I played the closed beta for awhile and saw huge problems going forward. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun shooter with some nice concepts behind it. What is wrong with it is just that you are paying a monthly sub for a s
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games.
I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD?
Or hell, even Tribes.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
IMHO - the gameplay itself is the best part of GA.... Im not a huge FPS person (wasnt a big fan of counterstrike/COD - but I do like tribes)
Anyways take my opinion with a grain of salt - but I love the matches. I Don't care for the PVE all that much and of course the "MMO" aspects are a bit lackluster.
Still though - I'd recommend GA to most ppl if you are into death matches that are quick and fun... I pre-ordered and I admit I thought about getting a refund I still very much enjoy it - which keeps me interested. The devs are also the best community I've ever seen. Answers most ppl's questions on the beta board (assuming they are reasonable)...
Overall - good game, needs some more "fluff" to get the subs - but as a stand alone FPS - I was very pleased with how fluid and fun the game play was/is. Best of luck - and if you do preorder and don't enjoy the game you can get your money back before Feb 1st (assuming you go through steam)
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
You could only play with 3 friends as well.
As said by many others (in other threads)
Take whatever this guy says with a grain of salt.... His words are pretty much fail
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
You could only play with 3 friends as well.
As said by many others (in other threads)
Take whatever this guy says with a grain of salt.... His words are pretty much fail
Just sayin
Good job Cammy. You were able to hold back the vile and vicious personal attack this time! Bravo! I guess my reports to the mods did the trick!
Good job not responding to a single point for the thousandth time. I don't think you've ever responded to any point made by anyone. Just attack the messenger 100% of the time.
-Generic maps with the same colors, same middle base and 2 side wings.
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
first of all, no one take shadow's words seriously. he's not even expressing opinions. he's purposely spreading misinformation about the game, or has cognitive deficits. this is my suggestion to you. i wont be addressing any more of his lies.
crimecraft and huxley were both failures for a simple reason. the devs of those games had absolutely no direction. they didnt know where they wanted to take them, and the games ended up as steaming piles of trash. having beta tested GA for a while, it has a ton of direction and an excellent devs who listen to the fans and also know exactly where they want to take the game.
having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game. the shooter aspect of GA is essentially a combination of Tribes and TF2. actually, it's exactly that. the combat itself is tactical. you wont be 1 or 2 shotting people. players can live for quite a long time and you have to think/coordinate to take the other team down. so GA is a tactical shooter. my opinion of the combat is that it's more immersive and more fun than both TF2 and CS. GA is very skill-based. for example, sniping in GA is much more challenging than sniping in CS. the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best. this is great considering the game isnt even out yet.
I have a quick question. I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games. I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD? Or hell, even Tribes.
first of all, no one take shadow's words seriously. he's not even expressing opinions. he's purposely spreading misinformation about the game, or has cognitive deficits. this is my suggestion to you. i wont be addressing any more of his lies.
crimecraft and huxley were both failures for a simple reason. the devs of those games had absolutely no direction. they didnt know where they wanted to take them, and the games ended up as steaming piles of trash. having beta tested GA for a while, it has a ton of direction and an excellent devs who listen to the fans and also know exactly where they want to take the game.
having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game. the shooter aspect of GA is essentially a combination of Tribes and TF2. actually, it's exactly that. the combat itself is tactical. you wont be 1 or 2 shotting people. players can live for quite a long time and you have to think/coordinate to take the other team down. so GA is a tactical shooter. my opinion of the combat is that it's more immersive and more fun than both TF2 and CS. GA is very skill-based. for example, sniping in GA is much more challenging than sniping in CS. the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best. this is great considering the game isnt even out yet.
Yes, trust Sonoggi, who has yet to actually address even a single point I have made. Not a SINGLE ONE.
Just goes around attacking and doing damage control.
Not.. a ...single...point...addressed...
"having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game"
"the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best"
Now, doesn't that sound like a completely honest opinion? Totally not shilling...
Too bad there are 37 pages on the beta forums disagreeing with this-12 in the original "I hate..." thread, 3 in the followup, and 22 in the suggestions... all in a little over a week.
Totally though! Trust the guy praising the game as unbelievable and unwilling to address a single criticism, opting instead to try to discredit the person making actual arguments based on actual specific points!
I played the closed beta for awhile and saw huge problems going forward. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun shooter with some nice concepts behind it. What is wrong with it is just that you are paying a monthly sub for a s
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
I played the closed beta for awhile and saw huge problems going forward. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun shooter with some nice concepts behind it. What is wrong with it is just that you are paying a monthly sub for a s
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
Have you been living under a rock or something? The online single player game with optional co-op features has been the new mmo for years. Thats precisely what WoW and so many other games like it are.
Big open gameworld where people can freely walk around in it? Who cares. What can you actually DO in that game world? Absolutely fuck all thats what. Thousands of people wandering around playing a linear game on their own or in a small group when they have to while they watch lots of people playing a "copy" of the same game on their own or in a small group.
Big open static unchangeable game worlds where the players cant do anything to effect each other are totally over-rated and rather pointless. I would rather just play a decent game. If Global Agenda pull off the AvA aspect of their game then they will be offering a meaningful PvP experience where your actions help to shape and change the gameworld........something very few mmos have been able to do.
lol im sorry your pissed...but i came from EQ1 from day one...sad you really really think that co-op has been the new MMO...really sad. this game will last what maybe 6-10 weeks? I really dont see people playing this game for 3-4 years...sorry you get the sad face.
lol im sorry your pissed...but i came from EQ1 from day one...sad you really really think that co-op has been the new MMO...really sad. this game will last what maybe 6-10 weeks? I really dont see people playing this game for 3-4 years...sorry you get the sad face.
Sorry I'm a bit confused. Are you saying that I'm the one who is pissed off or are you referring to someone else? Where did you get the impression that I am pissed off? Why would I be the one with a sad face when you are the one who is disappointed with this game? Very strange.
I played the closed beta for awhile and saw huge problems going forward. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun shooter with some nice concepts behind it. What is wrong with it is just that you are paying a monthly sub for a s
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
2 Snoggi: Neocron 2, Planetside, the new MMO Face of mankind and you could even throw Fallen Earth in there for persistent shooters. Too bad the old Hellgate: London is no longer active. I could of put that on the list too.
For you to dispel anything, you need to know your facts a little bit better. Get back to me when you know more about pesistent shooters. Have fun with GA.
I played the closed beta for awhile and saw huge problems going forward. Don't get me wrong, it's a fun shooter with some nice concepts behind it. What is wrong with it is just that you are paying a monthly sub for a s
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
2 Snoggi: Neocron 2, Planetside, the new MMO Face of mankind and you could even throw Fallen Earth in there for persistent shooters. Too bad the old Hellgate: London is no longer active. I could of put that on the list too.
For you to dispel anything, you need to know your facts a little bit better. Get back to me when you know more about pesistent shooters. Have fun with GA.
This conversation is over.
Thats not really much of a list though is it.
Neocron 2 and Planetside are old out-dated games, Face of mankind is not complete yet and therefore not available to play and Fallen Earth is a hybrid game and not a true FPS mmo.
Sonoggi's statement is pretty accurate. There effectively arent any fps mmos worth paying any attention to.
lol im sorry your pissed...but i came from EQ1 from day one...sad you really really think that co-op has been the new MMO...really sad. this game will last what maybe 6-10 weeks? I really dont see people playing this game for 3-4 years...sorry you get the sad face.
Praising yourself because you come from EQ is like patting yourself on the back because you watched Power Rangers. Sorry, but EQ was a crap game that got the attention it did because it was new and very few games were like it. Had EQ come out today, it would be laughed at hysterically. I guess dumb people don't know how to evolve their tastes. Also, why are you so angry?
As for the whole persistence argument, GA is a persistent game...assuming you are playing the AvA. AvA is what makes this game persistent and can be legitimately called an MMO. In AvA, agencies and alliances are fighting for control of various territories and those decisions and battles have a permanent effect on the "war." In other words, it's not like Guild Wars or Diable where your action have no effect on anything. Even while heavily instanced, the choices you make as a player have meaningful consequences that effect other players by effecting the landscape and strategy.
If all you're doing is doing PvE and PvP missions, then the game is basically just Guild Wars, which isn't a bad thing considering you don't have to pay a monthly subscription if that's the type of experience you want. But if you want to MMO-ify your experience, well then that's there too as long as you're willing to be a part of an agency and contribute to the AvA effort.
this game, like any game, is not for everyone. personally i disliked many aspects of it, but tried hard to like it as I really want a shooter with mmo-like features.
I did a ton of AvA with one of the major alliances. The vehicles/turrets aren't that exciting. Map design is bland and boring. Essentially the only difference between the ava and pug's is that you can play with a group of 9 others, and get your clan name (not full name, just symbol) on a hex map. Thats it. And there is a few things you can 'craft'' via menu for those hex games to be used, like a few vehicles and a nuke. I dont see how that is worth the monthly sub. However, a good handful of people in the alliance plan to stay as they enjoy the game. They seem to come from a more MMO background. Different strokes for different folks.
The free version of the game is a lobby with forced pug's for pvp, and a few pve missions where you can be a bit more selected of your other 3 mates. The pugs have a few types, with most of the objective ones being similar. Essentially you run to a circle and stand over it until you capture it, or move the object, depending on the type of map, ala glorified capture-the-flag. The pve missions are all very very similar in design, and contain the same enemies with *sometimes* different bosses. A majority of them feels like the newer star wars movies, going against hordes of 'drones' with laser guns; *pew* *pew*. The boss fights on the most difficult (in ranking) missions are actually challenging and fun. Unfortunately, since the maps essentially feel the same, this gets old fast.
The actual combat feels like a TF2 mod on a different engine, with a third-person view. If you are proud of your ability to aim well, you will be let down. There is no weapon in the game that takes advantage of good aim. There are sniper recon's and medics, but the projectiles are really slow, so it is more predictive or luck. There are some fun things for combat, such as the recon clone or the robo forcefield, but most of which is not unique. Honestly it felt like a mod to UT2k4 to me. It is boringly balanced and teamwork dependent, meaning you cannot turn the tides unless you play a team that does not know what they are doing. The way it plays like a MMO is that is medic + tank dependent.
The good thing about the game is that it *should* be graphically smooth on most comp setups. The lobbys are broken up into nodes, so there is not just 1 overpopulated lobby. There is not many bugs pre-release here, most of which are crashing of the AvA matches. The pings are abnoxious for almost everyone I played with, but since it's not much of a twitch game, this doesn't always matter.
Anyways, hope this helps give some clear views to any on the fence. Made a long review here as it is always frustrating to get a refund. Personally going to take the $$ returned and just preorder bad company 2.
Anyways, hope this helps give some clear views to any on the fence. Made a long review here as it is always frustrating to get a refund. Personally going to take the $$ returned and just preorder bad company 2.
Yes I did it also, I have been in beta for a long time the thing is that it's not that good as an fps or an mmo, it's like having two okay games in one - in the end it really drills down to the enjoyability of the fps part and it's not good enough as personally I rather play a real team fps like TF2..
I still dont understand why they keep calling this game an MMO? Seriously, why? There is nothing MMO over it at all.
The game is great though. Very polished, very fun and will last for a very long time if it keeps getting updated with new stuff every now and then.
The question is, will people pay monthly for a co-op game? Of course not.
This game will sadly fail because of the monthly fee. Sadly because its a very well done game.
Optional monthly fee that is lower than the industry standard. Thats one of the reasons i was going to get it, if i decide its not worth subbing to, i can still play most parts of it.
I still dont understand why they keep calling this game an MMO? Seriously, why? There is nothing MMO over it at all.
The game is great though. Very polished, very fun and will last for a very long time if it keeps getting updated with new stuff every now and then.
The question is, will people pay monthly for a co-op game? Of course not.
This game will sadly fail because of the monthly fee. Sadly because its a very well done game.
Optional monthly fee that is lower than the industry standard. Thats one of the reasons i was going to get it, if i decide its not worth subbing to, i can still play most parts of it.
A very good answer. Thats something I think a lot of people simply arent taking into account. Will people pay monthly for a co-op game? No of course they wont because the co-op aspect is free. They might however pay monthly for a competitive pvp game.
On a side note it might actually be worth pointing out that WoW and a lot of other mmos are co-op games and yet plenty of people pay a higher monthly fee for those.
Comments
i love it so much i just got my money back from my pre-order...thank you Steam
...50 people in one dome does not make a MMO sorry.
so you think co-op is the new mmo then?
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
I have a quick question.
I could care less about the "MMO" aspect of the game. The big problem I've had with games like Crimecraft, Huxley, and the other MMOFPS games is that the combat is incredibly subpar when compared to more traditional team based FPS games.
I'm just curious if the combat is anywhere close to being as good as TF2, Counter-Strike, or CoD?
Or hell, even Tribes.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
IMHO - the gameplay itself is the best part of GA.... Im not a huge FPS person (wasnt a big fan of counterstrike/COD - but I do like tribes)
Anyways take my opinion with a grain of salt - but I love the matches. I Don't care for the PVE all that much and of course the "MMO" aspects are a bit lackluster.
Still though - I'd recommend GA to most ppl if you are into death matches that are quick and fun... I pre-ordered and I admit I thought about getting a refund I still very much enjoy it - which keeps me interested. The devs are also the best community I've ever seen. Answers most ppl's questions on the beta board (assuming they are reasonable)...
Overall - good game, needs some more "fluff" to get the subs - but as a stand alone FPS - I was very pleased with how fluid and fun the game play was/is. Best of luck - and if you do preorder and don't enjoy the game you can get your money back before Feb 1st (assuming you go through steam)
Cheers
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
You could only play with 3 friends as well.
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
You could only play with 3 friends as well.
As said by many others (in other threads)
Take whatever this guy says with a grain of salt.... His words are pretty much fail
Just sayin
4 generic classes that all share the same main weapons. Very little customization with skill points(only get 13) in generic skill trees. Impossible to kill a medic/player combo...
Maps are very generic with no variety. The capture point maps(all 4) are of the exact same design of one center base with 2 side small bases.
You could only play with 3 friends as well.
As said by many others (in other threads)
Take whatever this guy says with a grain of salt.... His words are pretty much fail
Just sayin
Good job Cammy. You were able to hold back the vile and vicious personal attack this time! Bravo! I guess my reports to the mods did the trick!
Good job not responding to a single point for the thousandth time. I don't think you've ever responded to any point made by anyone. Just attack the messenger 100% of the time.
-Generic maps with the same colors, same middle base and 2 side wings.
-Can only play with 3 friends
-10v10 max
-Pay $13 for the privilege
first of all, no one take shadow's words seriously. he's not even expressing opinions. he's purposely spreading misinformation about the game, or has cognitive deficits. this is my suggestion to you. i wont be addressing any more of his lies.
crimecraft and huxley were both failures for a simple reason. the devs of those games had absolutely no direction. they didnt know where they wanted to take them, and the games ended up as steaming piles of trash. having beta tested GA for a while, it has a ton of direction and an excellent devs who listen to the fans and also know exactly where they want to take the game.
having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game. the shooter aspect of GA is essentially a combination of Tribes and TF2. actually, it's exactly that. the combat itself is tactical. you wont be 1 or 2 shotting people. players can live for quite a long time and you have to think/coordinate to take the other team down. so GA is a tactical shooter. my opinion of the combat is that it's more immersive and more fun than both TF2 and CS. GA is very skill-based. for example, sniping in GA is much more challenging than sniping in CS. the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best. this is great considering the game isnt even out yet.
first of all, no one take shadow's words seriously. he's not even expressing opinions. he's purposely spreading misinformation about the game, or has cognitive deficits. this is my suggestion to you. i wont be addressing any more of his lies.
crimecraft and huxley were both failures for a simple reason. the devs of those games had absolutely no direction. they didnt know where they wanted to take them, and the games ended up as steaming piles of trash. having beta tested GA for a while, it has a ton of direction and an excellent devs who listen to the fans and also know exactly where they want to take the game.
having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game. the shooter aspect of GA is essentially a combination of Tribes and TF2. actually, it's exactly that. the combat itself is tactical. you wont be 1 or 2 shotting people. players can live for quite a long time and you have to think/coordinate to take the other team down. so GA is a tactical shooter. my opinion of the combat is that it's more immersive and more fun than both TF2 and CS. GA is very skill-based. for example, sniping in GA is much more challenging than sniping in CS. the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best. this is great considering the game isnt even out yet.
Yes, trust Sonoggi, who has yet to actually address even a single point I have made. Not a SINGLE ONE.
Just goes around attacking and doing damage control.
Not.. a ...single...point...addressed...
"having played just about every fps out there and just about every MMO out there, i have chosen GA as my game"
"the pvp balance is also excellent. probably the best"
Now, doesn't that sound like a completely honest opinion? Totally not shilling...
Too bad there are 37 pages on the beta forums disagreeing with this-12 in the original "I hate..." thread, 3 in the followup, and 22 in the suggestions... all in a little over a week.
Totally though! Trust the guy praising the game as unbelievable and unwilling to address a single criticism, opting instead to try to discredit the person making actual arguments based on actual specific points!
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
Have you been living under a rock or something? The online single player game with optional co-op features has been the new mmo for years. Thats precisely what WoW and so many other games like it are.
Big open gameworld where people can freely walk around in it? Who cares. What can you actually DO in that game world? Absolutely fuck all thats what. Thousands of people wandering around playing a linear game on their own or in a small group when they have to while they watch lots of people playing a "copy" of the same game on their own or in a small group.
Big open static unchangeable game worlds where the players cant do anything to effect each other are totally over-rated and rather pointless. I would rather just play a decent game. If Global Agenda pull off the AvA aspect of their game then they will be offering a meaningful PvP experience where your actions help to shape and change the gameworld........something very few mmos have been able to do.
lol im sorry your pissed...but i came from EQ1 from day one...sad you really really think that co-op has been the new MMO...really sad. this game will last what maybe 6-10 weeks? I really dont see people playing this game for 3-4 years...sorry
you get the sad face.
Sorry I'm a bit confused. Are you saying that I'm the one who is pissed off or are you referring to someone else? Where did you get the impression that I am pissed off? Why would I be the one with a sad face when you are the one who is disappointed with this game? Very strange.
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
2 Snoggi: Neocron 2, Planetside, the new MMO Face of mankind and you could even throw Fallen Earth in there for persistent shooters. Too bad the old Hellgate: London is no longer active. I could of put that on the list too.
For you to dispel anything, you need to know your facts a little bit better. Get back to me when you know more about pesistent shooters. Have fun with GA.
This conversation is over.
no, youre not. youre paying a monthly sub for an MMO that has shooter aspects. youre paying for persistency, and a whole different game of AvA (which is a lot like an RTS with you being in the middle of it; youre able to build facilities, vehicles and protect your own territory against invasion).
but as you said, if you like it you'll know it. if it's meh, then you'll just focus on what you see as problems. you see huge problems going forward, i dont see anything but a bright future for the game.
Your right I'm not. As I said before I am not going to play the game. Persistent or not, If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better. IMO any Valve shooter knocks this one in the dirt. Have fun playing it, I hope it does have the bright future your saying it will.
there arent any persistent shooters out there, actually. ive been a Valve fanboy since HL. i own LFD2, and all of HL2's, as well as TF2. and GA wipes the floor with them all. this is my honest opinion. i dont care that youre not going to play, you dont have to repeat it. i was dispelling some of the misinformation you had so that others in this thread know better, and not trying to convince you to play.
No persistent shooters. Planetside is totally not persistent! Honestly! I've been a Sony fanboy, but dome city and queues are totally more persistent!
2 Snoggi: Neocron 2, Planetside, the new MMO Face of mankind and you could even throw Fallen Earth in there for persistent shooters. Too bad the old Hellgate: London is no longer active. I could of put that on the list too.
For you to dispel anything, you need to know your facts a little bit better. Get back to me when you know more about pesistent shooters. Have fun with GA.
This conversation is over.
Thats not really much of a list though is it.
Neocron 2 and Planetside are old out-dated games, Face of mankind is not complete yet and therefore not available to play and Fallen Earth is a hybrid game and not a true FPS mmo.
Sonoggi's statement is pretty accurate. There effectively arent any fps mmos worth paying any attention to.
Praising yourself because you come from EQ is like patting yourself on the back because you watched Power Rangers. Sorry, but EQ was a crap game that got the attention it did because it was new and very few games were like it. Had EQ come out today, it would be laughed at hysterically. I guess dumb people don't know how to evolve their tastes. Also, why are you so angry?
As for the whole persistence argument, GA is a persistent game...assuming you are playing the AvA. AvA is what makes this game persistent and can be legitimately called an MMO. In AvA, agencies and alliances are fighting for control of various territories and those decisions and battles have a permanent effect on the "war." In other words, it's not like Guild Wars or Diable where your action have no effect on anything. Even while heavily instanced, the choices you make as a player have meaningful consequences that effect other players by effecting the landscape and strategy.
If all you're doing is doing PvE and PvP missions, then the game is basically just Guild Wars, which isn't a bad thing considering you don't have to pay a monthly subscription if that's the type of experience you want. But if you want to MMO-ify your experience, well then that's there too as long as you're willing to be a part of an agency and contribute to the AvA effort.
got my refund (thanks steam) today.
this game, like any game, is not for everyone. personally i disliked many aspects of it, but tried hard to like it as I really want a shooter with mmo-like features.
I did a ton of AvA with one of the major alliances. The vehicles/turrets aren't that exciting. Map design is bland and boring. Essentially the only difference between the ava and pug's is that you can play with a group of 9 others, and get your clan name (not full name, just symbol) on a hex map. Thats it. And there is a few things you can 'craft'' via menu for those hex games to be used, like a few vehicles and a nuke. I dont see how that is worth the monthly sub. However, a good handful of people in the alliance plan to stay as they enjoy the game. They seem to come from a more MMO background. Different strokes for different folks.
The free version of the game is a lobby with forced pug's for pvp, and a few pve missions where you can be a bit more selected of your other 3 mates. The pugs have a few types, with most of the objective ones being similar. Essentially you run to a circle and stand over it until you capture it, or move the object, depending on the type of map, ala glorified capture-the-flag. The pve missions are all very very similar in design, and contain the same enemies with *sometimes* different bosses. A majority of them feels like the newer star wars movies, going against hordes of 'drones' with laser guns; *pew* *pew*. The boss fights on the most difficult (in ranking) missions are actually challenging and fun. Unfortunately, since the maps essentially feel the same, this gets old fast.
The actual combat feels like a TF2 mod on a different engine, with a third-person view. If you are proud of your ability to aim well, you will be let down. There is no weapon in the game that takes advantage of good aim. There are sniper recon's and medics, but the projectiles are really slow, so it is more predictive or luck. There are some fun things for combat, such as the recon clone or the robo forcefield, but most of which is not unique. Honestly it felt like a mod to UT2k4 to me. It is boringly balanced and teamwork dependent, meaning you cannot turn the tides unless you play a team that does not know what they are doing. The way it plays like a MMO is that is medic + tank dependent.
The good thing about the game is that it *should* be graphically smooth on most comp setups. The lobbys are broken up into nodes, so there is not just 1 overpopulated lobby. There is not many bugs pre-release here, most of which are crashing of the AvA matches. The pings are abnoxious for almost everyone I played with, but since it's not much of a twitch game, this doesn't always matter.
Anyways, hope this helps give some clear views to any on the fence. Made a long review here as it is always frustrating to get a refund. Personally going to take the $$ returned and just preorder bad company 2.
Ok, you are both incorrect and I hate that 'you got trolled feeling' but I feel the need to set this straight.
I said: TF2 is better (in my opinion)
Snoogi said "there arent any persistent shooters out there"
I responded with a list, short or whatever it's still a list correcting his above statement.
Neonwire tries to backup a faulty statement with :"There effectively arent any fps mmos worth paying any attention to."
A Persistent FPS is a Persistent FPS no matter how you slice it.
This thread is 'love it or hate it', I hated it.
End of story.
Yes I did it also, I have been in beta for a long time the thing is that it's not that good as an fps or an mmo, it's like having two okay games in one - in the end it really drills down to the enjoyability of the fps part and it's not good enough as personally I rather play a real team fps like TF2..
I still dont understand why they keep calling this game an MMO? Seriously, why? There is nothing MMO over it at all.
The game is great though. Very polished, very fun and will last for a very long time if it keeps getting updated with new stuff every now and then.
The question is, will people pay monthly for a co-op game?
Of course not.
This game will sadly fail because of the monthly fee. Sadly because its a very well done game.
Optional monthly fee that is lower than the industry standard. Thats one of the reasons i was going to get it, if i decide its not worth subbing to, i can still play most parts of it.
Optional monthly fee that is lower than the industry standard. Thats one of the reasons i was going to get it, if i decide its not worth subbing to, i can still play most parts of it.
A very good answer. Thats something I think a lot of people simply arent taking into account. Will people pay monthly for a co-op game? No of course they wont because the co-op aspect is free. They might however pay monthly for a competitive pvp game.
On a side note it might actually be worth pointing out that WoW and a lot of other mmos are co-op games and yet plenty of people pay a higher monthly fee for those.
Because it is. Next question?