MAG might be horrible on 360 but not ful ...

Can MAG be done on the 360? I think the main reason why most cows would say no is because they automatically think, hardware...but no.First of all- lets examine the concept of MAG- the big factor that's meant to drive the gameplay... ''CO-operation'' DO you think all the immature 7 year olds in XBL would be able to co-operate and play with squads and take orders? I don't think so but that's not a factor to my opinion.Second--- Lets take the 360's Network: Do you think the game wouldn't feel like a powerpoint with all the lag- if there's any? WHich there will most likely be.Third of all: Mag doesn't just feature pretty warzone simulation with helicopters floating around and enemies dropping by parachutes. There are lots of background scripts and commands and components running to create what you see. There's management and tracking of character actions...There's communication across the network between the 256 players... DO you think the 360 can handle that without sputtering? I don't know.Thats just the way I see it.Oh, and yeah on the side note...Lemmens, stop hiding behind ME2. And sheep....*Facepalm...And we never hyped MAG too above 7...Hell, i even posted about how stupid and annoying the beta was to ME and I was cursed out by other cows so no one overhyped the game so its not a flop. I'm actually really surprised.MAG might be horrible on 360 but not ful ...
Imagine Bad Company 2, with Mags player amount. Maybe like 64. That would be amazing.MAG might be horrible on 360 but not ful ...
FFXI on 360. Supports up to 3000 players. it's all based on network configuration.
lol, the majority everyone on XBL has mics because every console comes with them :P



256 players has nothing to do with hardware this gen, even the wii could do it with dedicated servers



There are some games on XBL with servers



Not all XBL players are immature, ive met just as many on PSN while playing warhawk :P
zipper was the king of fps until ps3 came out, ps2 socom games was more fun than modern warfare games imo. online socom owns
TC i have to agree with you,

8.0 is a great score, For a game of this scale, its a good score since its the first ever 200+ player game on a console.

Its a great accomplishment, and seriously we dont know if it can be done on the 360.
all these are assumptions and speculations , let's just skip that matter people, the game won't be made on the x360 even if it's possible, proving wether it's possible or not is pointless.
MAG could be done on the 360.
I think any game on the PS3 can be done on the 360, and vice-versa, with enough developer support and ambition, money, and time.



The reason first-party games on PS3 look so darn good compared to first-party 360 games is because Sony puts a lot of support behind its own team, budget-wise, development time wise, and labour wise. If only Microsoft would be the same, then we would see some spectacular games on both consoles, and System Wars would actually be more interesting with truly spectacular titles coming out on both fronts.



Even the Wii, as a system, is well capable of producing some spectacular visuals (Mario Galaxy for example). It all lies in developer effort, in the end.



Last generation was the same thing : the PS2 was the weakest, specs wise, among the consoles, but the games published on it were producing some impressive visuals, due largely in part, once again, by the sheer talent of the developers behind them.
In fact it should be done on the 360, it's a great game.
Is it really 256 players running around the map?

I'm sure I saw someone post on here saying it was 64.
[QUOTE=''gameofthering'']Is it really 256 players running around the map?

I'm sure I saw someone post on here saying it was 64.[/QUOTE] There are 64 player modes, but the main drive of the game is the 256 player Domination mode. There is also a 132(I think it's that number) mode called Acquisition
[QUOTE=''k25425'']zipper was the king of fps until ps3 came out, ps2 socom games was more fun than modern warfare games imo. online socom owns[/QUOTE]



lol and yet the socom games didn't sell near the units or get the scores of the call of duty and battlefield games...hmmm zipper was king of nothing really.
[QUOTE=''wasted_wisdom'']Can MAG be done on the 360? I think the main reason why most cows would say no is because they automatically think, hardware...but no.

First of all- lets examine the concept of MAG- the big factor that's meant to drive the gameplay... ''CO-operation'' DO you think all the immature 7 year olds in XBL would be able to co-operate and play with squads and take orders? I don't think so but that's not a factor to my opinion.

Second--- Lets take the 360's Network: Do you think the game wouldn't feel like a powerpoint with all the lag- if there's any? WHich there will most likely be.

Third of all: Mag doesn't just feature pretty warzone simulation with helicopters floating around and enemies dropping by parachutes. There are lots of background scripts and commands and components running to create what you see. There's management and tracking of character actions...There's communication across the network between the 256 players... DO you think the 360 can handle that without sputtering? I don't know.

Thats just the way I see it.

Oh, and yeah on the side note...Lemmens, stop hiding behind ME2. And sheep....*Facepalm...

And we never hyped MAG too above 7...Hell, i even posted about how stupid and annoying the beta was to ME and I was cursed out by other cows so no one overhyped the game so its not a flop. I'm actually really surprised.

[/QUOTE]

Wow you really explained why MAG can't be done alright :roll:

DAMAGE CONTROL!!
lol xbox live has much more communication then PSN and i dont know where you guys pull this ''7 year olds'' BS from. there are many adults playing and not every 7 year old is bad. Also 360can use dedicated servers for games like MAG so stop acting like 360 is stuck with p2p. it can handle MAG as good as ps3 but maybe with slight graphics downgrade. MAG would be MUCH better on 360 (even with the slight graphical downgrade) due to better controller.
MAG is nothing special, its basicly the same as a MMO, except scaled down. it looks good because there isnt 1000's of people playing at once in a open world
[QUOTE=''gameofthering'']Is it really 256 players running around the map?

I'm sure I saw someone post on here saying it was 64.[/QUOTE] I know right? That's sort of confusing me too. One thing about the game-when i played the beta- is that things could change and you actually DO feel like you're making differnece. Except to be honest, the graphics sucked and i had to move my ps3 to the living room to use the HD so I could see and stop getting sniped. But yeah the maps are realistic-- a dream for those annoying campers who just hide and snipe. I loved how in the game- once your position was compromised an enemy would come for you...I think there must be communication because the one time we invaded a Point B zone and while my squad infiltrated I decided to stay behind and snipe. Some idiot from the other team stormed out and i was just about to hit him...then somehow I got sniped- almost like he was used as bait. The game is realistic and one thing it does excellently is make you feel like you're really doing something.
[QUOTE=''WilliamRLBaker''][QUOTE=''k25425'']zipper was the king of fps until ps3 came out, ps2 socom games was more fun than modern warfare games imo. online socom owns[/QUOTE]



lol and yet the socom games didn't sell near the units or get the scores of the call of duty and battlefield games...hmmm zipper was king of nothing really.[/QUOTE]

epic fail...around 10 million copies sold all time just for ps2 series. ps3 and psp around 2 million each
the 360 most likely could handle MAG but just like MAG it would require a new engine built from the ground up and it would require some heavy investments in servers, also netcode is the most important aspect to making a game like MAG work anyways, that's why MAG had over 1,000 people closed-beta testing the thing for so longso i think the question is whether Microsoft would even lift a finger to make something like MAG when they're raking in money off of less intensive P2P gamesanyways all these ''can or can't be done'' topics are usually full of **** anyways, the better answer is always simply ''it's not on it'' as in ''i have MP with 256 players, you don't'' or ''i have Uncharted 2, you don't'' or ''i have MGS4, you don't'' and so-on
[QUOTE=''sikanderahmed'']lol xbox live has much more communication then PSN and i dont know where you guys pull this ''7 year olds'' BS from. there are many adults playing and not every 7 year old is bad. Also 360can use dedicated servers for games like MAG so stop acting like 360 is stuck with p2p. it can handle MAG as good as ps3 but maybe with slight graphics downgrade. MAG would be MUCH better on 360 (even with the slight graphical downgrade) due to better controller.[/QUOTE]

IDK... I think I already stated that I'm not one of the big supporters of MAG so stop expecting me to get all fanboy against you. If you read the first post clearly you'd see that all the things I stated were posted as opinions and I actually said I was asking for what you guys thought. Also no one is damage controlling because this game exceeded everyone's expectation. Honestly- like I've made clear- I thought the game was horrible from the beta but I was wowed by what gamespot gave it. LOL remember how it took them forever to review... Well, inside I kept laughing like wow GS is totally going to burn this game. I kept checking back to see like a 6.4 or something then i was slapped with an Eight. So MAG- to cows- was like a new born baby who the doctor said wouldnt live too long and then its parents already built a coffin for it and the next thing you know, its exceeding their expectations: you ever read the scarlet ibis?