Hey guys, i'm getting a new ps3 game this summer and i can't decide between Mag or Battle field bad company 2. I hear that mag is a one of a kind game
but BFBC2 has better graphics and sound quality. So.... which one should i get?? I will be glad if all users who read this thread give a reply, THX!

Wow thats a good question. I'd get MAG, just because I'm a multiplayer kinda guy. I'd get both if I were you though. Or MW2.

It depends what kind of game you like. MAG is a game to play as a team. You do not have campaign but it is all about strategy, the class you choose, how you customize it and the role you take on the battle. Reviving and repairing give you mmore points than killing, it is all about being a team player. People use mics a lot and moaning people get kicked soon from the game. You can have leaderships positions when you improve your level, but you need to know what you are doing because it is also all about setting up the right target (because it will give you points too) or directing people to the right places. I really like MAG, new DLC has just come out today. I have not played BFBC, so I cannot really give an opinion on it. I am adicted to MAG, but I know people who never got into it. If you are a team player and you like playing with friends, get strategies done and so on... then MAG could be a good game for you.

Moved to Sony boards

I would have to say BBC2, although I have not played MAG, the new addition of all the destruction you can create works fantastic with the game itself.

The new medal of honor will be coming out in awhile too....so that might be a tough one...

Right on the money Raist, that is going to be a good one.

mattmo0121 wrote:

Right on the money Raist, that is going to be a good one.

I'd like to think so....but I might do the demo or rent first. I havent enjoyed MOH since Rising Sun

give them both a rent and see what you like more?
probably the easiest way. that way youre not going off any opinion but your own

My buddies really like BFBC2 and they dint like MAG too much. But that's them. Best thing to do, as banded1 mentioned, is to rent and check out what you like.

Yeah, sometimes with all the players in one online match there are, it can be a little frustrating.

Heres the thing, Mickey-
I have both games. IMO- BFBC2 is better. And here's why.
BOOBIES!
Just kidding, wanted to get your attention-

BF has vehs. MAG does not.
BF has campaign mode. MAG does not.

MAG has a shit load of players at one time.
BF does not.
MAG has the ability to go prone.
BF does not.

There ya go, hope this helps.


Come back next week when Teh Sponge talks about politics and war, not necessarily in that order.

Micky it depends what your in to 3rd person or 1st person but personaly i would pick mag 256 player mutiplayer with no lag MW2 lags with 12 people

natedrake22 wrote:

Micky it depends what your in to 3rd person or 1st person but personaly i would pick mag 256 player mutiplayer with no lag MW2 lags with 12 people

Good point.

Any time I played MAG, it was a complete lagfest. Only two types of games are playable with MAG, neither one going over 60 players, and there's still a good bit of lag.
My

mattmo0121 wrote:

natedrake22 wrote:

Micky it depends what your in to 3rd person or 1st person but personaly i would pick mag 256 player mutiplayer with no lag MW2 lags with 12 people

Good point.

But the dilema was between MAG and Battlefield, not between MAG and MW2... lol

Cobalt, I have never had lag in MAG, I did not know people had. However, I get lag in MW2 about 80% of the time, and I get disconnected about 70% of the time at some point during the time I am playing. What kind of games have you played? I always get around 60 people, they are not in the same base, but you could actually go to other base and play against other squads, it just does not give you as many points if you do other thing. And that is Sabotage, Domination is even bigger.

Again, I will stress that I have'nt played MAG. But, there's bound to be lag with all of those players.

mattmo0121 wrote:

Again, I will stress that I have'nt played MAG. But, there's bound to be lag with all of those players.

To be honest, so far, the only person I have heard that have lag is Cobalt, and even though I trust him and I am sure he has experienced it, I think that it is a rare case and it might suffer lag because of whatever reason (problem with the server that deals with his conection, etc).

All the games that are in Sony servers are usually less affected by lag. You only have to compare a 8v8 in RFOM and a 8v8 in any COD game. That is because dedicated server work much better that non-dedicated servers. I know about 15 other people that play or have played MAG and none of them have suffered or seen lag in MAG. Cobalt had that experience, which I think it is not the norm and it is exceptional based on my own experience of the game. The COD series has the worst connection known in any given game. There has not been one single Call of Duty game that had a brilliant lag free conection. MAG has not got a single player option, it is all online and they tested the game for months before it went out. It would be mad to release a game where everyone has lag. Whatever it is the issue with Cobalt, it is not the norm or what happens more often. Unless I am in the lucky side. But as I said, none of the people I have played with and none of the players I have played against during these last 4 months have complained once of lag. Maybe I am playing in a good server, idk.

Seyel wrote:

mattmo0121 wrote:

natedrake22 wrote:

Micky it depends what your in to 3rd person or 1st person but personaly i would pick mag 256 player mutiplayer with no lag MW2 lags with 12 people

Good point.

But the dilema was between MAG and Battlefield, not between MAG and MW2... lol

Cobalt, I have never had lag in MAG, I did not know people had. However, I get lag in MW2 about 80% of the time, and I get disconnected about 70% of the time at some point during the time I am playing. What kind of games have you played? I always get around 60 people, they are not in the same base, but you could actually go to other base and play against other squads, it just does not give you as many points if you do other thing. And that is Sabotage, Domination is even bigger.

Never mattered where I went, the lag was always about the same. This could simply be my connection, I suppose. Still, if I tried Domination or Acquisition it was beyond intolerable. Nearly as bad as having one orange bar in MW2, while it seems like everyone else has full green.
Yeah, I was thinking of Sabotage and the "Basic Training" type one where you only play against members of your faction. I forget what it's called though.

EDIT: Sey with the post ninjaing.

Did you see it?


Lol

I'll chime in and say that I never really had an issue with lag in MAG. When did you start having problems with it, Cobalt? I don't recall you really mentioning it, when we played together. It's really very minimal, if really a factor at all. I can't recall a single time where I felt another player, or myself was laggy, and I know a few other players I had played with consistently felt the same way. It's just not an issue the game has, Zipper did a great job with the netcode, and dedicated servers are a huge boon to the online experience.

I can give you my opinion, as a person who put a lot of time into MAG, but who has not played Bad Company. For reference, I put about 70 hours into MAG, and had vetted from SVER twice, and Raven once, before quitting my Valor character right before he was ready to vet again.

MAG is a game where there's a large emphasis on teamwork, and the contributions of the squad, as a whole. It's pretty easy to feel faceless in anything larger than a Suppression, because it's harder to see your contributions sometimes, in the scope of the entire battle. There are a few exceptions, like talented Combat Medics, who can singlehandedly save an assault on an objective, or a Commando who is behind enemy lines planting charges and blowing up key pieces of equipment, but even then, it's easy to lose yourself. If you like having that large emphasis on teamwork, then MAG is probably something you'll enjoy a great deal.
- One thing that does expand upon this, and make you more prominent, is a leadership role. There are three leadership roles, with abilities that get progressively more powerful. There, it's a bit easier to see the impact you have, because it's a bit more linear. Calling in an airstrike to destroy the last standing bunker, and let you and your PMC push into objectives is a bit easier to see.

Another thing to keep in mind, when considering MAG, is that there are 4 gametypes now, with the new Interdiction gametype, which I'm unfamiliar with, and each faction has one map. The game can start to feel pretty old, as you're really playing the same thing, on the same scenery, repeatedly. This is kept in check by rotating what squad you are in, which affects which part of the map you'll be focusing on, but the designs and goals are all largely the same. Attacking and Defending help to keep it a bit more varied, but again, after a while, it does start to feel like the same thing, over and over again.

This is also aided by the fact that characters are all largely similar. There's a few key archetypes, that you can play as, but beyond that, they all really start to play the same, with differing weapon choices. There's enough to keep you busy, while you work your way up to better equipment, and try out each thing, but depending on how long you'd like your investment to hold your interest, it's something to keep in mind. Character creation is not very deep, and you'll quickly find your niche, and stick to it. If you'd like to take a look at some of this stuff, there are character trees online, and we have discussed some character builds in the MAG thread, as well.



There are a lot of good things to be said about MAG. It's a solidly built game, with a scope that's really been previously unseen. There's a lot there, for players who are willing to work together with their squads, their platoons, and their whole PMCs, but if that's not really your thing, then you'll be losing out on a lot of the experience. The game was great for me, for a long time, but it was hard to keep myself interested, even when trying to play in Leadership roles, because really, the effort hinges on every player being willing and able to contribute to the picture as a whole. There are enough builds and weapons to keep you interested for a while, but if you're looking for a game that will be a long term investment, you'll need to look for the depth elsewhere, to really keep you interested. The gametypes will keep you interested for a while, especially as you build your way up to being comfortable in a Domination, which is the largest gametype, but again, after a while, be prepared for the experience to change only if you're in a leadership position.


Anybody have any info on the Interdiction stuff? I saw the little header on the PSN ticker, and the page on the browser homepage, but haven't really been able to look into it much.

Endloslung wrote:

I'll chime in and say that I never really had an issue with lag in MAG. When did you start having problems with it, Cobalt? I don't recall you really mentioning it, when we played together. It's really very minimal, if really a factor at all. I can't recall a single time where I felt another player, or myself was laggy, and I know a few other players I had played with consistently felt the same way. It's just not an issue the game has, Zipper did a great job with the netcode, and dedicated servers are a huge boon to the online experience.

I didn't mention it mostly because I always lag in games. I'm used to it. lol Sey's probably got the right of it, and it's just me.

Endof, what faction are you in? Do you still play? I am in SVER, I do not think I have added you yet (I need to start "updating" my PSN list and add the clan).
I agree with all you have said, 100%. Great post.

I have seen the Interdiction play, my bf was playing the other day, I have not had time yet. It seems there are 3 bunkers and 8 tanks on each side and you have to get the bunkers. It is like a mix between Sabotage and Domination, or something like that... sorry, I have not played it yet, so I might be recalling wrong... I could even have dreamt about it... lol

I've been just about everywhere, on MAG. I started off as SVER, and when the Double XP Weekend hit, around the time they released the updated Marksman Rifles, I went through Raven, and almost got to my vet again in Valor. Right now, I have a character in Valor, I can't recall what level, it's probably been a few months since I've played. I got burnt out, I'm considering picking it back up again, for the variety, soon. I do miss it, and it does offer a lot of unique experiences, as opposed to some of the other games out there, but it was my only title for a while, and after playing it for so long, it all really became the same.

I am interested in seeing what Interdiction is like. A bunch of us had discussed what it would be like, to add gametypes, or even PMCs in the future, to keep things interesting, and I know Zipper has always said that they were in MAG for the long haul, and wanted to keep the game growing. I like that they do keep up with the game, the newer updates to some of the weapons were nice. I loved the RTK update, and I really enjoyed using the updated Marksmen Rifles on both Valor and Raven.


Like I mentioned above, MAG really isn't like anything else out there. It's a lot of uncharted territory, so to speak, and it does it all very well, with solid execution. The netcode is good, and the game has dedicated servers, so the online experience is smooth. The thing is, it's all online. There's no singleplayer experience, you're just kind of thrown into the middle of the Shadow War, which does help to create the feel I think Zipper was going for. Zipper is dedicated to maintaining the game, and there are certainly developers who have done much worse. They've released multiple free DLC updates, to add new weapon upgrades, and they recently even rolled out a new gametype, and they'll usually celebrate these with Double XP weekends. Overall, it's a solid title, but really, you're going to get out of what, what you put in. It's very rewarding to be able to organize an entire PMC to take a Domination that was slipping, or to organize your Platoon or Squad to help another in need, but it's equally as frustrating when you're playing in groups where these things are not happening.

The size is both a blessing and a curse, because really, you'll pull off some incredible things, and everything with flow wonderfully, and other times, you'll be stuck with leaders who cannot manage a FRAGO, let alone manage an entire Platoon or PMC. It's just something you have to roll with, and make the best of, in spite, regardless of what type of leadership or organization you're playing with. I don't regret my time in MAG at all, and I do plan on going back. If it sounds like something you'd be interested in, then by all means, give it a shot. It's definitely not a choice you'd regret, and I would think you could pick up a used copy for relatively cheap, if you're still on the fence. Worst case, give it a shot, and return it, and go from there.

I do wish I could give more feedback on Bad Company 2, all I have to go on is a few people who bought it, and were incredibly unsatisfied. Their complaints differed, and you'll have this, with any title. It admittedly sounds very cool, but a few things, like the inability to go prone, irk me. I also hear that it's like MAG, in that there isn't a ton of variation in gametype, but I don't know the validity of that, since I've not played.

Wow, you should be on the gameinformer, Slung.