KylieDog said:
Akvod said:
KylieDog said:
No, 256 players is not something that affects YOU, your individual soldier and what YOU can do. Those 255 other people are nothing to do with you, you can suggest targets and so forth if you get a command position but they do what they want. If you actually controlled your entire team and they was AI bots like in a RTS with the ability to control your soldier and join them it wouldn't be generic, but that doesn't happen, YOU control YOU only and YOU don't do anything countless other FPS game haven't already done.
You will never find yourself facing 128 players of the other team anyway, you fight a couple squads at once at best, the rest are off fighting other squads on your team elsewhere, making the gameplay the same as many other shooters. In the 256 player games there are 8 sets of objectives, so those 128 player teams are split into 16 player groups, not exactly something not done a hundred other times in FPS games.
|
It could be argued that this is the first time there ever was a commander type thing like Battlefield 2 had (or at least I read) for the consoles.
But in your defense, yeah, the 256 players never really affected me personally. Since the devs split up everything (which is a good thing, don't get me wrong), it never really felt like I was playing against 256 players, but a mini-game within the big one.
This game wasn't for me, but I could really see this game developing a really strong following. I mean, yeah, the 255 players aren't in front of you, but those who understand the implications of far away events, and look at things in a macro perspective will love the strategy MAG can have. If the dedicated fanbase use mics and cooperate well, then matches can be really tight and enjoyable.
So I think it's unfair for you to call it generic, when it's probably going to be the most niche game this year.
|
I think the 256 players thing is pointless they way it splits everyone up. I remember countless times in the BETA it would be 2 squads on my team vs 2 squads of the enemy. This was on Sabotage I think it is where they need steal some trucks. We defending ours brilliant, but then we lost the match because some pair of squads 2 miles away that nobody interacts with AT ALL could not defend theirs.
Honestly they may as well have been in a different game they were so seperated.
|
The mode where you need to steal the enemies vehicles wasn't available in the beta. That would be Acquisition.
You were playing Sabotage, the mode where you had to each defend your bases. However if you had no problem defending yours then I don't see why it mattered if the other team couldn't hold theirs. As long as you don't lose both and then afterwards lose your 3rd base after everyone gathers there you win.
When those two points are taken you then have all the players in that game (64 for Sabotage) gathered in one section, so you're wrong when you say they are all split up. That is just for the first section and only applies as long as you can keep control of your first 2 bases.
iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.
Currently playing:
Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)
Got a retro room? Post it here!
