StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Would it count as necro to post in the MAG thread again?

Here ya go -- 14 single player missions, and 32-player online, from the guys who did the PS2 SOCOM games and MAG. While I am concerned, I wouldn't mind seeing what it's about... so long as it doesn't take away from MAG. (Zipper claims support, but I'm more concerned about the player base.)

Edward Yee wrote:Would it count as necro to post in the MAG thread again?

Here ya go -- 14 single player missions, and 32-player online, from the guys who did the PS2 SOCOM games and MAG. While I am concerned, I wouldn't mind seeing what it's about... so long as it doesn't take away from MAG. (Zipper claims support, but I'm more concerned about the player base.)

I'm excited for this, especially as I found the original SOCOMs to be quite entertaining. Now we have a chance to rectify the clusterfuck that is SOCOM confailtation, and bring some fun tactical gameplay back to the table. As an aside, MAG was a huge letdown for me. I saw the writing on the wall with the beta and my worst expectations came to pass.

What happened with MAG?

SOCOM: Confrontation was not done by Zipper.

As for MAG, it's recently been patched in ways that generally seem good to me (for example, MUCH lower respec cost), but apparently there's still controversy/debate over whether or not the weapon balancing actually worked, much less whether it was appropriate.

I found that while the idea of MAG might have worked the health system and overall game play felt like a let down. Now if MAG had CoD:4's level of gameplay I might have played for more than the Beta/Demo.

Some of the recent patch changes WRT health were it being easier/quicker to finish off an incapacitated enemy, as well as fixing the bug that prevented guys with Improved Health (i.e. 120 Health instead of 100) from getting the "full HP" benefit from Improved Resuscitation.

Ehh, in retrospect I found CoD4's multiplayer actually overrated. Ironically, as problematic as MW2's multiplayer is, I would still rather play that... but MAG actually quickly replaced MW2 for my "need my fix of" game.

Artemas wrote:What happened with MAG?

What happened was that all the good players went to SVER, a faction whose maps were biased towards their defense. I figured that the good players would eventually migrate to another faction, which I saw aspects of in Valor, and that this core group of players would dominate the rest of the population. That is what I experienced combined with a stunning lack of teamwork or coordination by almost everyone.

Edward Yee wrote:SOCOM: Confrontation was not done by Zipper.

IMHO, if Zipper were in charge of the project, it would have been much better in terms of support and playability.

TheMuffinKing wrote:What happened was that all the good players went to SVER, a faction whose maps were biased towards their defense. I figured that the good players would eventually migrate to another faction, which I saw aspects of in Valor, and that this core group of players would dominate the rest of the population. That is what I experienced combined with a stunning lack of teamwork or coordination by almost everyone.

I won't lie, I went down this route. In fairness, I did not notice this map advantage with Valor, because they gave us (SVER) absolute HELL when we fought them. Though technically you're stuck with your faction for all 60 levels, you can "prestige" (Veteran Mode) at level 60 to change faction. Respec cost is always way lower now.

Personally I thought that the lack of teamwork/coordination was due to an influx of new players who... just didn't get it.