PS3 shooter wit 256 players online?

[BillyTh3Kid]

A game called "mag" is coming out for the ps3 soon. It's a FPS game and they say it will allow 256 players online to fight in a war.

How can they do that? or is it a trick to get you to by they game that actually youll be fighting 16v16 in a tournament involving a total or 256 players?

I wonder how they plan on making a game run with 256 players running around shooting, first thing that comes to mine is frame rate, 200+ guys on screen.......Then lag and having people shoot at you and dissapear and then the screen flash and your dead....connection probs...no way 256 people could sync up and play with no lag in a fps for a console with people playing all across the world.

[BillyTh3Kid]

fuck so many dumb grammar errors, its 6:15am here havent slept.

[H-A-X-O-R-Z]

You're an idiot.

Everyone whos anyone knows about MAG.

in MAG there are two teams of 128 players, these are cut into squads of 16 players, so 8 squads of 16 players on each team. The squads all have their own objectives to do until the very end where it's simply one objective.

the games hold 256 players on dedicated servers rather than relying on one player to host the match, the maps are huge and as such you dont have to worry about seeing all 256 players at once.

[BillyTh3Kid]

At 10/24/09 08:23 AM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote: You're an idiot.

Everyone whos anyone knows about MAG.

in MAG there are two teams of 128 players, these are cut into squads of 16 players, so 8 squads of 16 players on each team. The squads all have their own objectives to do until the very end where it's simply one objective.

the games hold 256 players on dedicated servers rather than relying on one player to host the match, the maps are huge and as such you dont have to worry about seeing all 256 players at once.

I'm not an idiot, I basically said what is going to happen, teams split up into little sub team. The whole game is set up to fail anyways, you will be in a lobby for 45 minutes.

[liaaaam]

At 10/24/09 08:26 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I'm not an idiot, I basically said what is going to happen, teams split up into little sub team. The whole game is set up to fail anyways, you will be in a lobby for 45 minutes.

I've played the game, it's really well done and there were no lag problems at all. The gameplay is pretty stellar and having such a huge amount of players make the online seem much more dynamic and much less of a frag fest than most other FPS games.

[H-A-X-O-R-Z]

At 10/24/09 08:26 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I'm not an idiot, I basically said what is going to happen, teams split up into little sub team. The whole game is set up to fail anyways, you will be in a lobby for 45 minutes.

You're a fucking idiot man, you expect that only a couple of thousand people are going to be playing? Dude, I can almost guarentee that most PS3 users will buy this game, I know I sure as hell am, maybe you want to have a look at some gameplay videos before you go around ranting about how the game will fail despite being a brilliant aspect and thus far been pulled off correctly.

[BillyTh3Kid]

At 10/24/09 09:18 AM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote:

At 10/24/09 08:26 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I'm not an idiot, I basically said what is going to happen, teams split up into little sub team. The whole game is set up to fail anyways, you will be in a lobby for 45 minutes.

You're a fucking idiot man, you expect that only a couple of thousand people are going to be playing? Dude, I can almost guarentee that most PS3 users will buy this game, I know I sure as hell am, maybe you want to have a look at some gameplay videos before you go around ranting about how the game will fail despite being a brilliant aspect and thus far been pulled off correctly.

lol ps3 fanboy alert.

No, I expect the usual couple hundred thousand to be on at any one given time. But with 256 players it will take some time to get a game going, some people will drop out in the lobby, need to wait for more people....ect...ect, unless they do something that lets you play while it finds more people. I have seen extensive gameplay videos. I'm sure the game will be fun, but I think many 12 year olds will play and wont have a clue what to do and fuck it up for the rest of the people.

[slackerzac]

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote:

but I think many 12 year olds will play and wont have a clue what to do and fuck it up for the rest of the people.

Maybe if it came out on the Xbox sure. But I rarely bump into a kid on PSN.

[liaaaam]

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: with 256 players it will take some time to get a game going

In the beta there were ~2000 people playing and the only game mode we could play was a 128 player capture/defend type match, there were absolutely no problems with getting a match together, the lobby system works very well.

[Jack]

At 10/24/09 09:01 AM, liaaaam wrote:

At 10/24/09 08:26 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I'm not an idiot, I basically said what is going to happen, teams split up into little sub team. The whole game is set up to fail anyways, you will be in a lobby for 45 minutes.

I've played the game, it's really well done and there were no lag problems at all. The gameplay is pretty stellar and having such a huge amount of players make the online seem much more dynamic and much less of a frag fest than most other FPS games.

Good to hear you had a pleasant hands-on experience with it.

Like you said, the biggest factor of it is that you'll being fighting in an actual battle, not just a small group of enemies.

I was hoping it would be released before Christmas, but oh well.

[dmansland]

At 10/24/09 10:25 AM, slackerzac wrote:

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote:

but I think many 12 year olds will play and wont have a clue what to do and fuck it up for the rest of the people.

Maybe if it came out on the Xbox sure. But I rarely bump into a kid on PSN.

Play World at War. So many little dumbshits expecting you to do something so they can glitch and benefit from something while you get nothing in return.

[dmansland]

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: lol ps3 fanboy alert.

Lol, dumbass got proved wrong and is resorting to the old and tired "fanboy alert" bullshit.

No, I expect the usual couple hundred thousand to be on at any one given time. But with 256 players it will take some time to get a game going, some people will drop out in the lobby, need to wait for more people....ect...ect, unless they do something that lets you play while it finds more people.

That's what most FPS games offer. The match starts and people can join in during the game.

I have seen extensive gameplay videos.

But no real hands on experience it seems.

I'm sure the game will be fun, but I think many 12 year olds will play and wont have a clue what to do and fuck it up for the rest of the people.

Like every other game with online.

[zimzap]

If you want to effectively know what the game is, go Google Planetside.

Sony is basically just re-releasing the game for the PS3 with some tweaks here and there.

[Centurion-Ryan]

At 10/24/09 01:17 PM, zimzap wrote: Sony is basically just re-releasing the game for the PS3 with some tweaks here and there.

Except, you know, for the totally different premise, setting and genre.

But yeah, apart from that it's the same game.

[Stretchysumo]

Everybody's heard about MAG by now.

[coolboycool21]

One thing that I am worried about LAG! :P

[zimzap]

At 10/24/09 02:02 PM, Centurion-Ryan wrote:

At 10/24/09 01:17 PM, zimzap wrote: Sony is basically just re-releasing the game for the PS3 with some tweaks here and there.

Except, you know, for the totally different premise, setting and genre.

But yeah, apart from that it's the same game.

That's like calling every new fighting game a massive innovation. I am not passing judgment on MAG because obviously I have never played it but I am sick of hearing how innovative and earth shattering this game will be. Anyone who has played planetside knows what to expect from this game. They even are maintaining the three faction system.

[RiuTenshin]

At 10/24/09 10:25 AM, slackerzac wrote:

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote:

but I think many 12 year olds will play and wont have a clue what to do and fuck it up for the rest of the people.

Maybe if it came out on the Xbox sure. But I rarely bump into a kid on PSN.

That's because majority of kids don't have a PS3 headset. The only reason XBL has "more" kids is because it comes with a headset.

Usually.

[huntarus]

At 10/24/09 02:58 PM, coolboycool21 wrote: One thing that I am worried about LAG! :P

Yeah, that is a big issue. If it uses a lag-compensating server like TF2, then there's no problem. One thing is still the amount of players on the field. I think the devs will use the same stuff that was used in Darkest of Days. In that game, they have very large battlefield scenes, one simulating Gettysburg and other civil war battles. Basically no lag on 360 and PS3.

[BillyTh3Kid]

Trust me bro, their wont be a game with 256 players in the same mape free to go where they want, dedicated server or not it will still be a shitfest. They did the beta on a fiber optic lan.

[H-A-X-O-R-Z]

At 10/24/09 07:30 PM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: They did the beta on a fiber optic lan.

OH MY FUCKING GOD LOL!!!!

Fibre Optic is based on you and your ISP, you goddamn fucking idiot, Fibre Optic also only effects speed, not getting into games, you think someone who has say dial-up and someone whos using a router willk have different chances of getting into a match? it makes no fucking difference you fucking idiot!

Also, that PS3 fanboy comment you posted earlier?

Well, here's a picture that just proves how much of a PS3 fanboy I am.

[liaaaam]

At 10/24/09 03:52 PM, zimzap wrote: MAG = Planetside

It's not :P At least from what I've played, it's nothing like it. At all.

At 10/24/09 07:30 PM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: They did the beta on a fiber optic lan.

So you're saying I went to Zipper Interactives studios and played with 2000 people over a local network? Are you retarded or.. are you just pretending to be x_x

[BillyTh3Kid]

At 10/25/09 07:39 AM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote:

At 10/24/09 07:30 PM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: They did the beta on a fiber optic lan.

OH MY FUCKING GOD LOL!!!!

Fibre Optic is based on you and your ISP, you goddamn fucking idiot, Fibre Optic also only effects speed, not getting into games, you think someone who has say dial-up and someone whos using a router willk have different chances of getting into a match? it makes no fucking difference you fucking idiot!

I graduated from MIT with a masters in Computer Science with a BA in computer networking. And what the fuck, no shit it only effects speed/ping/latency/lag, not getting in a game. Your a fucking idiot, what are you talking about? when did I say if you have a slow internet you wont get in a game faster? I only mention that it will be a shitfest gathering 256 players in a lobby and also a shitfest in game.

Also, that PS3 fanboy comment you posted earlier?

Well, here's a picture that just proves how much of a PS3 fanboy I am.

Cool.

I suggest you take your teenage angst out on something more productive like baseball, rather then showing us how big your epenis is.

[Sekhem]

At 10/24/09 11:39 AM, liaaaam wrote:

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: with 256 players it will take some time to get a game going

In the beta there were ~2000 people playing and the only game mode we could play was a 128 player capture/defend type match, there were absolutely no problems with getting a match together, the lobby system works very well.

doesn't it have a drop in, drop out system like battlefield?

i thought i heard that somewhere.

[ArmouredGRIFFON]

At 10/25/09 07:39 AM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote: Fibre Optic is based on you and your ISP, you goddamn fucking idiot

Actually Fibre Optic wire's would increase server speed if it was incorporated into the system idiot... Not connection speed, just the rate the server can [input/output] information.

[H-A-X-O-R-Z]

At 10/25/09 12:22 PM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I graduated from MIT with a masters in Computer Science

Feels good to know I trolled a troll into going over the top trolling, therefore proving they're a troll.

[BillyTh3Kid]

At 10/25/09 06:30 PM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote:

At 10/25/09 12:22 PM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: I graduated from MIT with a masters in Computer Science

Feels good to know I trolled a troll into going over the top trolling, therefore proving they're a troll.

You forgot my BA in networking idiot, and wow your very immature.

[OfficeMan]

At 10/25/09 07:39 AM, H-A-X-O-R-Z wrote: Well, here's a picture that just proves how much of a PS3 fanboy I am.

Nice 20 dollar game collection lol

Where did you buy those games? K-Mart LOL

[akmeteor]

I'm siding with the newbie on this one, he actually is right. Though he put LAN when it wasn't LAN. The fibre optic cables are too expensive to have that many of, so they are doing basic ethernet links prolly. Then you have MASSIVE latency issues.

[narf109]

At 10/25/09 03:45 PM, Sekhem wrote:

At 10/24/09 11:39 AM, liaaaam wrote:

At 10/24/09 09:34 AM, BillyTh3Kid wrote: with 256 players it will take some time to get a game going

In the beta there were ~2000 people playing and the only game mode we could play was a 128 player capture/defend type match, there were absolutely no problems with getting a match together, the lobby system works very well.

doesn't it have a drop in, drop out system like battlefield?

i thought i heard that somewhere.

in the beta you waited in a queue and you be signed up for a game and determine your role (squad , platoon, or officer).

The game is pretty much a cluster fuck from hell. The gameplays fun and all but the command system is flawed, and you almost will never have real strategy. The best role to be is the squad leader. They're the only ones who have any sort of influence as to where the battle goes. The platoon leaders and officers pretty much are support roles and all they're really useful for is stat boosts and the occasional support powers(which go away quickly if the squad leaders suck). They have no control over squads other then being able to broadcast to everyone their mic(which is pointless because its so chaotic).