We must be playing different games then, because I've always had great teams that worked together... or fought against them. That's how you win.

Huxley also claims 5000 a server and 10 battles at once which makes it more like 500 people per fight. also, Sony already did something like this in the past on PC so it's nothing new, it's called Planet Side, it was good until they added in mechs which was a retarded move.

I just don't like all the hate Resistance 2 gets on here... Honestly, it's a good, solid FPS. It has flaws, yes, but the mp and co-op are among the best I've ever played, and I don't understand why everyone bashes it so much. =(

MAG does look pretty good too. I remember rumors that there might be a subscription for it, which would suck, but we'll see.

oh dood you should check out the PC gaming forums on the internet, they laugh at console FPS period, no mercy.

I've seen that on here, but I've also seen console gamers bash it. Even Sony fans. It's sad, because it doesn't deserve all that hate.

Show me a few threads from the Microsoft and Nintendo forums talking about games saying they're only possible on that platform.  It's the usual that happens on here, Sony fans hype a game up crazily without anything substantial to base their belief in the title.  Come release day and when the reviews start coming in the backtracking starts and the naysayers who were trying to keep things in perspective and in check are proved right yet again. 

I've read the entire thread and there is no trashing going on at all other than concerns of lag, and the fact that is it really a 256 player game anc concerns of how they interact.  If you consider these questions which very seriously need to be addressed in order for the game to be a success as trashing then you need to take your Sony glasses off.

Please grow up and stop acting like a spoilt child.  I have said kind words before it's just again you're immature fanboy bias blinkers your views.  You didn't address any of the points I brought up (because I'm right) and then proceed to attack a user for his opinion which I feel was more than justified.  Call me a fanboy if you like but at least I base my arguments from an informed position rather than an emotional one.  If I truly hate Sony then why do I own a PS3, I don't, I hate the crazy fanboys that smack talk regarding it.  Having seen your early behaviour on this site I'm not that surprised by this reply of yours might I add.  Also a fan may not have started this thread but there are plenty who posted hype after the intial OP who are.   

Also just one quote from me regarding Killzone 2:

"@Parasitic - seriously coop and splitscreen were dropped as a design choice. I suspect splitscreen was sacrificed for the better visuals the fanbase loves and coop probably wouldn't work in their vision of the campaign. If you're going to add coop then it needs to be in the planning from the beginning not tagged on late in development. Whatever the reason for not being included, it was nothing to do with the difficulty in developing on the PS3."

That hardly seems to be unkind words regarding Sony's product now does it?

It's going to depend on the game and how it's designed. Lets look at Call of Duty 4 for example. 18 players on the PS3 version feels okay and playing in a server with a few more players doesn't feel that bad in the PC version. However, the PC version can support servers up to 50 players and this shows that it's not designed to play well with that many players (the maps especially) as things are just too close and hectic.

Now lets back up and take a look at Battlefield 2. It's a game who's medium/large maps are designed for 64 players. Does the game have some flaws? Heck yes with annoying jittery lag, weird hit detection, an insane amount of grenade spamming (especially when in 'infantry only' servers), spawn camping, patches that fix things but mess other stuff up, ect. Sure, the hotly contested control points can be really hectic, but Battlefield 2 has provided me (and I'm sure many others) with some insane and awesome moments that makes me fondly remember this game. Other games with smaller player numbers can be fun, but this game has also provided me with some cool experiences like where I'm running with my squad to an objective while planes carpet bomb the immediate area, helicopters are going after stray people and tanks, artillary is being aimed at clusters of people, ect.

I don't know how MAG is going to be or how it will play. However, there's no point in knocking it just for the player number or hyping it up for the player number for that matter. Until we can see it in motion and see how well it actually plays, we'll just have to wait.

By the way, why should there be good luck in finding 256 players? Do you just mean playing in full servers or are you looking at this from a matchmaking standpoint like in games such as Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4? A server browser would be appropriate for this game.