Daily Joystick Review: MAG

Chad from Daily Joystick writes; "As the saying goes, 'with great risk comes great reward'. Things do not get much riskier than putting a massive online-only first-person shooter, relying heavily on team communication, on PlayStation 3, but that is exactly what Zipper Interactive did with the horribly named MAG. Fortunately, the name is about all there is to gripe about."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
3121d ago Replies(4)
-Alpha3121d ago (Edited 3121d ago )

Aside from the 10/10 PSLS gave which I didn't find credible.

Gamespot's review is coming tonight btw-- they pointed out on their podcast that the game doesn't offer anything close to 256 players on screen at once and I remember IGN stressing that you usually fight squads more than engage in some 256-player on screen battle, but that is kind of expected considering that would be complete chaos. It's actually my only concern with MAG. On paper and even in the Butler ad it makes it sound like you engage something close to 256 players, but in reality (based on gameplay videos) 256 is more of a selling point to hype players more than it is something you truly engage in. I think the best thing to come out of 256 players is not the assumption that you will see a majority of players at once (like the premier trailer depicted), but the fact that so many players allows for divided squads. It gives the sense of a a big game that is cleverly organized, and in every sense of the word that's what "war" feels like.

I also think that it will be something that will put off some players: imagine coming from smaller games where your presence makes significant differences as opposed to a game where your presence is a part of a squad which is part of a team, which is part of a whole army. It can make players feel insignificant and this is where people must understand MAG to be a game that isn't about only YOU.

Fishy Fingers3121d ago (Edited 3121d ago )

That was Zippers main point, to offer smaller battles while in the knowledge that your (and your squads) work was contributing to the larger battle. The only why you'd likely get all 256 players together would be if the maps were small, there for making the game carnage and the direct opposite of what its trying to be and to do, encourage tactical team based gameplay. Although there have been videos posted showing 128 team mates all together.

It's like a stripped out MMO in a way, if you were to play WoW you wouldnt expect to see several thousand players running around in the same, small confined area.

Edit: You've changed your post several times now, it makes replying quite difficult.

-Alpha3121d ago (Edited 3121d ago )

Lol sorry, I keep having to add things because sometimes I don't explain things in detail which results in people making hidden assumptions about my posts.

I understood MAG to be a 256 player game, and it was certainly hyped like that too. Even the advertisement seems to give that impression, so I think that this is what's going to lead to the refinement process of "finding the sweet spot" for MAG's community.

It happens in tons of games that aren't exactly Halo or COD. Battlefield has it, Socom has it, Killzone has it, Warhawk has it, and MAG has it: You just can't expect it to be something the masses will eat up and play.

Based off of what people have told me and pre-release hype, a lot of people had the image that you dropped to a field where players were fighting everywhere. At least that's the impression I got and it's quite contrary to the reality of the game.

@raztad below

There is nothing more I would like to do then jump on the latest hip thing in gaming, trust me. Bad Company 2 is coming out in 27 days. It's hard splitting money between school and gaming man. I've been wanting to get BC2 since November so getting MAG now would be impulsive and then I may regret it. Hey, PM me your PSN ID anyway, we can play some other games.

Also, I COULD get MAG this month but it will take some convincing to make someone buy it for me :P

@Living Legend 2.0

That's incorrect: I haven't pointed out flaws as if I was determined to bring the game down. I've pointed out things that CONCERN me with the game. I've never flat out said MAG is bad, it's gameplay sucks, etc. Everything I've said I've said it cautiously and skeptically. Apparently that's considered stealth trolling. Now when I heard of MAG I didn't go Batsh*t like others may have. I was sure I was going to avoid this game but I've since learned about how the multiplayer is organized and it's interested me. However, I have commented multiple times that I'm not sure if the game is my cup of tea and how much I may get out of it. Am I not entitled to be openly skeptical? Why is that considered trolling? If there is anything specific that I said you want to call me out on then I will gladly address it.

raztad3121d ago

Come on alpha. I know you want this game. Just get it man. You will not regret it. BC2 is still months away lets team up in RAVEN and kick others guys azzes. I'm getting a MIC just for MAG, already qualified as a squad leader a mic is important for putting your act together.

Regarding the review. Some love it and some hate it. It's obviously a divide. I love the game and thats what matter.


Curious.You admit to not purchasing MAG and yet seem ever vigilant for anything regarding it.Quick to point out it's flaws,on numerous occasions yet have not and likely will not be purchasing it.I am confused.
On topic,this review more closely aligns with my own impressions of the game.It is pretty fun and has exceeded my expectations .=)

seifer0853121d ago

stealth trolling? Are u really bungie or giantenemycrab?

Mag looks fun though probably pick it up when paid.