Reply
Feb 05 2014
By: Trioptical Sackboy 430 posts
Offline

Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

[ Edited ]
96 replies 1523 views Edited Apr 10, 2014

H-MAG2 So Far... [Updated 4/10/2014]

  • Do the majority like the "pureness" of Sabotage? (No strike packages, etc. Just you and your gun and your team)
  • More "solid" feel for moment to moment gameplay (need to define solid)
  • Need to investigate if the not solid feel had to do with having no aim assist
  • Being close to your squadmates gives you bonus health and other bonuses making squads much more effective than individuals.
  • Preserve pseudo-matchmaking of the original? (Groups more often matched against groups in platoon setup)
  • Queue time shortened (possible solutions follow)
  • Waiting Room Matches of numerous match types (not just TDM), support character progression, and end "abruptly" when the queue is full for the large player count game modes.
  • Game modes and maps that scale dynamically depending on the number of available players.
  • (Sorry Zipper, guess you out. Smiley Happy )

 

 

Playing those last few weeks of MAG got me thinking again about what a sequel would be like. I mean, MAG was the first game of its kind so clearly there were some missteps, but now that we've seen what 256 player battles look like, what a "Shadow War" looks like, what progression in such a game could be like, it would be a shame not to take those lessons and make something better out of them.

 

So just for fun, a design exercise, what would MAG2 be like.

 

Post a single idea based on what we saw in MAG, or in the spirit of what MAG could have been.

 

I'll start -- I think that squad play / team play should be further emphasized in H-MAG2, almost to the point where a single soldier is basically useless on his or her own. This idea is inspired by those images in the opening cinematic in which soldiers are coming out of an LAV, with the ones in front providing cover as the ones in back unloaded from the vehicle. Rarely was it the case in the actually game for an entire squad to move as a unit since it was pretty dangerous.

 

But that would be cool, right? Taking team play and coordination further than any game before?

In game, I think this would be accomplished much in the same way that proximity to squad leaders gave certain bonuses, but instead of XP bonuses, which sort of lose their meaning once you've maxed out, these bonuses would dramatically change your soldier's effectiveness. Maybe even making it so moving as a unit is actually safer than scattering and going it alone.

 

As a half baked thought, sniper play would still be available in some fashion. Perhaps having a spotter makes the sniper better some how? Haven't thought that through yet.

 

See? Design exercise. Harmless fun. Who'd like to join me?

Message 1 of 97 (1,523 Views)
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 02/09/2010
Offline
352 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

I liked the fixed spawn and progressive spawn idea. The fact that you would take over an area and then your spawn would move up and progress to parachuting in rather than starting in the woods at the end of the map.

 

Message 2 of 97 (1,518 Views)
Sackboy
Registered: 06/07/2004
Offline
430 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Dreadnaught360 wrote:

I liked the fixed spawn and progressive spawn idea. The fact that you would take over an area and then your spawn would move up and progress to parachuting in rather than starting in the woods at the end of the map.

 


Yeah, that was great, and not locking off the map as in Battlefield's Rush mode was pretty distinctive and allowed for some counter attacking opportunities on defense. H-MAG2 would definitely maintain the "fronts" of the first game.

 

There were some complaints about how you'd always have to run a long way to get back into battle. Do you think that was to just discourage people from dying and playing carelessly? Or maybe, without that travel time, the battles would have been too hard to win?

Message 3 of 97 (1,515 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 06/01/2012
Offline
1344 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Trioptical wrote:

Playing those last few weeks of MAG got me thinking again about what a sequel would be like. I mean, MAG was the first game of its kind so clearly there were some missteps, but now that we've seen what 256 player battles look like, what a "Shadow War" looks like, what progression in such a game could be like, it would be a shame not to take those lessons and make something better out of them.

 

So just for fun, a design exercise, what would MAG2 be like.

 

Post a single idea based on what we saw in MAG, or in the spirit of what MAG could have been.

 

I'll start -- I think that squad play / team play should be further emphasized in H-MAG2, almost to the point where a single soldier is basically useless on his or her own. This idea is inspired by those images in the opening cinematic in which soldiers are coming out of an LAV, with the ones in front providing cover as the ones in back unloaded from the vehicle. Rarely was it the case in the actually game for an entire squad to move as a unit since it was pretty dangerous.

 

But that would be cool, right? Taking team play and coordination further than any game before?

In game, I think this would be accomplished much in the same way that proximity to squad leaders gave certain bonuses, but instead of XP bonuses, which sort of lose their meaning once you've maxed out, these bonuses would dramatically change your soldier's effectiveness. Maybe even making it so moving as a unit is actually safer than scattering and going it alone.

 

As a half baked thought, sniper play would still be available in some fashion. Perhaps having a spotter makes the sniper better some how? Haven't thought that through yet.

 

See? Design exercise. Harmless fun. Who'd like to join me?




 

Oh, I just had an idea. What if being near teammates actually made you STRONGER as an individual? Like if you literally had more health if you were within x distance from a teammate, and this bonus was completely stackable?

 

The only way that I could see them explaining this (well, at least more eleiquently than the "blue smoke" rivival system) would be if it were to switch to a sci-fy setting, at least enough for the existence of sheild generators. Each soldier would have both a sheild bar and a health bar. Health would work like it always does, but sheilds would regenerate and would only be limited only by each soldiers energy storage.

But this energy would automatically transfer between nearby teammates!

As such, when ten people were standing together, their sheild bars would essentially merge. If you shot at only one member of the group, you would deal equal damage to all the people around him as well, including people behind cover, etc, essentially giving that one man 10X more health than if he were standing alone. Now once you did deplete the whole group's sheilds, then damage would affect their individual health bars and it would be every-man-for-himself, like always.

 

What effect do you guys think this would have on gameplay?

--------------( Semi-official Starhawk Suggestion Central (Updated 09-05-12)-----------------



----------------------------------------------------Built to Destroy----------------------------------------------------


Message 4 of 97 (1,509 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 06/07/2004
Offline
430 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Arron_Rift wrote:

Oh, I just had an idea. What if being near teammates actually made you STRONGER as an individual? Like if you literally had more health if you were within x distance from a teammate, and this bonus was completely stackable?

 

The only way that I could see them explaining this (well, at least more eleiquently than the "blue smoke" rivival system) would be if it were to switch to a sci-fy setting, at least enough for the existence of sheild generators. Each soldier would have both a sheild bar and a health bar. Health would work like it always does, but sheilds would regenerate and would only be limited only by each soldiers energy storage.

But this energy would automatically transfer between nearby teammates!

As such, when ten people were standing together, their sheild bars would essentially merge. If you shot at only one member of the group, you would deal equal damage to all the people around him as well, including people behind cover, etc, essentially giving that one man 10X more health than if he were standing alone. Now once you did deplete the whole group's sheilds, then damage would affect their individual health bars and it would be every-man-for-himself, like always.

 

What effect do you guys think this would have on gameplay?


Yeah, this would probably be less infuriating that what I was thinking. I was thinking that maybe when you're alone, you're weapons are wildly inaccurate, but I think that would take all of the twitch skill out of the game and turn into more of a strategy action game rather than a team based shooter.

 

This would also work in the snipers situation if, for example, when you're alone, you can't be revived or something, where as when you have a teammate nearby they can increase your health, and if you get shot you go into a downed state rather than being insta-killed.

 

Then again... if you're alone, you're not getting revived anyway... hmm, needs more thought.

 

I think this would probably encourage people to move together as a unit, but there'd probably need to be a cap as to how many health boosts can be stacked on one another. Otherwise, a whole platoon could just gather up and just get gobs of health. Or maybe that'd be cool as a strategy. What do others think?

 

I don't think the game would necessarily need to rationalize the increased health though, seeing as how health, revive kits, a lot of stuff really don't make too much real world sense. As long as the feature serves the game, that should be enough for now.

Message 5 of 97 (1,503 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
VP of Gaming
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
29169 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Design by internet committee? Remeber the old saying about too many chefs...

Message 6 of 97 (1,491 Views)
Sackboy
Registered: 06/07/2004
Offline
430 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Well obviously, I get final say.

 

No, I'm kidding. This is just for fun anyways, and who would know MAG better than some of the people here?

Message 7 of 97 (1,486 Views)
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 06/01/2012
Offline
1344 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 5, 2014

Trioptical wrote:

Well obviously, I get final say.

 

No, I'm kidding. This is just for fun anyways, and who would know MAG better than some of the people here?


If you're wanting oppinions from the old MAG community, you should probably post a link to here over on the "[Info] Mag forums" (or something like that) thread. I don't think the old fans have really left that thread much since Sony ruined the forums...

--------------( Semi-official Starhawk Suggestion Central (Updated 09-05-12)-----------------



----------------------------------------------------Built to Destroy----------------------------------------------------


Message 8 of 97 (1,474 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 05/30/2004
Online
1421 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 6, 2014

CaptainAlbator wrote:

Design by internet committee? Remeber the old saying about too many chefs...


Don't see why not. That's how all these new games are designed today anyway. No game made today is in its original form from when it launched.

Gaming died with the PS2
Gaming in 2016 is a casual scrub's dream
Thank you for ruining a once great hobby
Message 9 of 97 (1,468 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 06/07/2004
Offline
430 posts
 

Re: Design H-MAG2 (Hypothetical Massive Action Game 2 (H-MAG2))

Feb 6, 2014

Alright, not here to debate the virtues of not designing by committee and what not; just want to have a fun design focused discussion on what was good and not good in MAG, as applicable to a hypothetical continuation of the franchise.

 

Getting back on topic, one of the problems with having so many players in a game was that it required lots of players, which occassionally made wait times long and near the end often playing a Domination match was impossible.

 

They tried ideas like bonus XP for playing certain modes, but one, at the max level bonus XP isn't an incentive anymore; and two, they offered bonus XP for so many different modes that it didn't help in getting players to congregate in the modes that needed players the most.

 

Perhaps H-MAG2 should have fewer game modes available at any given time so that everyone logged on plays those modes, hopefully shortening queue times. ("The Stick" solution)

 

Or, maybe a random drops type progression system for equipment and weapon unlocks, but I guess those would eventually run out too. (The "Maxed Out Issue")

 

How can queue times be improved?

Message 10 of 97 (1,456 Views)
Reply
0 Likes