

Maybe most PS3 owners feel that way.
Reply

Posted: Sep 17th 2009 2:12PM Edge of Blade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah. Maybe. But don't act like your posse going out to buy mics is representative of the rest of PSN. Honestly, why don't people talk about the cost of getting a bluetooth mic in getting a PS3? And I don't mean the shitty one that got packed in with Warhawk.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:37PM Marius said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Ah so want to play this

But I wish this game got delayed more to improve the graphics
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:44PM Levi said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
are you fucking serious? What is wrong with everyone now? Those graphics are not only fine, they are GOOD
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:48PM chipimix said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Graphics graphics graphics. Do you really think that's what makes a game great?
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:51PM Marius said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I just dont know how my eyes will feel from playing KZ2 to this
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 10:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@danixx: Back in '05, I used to frequent EB Games alot. I also would watch people when they came in and see how they chose to pick out video games. To make a long story short, I watched a lot of people pick up a lot of terrible games because the graphics were "good". People would walk up to the front desk and their very first question about a game would be "How are the graphics"? So I hate to say it but there is a large demographic of persons who buy titles just based on the graphics. It's rather sad actually.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 10:52PM ptcamn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The graphics look great. Definitely as good (if not better) than Far Cry 2. This is even more amazing considering that you have that many people simultaneously. I have read some comments saying that the weapons don't look good, but put a Far Cry 2 character or weapon next to MAG's and they look just as good.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:42PM EGOvoruhk said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
How do you become a leader or commander? Hopefully it's random, and not based on experience points, because if so, I'm going to hate following some pre-pubescent boy's nasely commands
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:52PM Mr Khan said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I would think that either having it random, or based on experience points, could lead to horrendous experiences (the guy with much more experience points could be some sort of ultra-serious douchebag, and randomizing it is just begging for trouble)

Maybe they could do it by a system similar to Xbox Live's Rep system. Everyone starts with a neutral reputation, and so early in the game's lifetime, it would largely be random, but when you're a leader, your performance gets rated, and the guys with the best rep get higher up the chain-o-command.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:53PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
eh, that's what i get for writing long posts. But the system SpyderTaco mentioned would be good too.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 9:51PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Spydertaco, thank you for that info leak, i will defend you to the death if need be. because reading EGO's comment struck a fear in me that i would not be able to stand this game if Leaders were all a bunch of pricks that rose thru the ranks simply because they had too much time on their hands. you have effectively allayed those fears.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 8:51AM SheppyReturns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Better way to think of it is this. What's the quickest way to gain experience? Following orders? Okay, good. Now think about your time BEFORE you can command people. If you're following orders, you're getting a VERY good look at how the objectives are met, etc. By the time you're eligible to lead men, you've put in enough time to understand how this should go down.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Hmm wish I could have got in the beta to at least try it, since I have a strict no buy policy with online only games...but maybe I could have bent that rule if it's good enough.

I laugh at their efforts for getting people to coordinate though. It doesn't matter how much extra xp you give them, most people want to run around doing their own shit in shooters.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:29PM Cheesus Crust said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It is..
And what about MW2, are you not gonna get that either, seeing as it doesn't have a demo either.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
No I'm buying MW2 because I know what I'm getting with that game. That, and it's one of the extremely rare games that I can actually stand playing online.

This game has thoroughly unimpressed me since it was announced, but I want hands on time to make the final call. I'd be able to tell after just 1 match if it will suck or not.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 12:22AM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Didn't you say the same thing about Infamous? You said it looked awful, then you played it and loved it and then after you beat it you said you wished you never bought it? Sometimes I think you just want attention.
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 12:26AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
infamous did get more mediocre the more I played it. I learned not to doubt my gut instinct
Reply

Posted: Sep 6th 2009 2:12AM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I don't think you know what your instinct is most of the time. How could you when it changes every few days?
Reply

Posted: Oct 30th 2009 10:37AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well i thought that by the end of reading this page i could condemn COD all the way to hell. Now i'm thinkin i'll need to get MW2 just to have an alternative. MAG is so irresistible (LagFree Vs. FreeLag), though the command structure may place a pubescent dribble in charge of my experience. At least that brat will be focused on the same things i want. We refer to it as "Winning". It has the potential to make you feel good, and even raise your expectations. But of course it's my digital ego i wish to pet most, Pown'n (Personally Ownin') targets is my favorite activity for a FPS or MPS. This makes us MVP on any VIP list. Use your mics, & keep LoL.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:50PM ged2000000 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'm in the beta of this game and the games awesome man. I've played with valer and now the new s.v.e.r. and each faction is like playing a totally new game. Different weapons, different styles, theres RPG skill elements in it which work really well and heres the big thing. NO ONLINE LAG. I havn't experianced any. In a 256 player match, 128 player match, 64 player match, theres no lag at all.

You'd think well 256 players will be to crowded. Nope wrong plenty of space and every squad holds down a certain area of the map. It works really well. This is a brilliant game
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:53PM kevin949 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It doesn't feel like a huge battle like that though because everyone is spread out between different spawns and objectives, so basically you always feel like you're in a 32v32 match.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:44PM kevin949 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ok, I stand corrected, I guess it was just the map I was on or something. It felt really spread out. Just played a few more matches that were adequately and accurately intense.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:56PM s ls said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
MAG will NOT be Sony's number 1 first party multiplayer game in the long run Socom will stay there.

People said the same thing about KILLZONE 2 and Resistance2 but we've seen the results. The game will be hyped and given great reviews but no matter what numbers will slowly go down.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The current Socom will not be #1 compared to MAG.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:02PM s ls said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@

you cant compare two totally different games
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 7:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I used to be a huge Socom player during the PS2 era, it's one of the reasons I got a PS3. Yet, ironically, I haven't bought Socom yet, is it worth it?
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2009 6:57PM Shadowbender said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
My gosh, I don't see any blue on this comment page. There's a problem.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW