DUST Search - Where did all this MAG/Dust comparision come form?

Rorek IronBlood wrote:

Actually Zipper stated that MAG started out as just a build to test out SOCOM in first person, but ended up becoming it's own game after some time. It's funny though because, MAG was treated horribly by Zipper, and even hurt by Zipper in many ways in which divided the community, and lack of proper support hurt MAG itself, but I found it ironic that after Zipper had turned it's back on MAG for SOCOM4 that SOCOM4 became the flop that shut them down. Yup. Sony done put old Seabiscut out back and shot it. Closing the doors to Zipper studios forever. Cannot seriously blame them though.

You know it's bad when people go back to SOCOM:Confrontation and end up having for more fun with Slant/Six Games first console title then they did with killstreak SOCOM4. Came out unfinished, ripped apart, and sold seperatly. I do not blame people (especially those of us who remember SOCOMbattles, and were there in the beginning.) I mean I can tolerate change, but that was just horrible. Atleast Slant/SIx eventually was able to make SOCOM:Confrontation playable and somewhat enjoyable. I still wish I did not need a sprint button, but meh.. Could have been worse, and I'm talking about a game that day one was unplayable (literally).


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mike Gunnzito 111	Posted - 2012.07.18 17:34:00 - [1] - Quote Rorek IronBlood wrote: Actually Zipper stated that MAG started out as just a build to test out SOCOM in first person, but ended up becoming it's own game after some time. It's funny though because, MAG was treated horribly by Zipper, and even hurt by Zipper in many ways in which divided the community, and lack of proper support hurt MAG itself, but I found it ironic that after Zipper had turned it's back on MAG for SOCOM4 that SOCOM4 became the flop that shut them down. Yup. Sony done put old Seabiscut out back and shot it. Closing the doors to Zipper studios forever. Cannot seriously blame them though. You know it's bad when people go back to SOCOM:Confrontation and end up having for more fun with Slant/Six Games first console title then they did with killstreak SOCOM4. Came out unfinished, ripped apart, and sold seperatly. I do not blame people (especially those of us who remember SOCOMbattles, and were there in the beginning.) I mean I can tolerate change, but that was just horrible. Atleast Slant/SIx eventually was able to make SOCOM:Confrontation playable and somewhat enjoyable. I still wish I did not need a sprint button, but meh.. Could have been worse, and I'm talking about a game that day one was unplayable (literally). Yeah, damn shame that zipper dropped MAG, once socom4 development ramped up. MAG was the better game. large battles, decent fps mechanics, with just a little sprinkle of rpgish skill point system. If they just focused on a way to make the "shadow war" a perpetual conflict (like dust will be) and added new maps, I'd still be playing to this day.
Mike Gunnzito 111	Posted - 2012.07.18 17:43:00 - [2] - Quote Rorek IronBlood wrote: What Zipper should have done was keep up support, and instead of continuously adding more game modes, they should have just added more individual maps that would have spanned to the current three game modes we already had. The addition of more game modes did not do a thing to help the game, and only created more problems. The second problem was lack of proper advertisment and a proper bundle with headset (which amazingly enough SOCOM:Confrontation managed to include!) (Note: I do not and will not ever condone high ranking players, and especially veterans going into the boot camp "TDM".) What's funny, Is that I and multiple others mentioned this to devs on the forum. Focus on getting new maps for the 3 main game modes, provide maps for free, so you dont segregate the player population, offer weapon and armor dlc, for $$, to bring in revenue that would have been from maps.
Mike Gunnzito 111	Posted - 2012.07.18 18:09:00 - [3] - Quote Tony Calif wrote: Mike, guns and stuff to pay for = pay to win New game mode = pay for game mode The problem was the players, not the game. How many thousand people are Playin suppression right now... More than every other game mode put together. Losers. Paying for guns, is not necessarily pay-to-win. Take the guns that they added, with the map pack/game mode, dlc. Each PMC got an additional AR, HMG, SR, and armor. Forget the armor, but the weapons themselves were only better in some instances. The DLC AR, had 45 rounds vs 30, had similar ROF to the other tier 2 rifles, but slightly less accuracy. ie: this weapon was better for nubs, or for those wanting to go 3v1. In 1v1, the standard tier 2 rifle was better. Same applies with the HMG, it was better as an anti vehicle, anti turret gun. It had good dmg, but its ROF was so slow that it was only good at taking out stationary targets (including infantry) Against a running/strafing infantry, is was arguably worse than even the tier 1 LMG. Buying better weapons, isn't NECESSARILY pay to win, as long as they're balanced properly. (which in MAG, they were pretty good)
Mike Gunnzito 111	Posted - 2012.07.18 21:54:00 - [4] - Quote All the comradery was def a big part of it. As has been mentioned, the comms were fantastic. Hopefully, CCP gets the grouping and comms right. (seems ok so far, just need grouping) And we def need proximity chat. That was another great part of MAG, hearing the enemy opponent near you rage after you drop him.