By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Time for people to eat some crow regarding MAG?

richardhutnik on 22 January 2010
justinian said:
Richard you are right. I do recollect what you are talking about.

But since it's your thread you might need to produce some evidence or some will think you are talking from your backdoor. Good luck.

I am glad I am thre only one who also remembers this.  I posted as a question, because I couldn't find the exact quotes of people, but I do remember them being variations on "there won't be 256 people in the same battle area".  I held out hope that is what was meant but others were saying it couldn't be done.  If anyone can find links to that, please post them.



Around the Network
twesterm on 22 January 2010
richardhutnik said:
justinian said:
Richard you are right. I do recollect what you are talking about.

But since it's your thread you might need to produce some evidence or some will think you are talking from your backdoor. Good luck.

I am glad I am thre only one who also remembers this.  I posted as a question, because I couldn't find the exact quotes of people, but I do remember them being variations on "there won't be 256 people in the same battle area".  I held out hope that is what was meant but others were saying it couldn't be done.  If anyone can find links to that, please post them.

From what people have said in this thread though is you don't get 256 people in the same battle area.



 

Onyxmeth on 22 January 2010
richardhutnik said:
Onyxmeth said:
richardhutnik said:

I recall posts, back at E3, that there was NO WAY, that MAG did 256 people at the same time on the battlefield.  My understanding is that it does.  So, if this is true, is it time some people eat crow regarding what they said about MAG?

Does MAG do 256 people on the same battlefield? From what I've gathered from beta players, you only see a certain amount of people at one time. If everyone at the start decided to just meet in the middle of the map, would that be possible?

Slimebeast said in this thread, that no one questioned 256 people on the same battlefield.  It does look like you have questions regarding this still.  I know people have doubted it.  I am also not sure, but thought that is what it meant when it was first announced.

I know a place like Second Life has sims (play areas) that cap off how many people can be in each. 

Well if even you're not sure whether 256 people can meet in the same section of the map, then why does anyone have to eat crow? Wasn't that the point of doubting whether it can be done? The same battlefield doesn't really matter unless everyone is really there and able to be wherever they see fit. It seems to me this game was designed for the purposes of allowing 256 players to compete in one game, but keep them separated into smaller groupings of fights. This was likely done because of limitations.

Even open world games are limited. While the entire map exists in theory, only a portion of it will filtered through the system at an one time, like a bubble. As you move, the bubble moves and more of the map is streamed while another portion of it is taken away. This seems to be in a way how MAG operates, although I could be wrong. I believe that either 256 players can't meet in one section of the map, or having it happen would cause a ridiculous amount of problems.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



richardhutnik on 22 January 2010
twesterm said:
richardhutnik said:
justinian said:
Richard you are right. I do recollect what you are talking about.

But since it's your thread you might need to produce some evidence or some will think you are talking from your backdoor. Good luck.

I am glad I am thre only one who also remembers this.  I posted as a question, because I couldn't find the exact quotes of people, but I do remember them being variations on "there won't be 256 people in the same battle area".  I held out hope that is what was meant but others were saying it couldn't be done.  If anyone can find links to that, please post them.

From what people have said in this thread though is you don't get 256 people in the same battle area.

So, it isn't going to be 256 people in a single area of the map at the same time?  It won't be possible to have like 8 squads of 8 players each storm a single area of the map with just 1 or 2 enemy squads in it?  If this is true, the one eating crow were me, for thinking that is how it would work.



zexen_lowe on 22 January 2010

Flamebait title, this won't end up well. Why do you have to be so confrontational, it's unnecessary




Around the Network
twesterm on 22 January 2010
richardhutnik said:
twesterm said:
richardhutnik said:
justinian said:
Richard you are right. I do recollect what you are talking about.

But since it's your thread you might need to produce some evidence or some will think you are talking from your backdoor. Good luck.

I am glad I am thre only one who also remembers this.  I posted as a question, because I couldn't find the exact quotes of people, but I do remember them being variations on "there won't be 256 people in the same battle area".  I held out hope that is what was meant but others were saying it couldn't be done.  If anyone can find links to that, please post them.

From what people have said in this thread though is you don't get 256 people in the same battle area.

So, it isn't going to be 256 people in a single area of the map at the same time?  It won't be possible to have like 8 squads of 8 players each storm a single area of the map with just 1 or 2 enemy squads in it?  If this is true, the one eating crow were me, for thinking that is how it would work.

I have no clue how it works.  I assume all 256 players exist in the map, but as Onyx said, that doesn't mean they're all rendering or you even know they exist since they don't exist in your bubble.



 

gansito on 22 January 2010

i'll be eating crow if the game actually turns out to be good which i don't think it will.