MAG Trailer: Putting the FPS Genre 'on Steroids'

I want to see a 256 player (or better yet persistent world) Zombie FPS, MMO type survival game.

I hate the "on steroids" label that is so overused in gaming. What does that mean, exactly? Does that mean that MAG will shrink the FPS genre's testicles and make it prone to fits of rage? Will it have graphical deficiencies the equivalent of acne?

I just hate that stupid analogy so, so much.

So in taking the FPS genre and putting "on steroids and taking it to the next level".....I can of course assume that it will have USB KEYBOARD + MOUSE support (that the PS3 supports)? If it is gamepad only forget about it.....

Hey Zipper. Dump Sony, return to Microsoft and take this technology and apply it to a 256-Player Battlefield in a MechWarrior Game with an Online Campaign universe..

With 256 players I would feel too insignificant. One person isn't going to have much of an impact on the way the match turns out with this many people.

Looke pretty meh to me. They threw a bunch of lame dev terms around like "From the ground up" and
said it's next gen for FPS but to me it looks like a crappy console shooter with a bunch of players being the only selling point.

Everyone is consistently imagining the worst case scenario base on the number of players. The game is being built specifically to support 256 players, pretend you are designing the game in with that in mind to make it work.

They aren't making Quake and then spawning 256 guys into a small map. The servers are not peer to peer, they are running dedicated servers with very large maps. If you have a map the size of lower Manhattan and two players are on opposite ends the servers know this, neither player needs to have any data sent to them.

The thing I haven't seen Sony talk about is the pricing model because last I heard, this was a pay to play game.

Once I see a full 256 players on a map without horrible lag I will start thinking this game might have a chance.

the gameplay videos looked pretty bad. I honestly dont care how many players (either small or large) in an FPS. First get the shooting mechanics down. Plus the graphics look like poo.

although its 256 players i cant imagine the agony of waiting in a lobby to try and fill a server with that number of people, i think battlefield bad company had it down as a online console squad based shooter, not to mention it had a pretty good single player side. This game could go horribly wrong in my eyes, but i still have hope for it.

To hell with all you gamers that think 12 and 16 player matches are the sweet spot. Go back to your Halo, Killzone, Call of Duty, tiny population servers. 64 player Battlefield 2 wars were glorious I tell you. GLORIOUS! The cap should have been lifted to 128 players!

What is up with the crappy bullet-trace effects and rocket smoke effects?

The video didn't mention the fact that, similar to Resistance 2's multiplayer, all participants are placed in 8-player squads, complete with squad leader. Four squads make up a Platoon, with a platoon leader, and there is also an OiC. Players who want leadership roles apply in the lobby before each match.
Playing near your squad leader gives you passive buffs like increased reload time or faster movement speed, and each squad leader can issue orders on the fly to attack or defend objectives, etc...
Squad leaders can call in UAV Recon, Cluster Bombs, Mortar Barrages and Artillery Strikes.
Platoon leaders can call in Bunker Buster missiles, Strafing Runs, Sensor Sweeps, and Gas Bombardments.
Officers in Charge can call in Signal Jamming, Comms Jamming, Satellite Sweeps, Tactical Strikes, Blockades and Rapid Deployment.
On top of all that, officers have access to an officer-only audio channel.
Seems like it won't be the usual clusterfuck...

Needs mouse and keyboard support, otherwise it's just another first person spam game.

It's been a long road guys. A long, long road. I think I'm ready to believe again. In hope. In love. This game could really be something.

Organization is gonna be a bitch.

Heck, full Battlefield maps were nothing but clusterf... of people trying to board all available vehicles and then drive them straight into enemy territory.

Does this really qualify as an MMO? Battlefield had 64 players. 256 is more, sure, but MMOs tend to have thousands of players inhabiting a persistent world, even if no more than a few hundred are allowed in a given portion at a time. PlanetSide, for all its flaws, was a good example of what I would consider an MMO FPS.

i hope they pull it off, i used to play joint ops back in the day and I think this is the only game trying to atempt something similar.