Jim Reilly, IGN News Editor
In the short time I had with MAG, the controls felt tight and responsive and there was little no noticeable lag. If you're a fan of team killing, though, MAG seems like an excellent choice to scratch that itch. Knife kills are quick and easy (tapping R3), and spawn reload times are relatively short. I was never voted out during any of my matches, so that means either MAG players have thick skin, or they were just having trouble finding the 'vote to kick' option in the menus. Hey, it's either you or them, I always say.
Hilary Goldstein, IGN Editor in Chief
Playing MAG for a half hour really makes me appreciate Modern Warfare 2. I know this is just a beta, but this has hardly gotten me excited for this upcoming PS3 exclusive. My big concern is that this game is going to be a haven for campers. Since there are so few spawn points, no kill cam and often little idea of where your killer is located, it's going to be really easy for people to find good hiding spots and lay waste to people. And it takes so ***** long to run back to the action that it's going to become really disheartening for a lot of gamers to die so quickly and so often. I don't have high hopes for this one.
A teamkilling scrub who doesnt deserve to play a game like MAG... and a cod fan boy saying that MAG is for campers! when his bigging up cod... i think his got the two switched around :/ both shouldnt be allowed to reveiw a game...
I think they missed it really I mean the game really does suck and all the elements that they stated are true but come on the game sucks more because of the lack of decently developed and even maps.
This is a flagship game for the PS3 system and when you play it you think omg this is so 80's
Zipper have really missed the mark with this game and I hope they notice it in sales.
MAG is doomed to fail.
Cristari wrote:
This is a flagship game for the PS3 system and when you play it you think omg this is so 80's
Its an accepted fact, that when you begin to exagerate your arguement, you know your side is weak and undefendable. Otherwise you would stick to the point using proven facts.
How many FPSs in the 80s had an online function with polygon based graphics were there...? Name them.
techwondo wrote:
Cristari wrote:
This is a flagship game for the PS3 system and when you play it you think omg this is so 80's
Its an accepted fact, that when you begin to exagerate your arguement, you know your side is weak and undefendable. Otherwise you would stick to the point using proven facts.
How many FPSs in the 80s had an online function with polygon based graphics were there...? Name them.
This ais a quote from another forum where someone was responding to someone elses criticism of MAG and compairing it to what they thought was a poor game (Bad Company 2). The sentiments are shared especially those on the map design.
Some Things? You mean just about everything. The concept is nice but this game will fail. Why call it 256 or even make it 256 if you never see 256. Hell, you are lucky to see 20 All you see is one platoon vs the other. The game visuals took a massive hit for the privilage of gloating that it holds so many players in a match.
Dice is a top notch company. Most of your issues are issues you need to take up with EA.
BC2 beta could have been 5 times worse then it is and still be 10 times better then the MAG beta. The Mag controls are robotic feeling and there is nothing fluid about it or the animations of it. It's like they cheated all laws of physics. They didn't use motion capture for anyting. It's like a bunch of robots running around. Nothing in the game feels natural really. You shoot a rocket launcher and it feels so off it's hard to describe.
It takes about 20 seconds to spawn (I don't care if it says 15). When you spawn you have to run half a mile back to your objective everytime. The weapons all feel the same. The sound effects are ridiculous. You shoot someone 800 yards away and you hear this generic splat like he's standing right next to you. The pixelation of the game is such that once you start shooting a guy 15 feet in front of you in the heat of battle he almost disappears. Just the color scheme makes stuff hard to see. That on top of the fact that it looks like an upscaled ps2 game doesn't help.
Hit detection is horrendous. I was up against a wall hidden and this guy walks by. He doesn't see me and i precisly aim onto his head and start shooting. Nothing is detecting out of the 20 bullets I put in him. He turns around and kills me some how.
The balance is a joke. Some maps, it doesn't matter if you are the best or worst group of players on earth you are gonna win no matter what. Then there are maps where objectives are taken in a matter of seconds because of the layout. So A and B is taken in the first minute of play before you can even orientate yourself and your stuck defending C which I must admit is slightly fun for such a subpar game.
Also the movement scheme is way out of wack. Some times I run at a slant for some reason because of the robot set up of the up and down/ left and right controls. It's just not fluid between the two.
BFBC2 feels like a well oiled machine even with it's flaws. MAG feels like garbage. Watch a grenande animation in MAG and tell me it looks like they put their heart into the game? Don't tell me all this lalalala will be fixed in 3 weeks. What you see in the MAG beta is what you will get. This beta was for network tweaks only and incidently the only thing they probably did right. The game f eels outdated and rushed.
If you want evidence play the game with an open mind and ask yourself why is this game like this?
