A persistent campaign where alliances and agencies consisting of thousands of players are constantly struggling for strategic advantage over territory and resources isn't an MMO? Are you really dense or just roleplaying as somebody who's incredibly ignorant?
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.
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
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.
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
Kinda like what you are doing...
Pot calling the kettle black? Sorry, my insecure friend, but look at the guy's post history. He's gone from thread to thread bashing the game for the sake of bashing it with ice-thin arguments and insults. You can continue to play the hypocrite part though and try to discredit the people who discredit the people who discredit the people, etc. Grow up.
As back as I can remember I played Doom and Doom II through a doomshell online over an AOL 56k modem connection. I graduated to Quake I, not Quake arena, Quake I online, where everyone either had a rocket launcher and a grappling hook or both. After I met with Half-life, it was all over. I played TFC and HL Online for hours on end. Needless to say I know my shooters.
What I felt was lacking about GA is that it felt that it was trying too hard to be state of the art. Kinda like your favorite old cartoon redone with CGI graphics and different voices, it just doesn't FEEL RIGHT. But I was lucky to get into Closed Beta CB1 A-1 and took advantage. This was offsetting my Aion Beta schedule over the summer, so I alternated weekends between the two. I was having a great time.
Unfortunately, they ran into some technical difficulties after the 4th installment and I couldn't play. I wrote to support and I really gave it my all. I was met with a weak response and it sounded like an IDUNNOWHATTODO email. It wasn't just me having the problem, it was quite a few players. But I kept up and got into the next one. But I don't write down names and dates, I just log in and go. I don't hold technical problems against games in beta, that is the time to have difficulties. It was the response of the company that rubbed me wrong.
The Graphics felt too glitzy and two dimensional. I like the glowing fringes on armor, but it seemed to lose it's luster when you can get it at level 5. The environment felt a bit dated, boxy, overglamorized yet undetailed. It felt as if I played this before in a different wrapper, just different names and abilities, it's been done.
At certain points it felt repetitive and when it comes down to straight fragging and melting faces, I have a shelf full of games for that. I didn't feel the need to jump on the bandwagon with this game on release. With some games I do, because I've done enough research and know what I like and what I don't like, although I have been known to be wrong. No one here is 100% perfect in their game picking record, but I don't mind getting into a game 1-2 years after release. I feel at that time all the bugs are worked out, the community has been formed and after 2 years running, the game shows strength. Much like GA does for some of you.
The bottom line is: I didn't like it. And that's that. I won't tell anyone to play it or not to play it, decide for yourself. It's your money at the end of the day and that really is what counts. Not the ranting and raving in forums, but if you decide to endorse a company its your wallets that do the talking. To me it wasn't worth 50 bucks and a $13 sub.
I've said all I am going to say about Global Agenda.
Why I don't love Global Agenda. - By Inktomi (who is now a known troll As back as I can remember I played Doom and Doom II through a doomshell online over an AOL 56k modem connection. I graduated to Quake I, not Quake arena, Quake I online, where everyone either had a rocket launcher and a grappling hook or both. After I met with Half-life, it was all over. I played TFC and HL Online for hours on end. Needless to say I know my shooters. What I felt was lacking about GA is that it felt that it was trying too hard to be state of the art. Kinda like your favorite old cartoon redone with CGI graphics and different voices, it just doesn't FEEL RIGHT. But I was lucky to get into Closed Beta CB1 A-1 and took advantage. This was offsetting my Aion Beta schedule over the summer, so I alternated weekends between the two. I was having a great time. Unfortunately, they ran into some technical difficulties after the 4th installment and I couldn't play. I wrote to support and I really gave it my all. I was met with a weak response and it sounded like an IDUNNOWHATTODO email. It wasn't just me having the problem, it was quite a few players. But I kept up and got into the next one. But I don't write down names and dates, I just log in and go. I don't hold technical problems against games in beta, that is the time to have difficulties. It was the response of the company that rubbed me wrong. The Graphics felt too glitzy and two dimensional. I like the glowing fringes on armor, but it seemed to lose it's luster when you can get it at level 5. The environment felt a bit dated, boxy, overglamorized yet undetailed. It felt as if I played this before in a different wrapper, just different names and abilities, it's been done. At certain points it felt repetitive and when it comes down to straight fragging and melting faces, I have a shelf full of games for that. I didn't feel the need to jump on the bandwagon with this game on release. With some games I do, because I've done enough research and know what I like and what I don't like, although I have been known to be wrong. No one here is 100% perfect in their game picking record, but I don't mind getting into a game 1-2 years after release. I feel at that time all the bugs are worked out, the community has been formed and after 2 years running, the game shows strength. Much like GA does for some of you. The bottom line is: I didn't like it. And that's that. I won't tell anyone to play it or not to play it, decide for yourself. It's your money at the end of the day and that really is what counts. Not the ranting and raving in forums, but if you decide to endorse a company its your wallets that do the talking. To me it wasn't worth 50 bucks and a $13 sub. I've said all I am going to say about Global Agenda. Play safe, Inktomi
I dont think your a troll - GA isn't for everyone and that's totally fine.... you make reasonable posts to explain why you dont LIKE it - not posts like "Zomg GA is utter fail <insert random flames here>....
I guess Im just trying to say.... we're just all enjoying our time with Shadow using him as a penyada. I've read your posts before... never had any problems what what you're saying and SOME parts I even agree with. I believe GA has some room to grow and improve (like all MMOs) but I think its fun and the rest falls into place. Ill likely not even sub (I don't usually sub two games per month) but we'll see.. Ill wait for the finish product before I pass final judgement. Even for just the $50 dollar box game - Im pleased with it and always wanted a shooter where I could progress my character and change up my gear. The gameplay is enjoyable but I dunno if Im a big fan of AvA yet... again - we'll see...
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.
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
Kinda like what you are doing...
Pot calling the kettle black? Sorry, my insecure friend, but look at the guy's post history. He's gone from thread to thread bashing the game for the sake of bashing it with ice-thin arguments and insults. You can continue to play the hypocrite part though and try to discredit the people who discredit the people who discredit the people, etc. Grow up.
Hmm, I guess when you have no content...you must attack.
But instead of trying to rationalize with you, I will simply report your attacks as harassment next time. Enjoy!
Why I don't love Global Agenda. - By Inktomi (who is now a known troll As back as I can remember I played Doom and Doom II through a doomshell online over an AOL 56k modem connection. I graduated to Quake I, not Quake arena, Quake I online, where everyone either had a rocket launcher and a grappling hook or both. After I met with Half-life, it was all over. I played TFC and HL Online for hours on end. Needless to say I know my shooters. What I felt was lacking about GA is that it felt that it was trying too hard to be state of the art. Kinda like your favorite old cartoon redone with CGI graphics and different voices, it just doesn't FEEL RIGHT. But I was lucky to get into Closed Beta CB1 A-1 and took advantage. This was offsetting my Aion Beta schedule over the summer, so I alternated weekends between the two. I was having a great time. Unfortunately, they ran into some technical difficulties after the 4th installment and I couldn't play. I wrote to support and I really gave it my all. I was met with a weak response and it sounded like an IDUNNOWHATTODO email. It wasn't just me having the problem, it was quite a few players. But I kept up and got into the next one. But I don't write down names and dates, I just log in and go. I don't hold technical problems against games in beta, that is the time to have difficulties. It was the response of the company that rubbed me wrong. The Graphics felt too glitzy and two dimensional. I like the glowing fringes on armor, but it seemed to lose it's luster when you can get it at level 5. The environment felt a bit dated, boxy, overglamorized yet undetailed. It felt as if I played this before in a different wrapper, just different names and abilities, it's been done. At certain points it felt repetitive and when it comes down to straight fragging and melting faces, I have a shelf full of games for that. I didn't feel the need to jump on the bandwagon with this game on release. With some games I do, because I've done enough research and know what I like and what I don't like, although I have been known to be wrong. No one here is 100% perfect in their game picking record, but I don't mind getting into a game 1-2 years after release. I feel at that time all the bugs are worked out, the community has been formed and after 2 years running, the game shows strength. Much like GA does for some of you. The bottom line is: I didn't like it. And that's that. I won't tell anyone to play it or not to play it, decide for yourself. It's your money at the end of the day and that really is what counts. Not the ranting and raving in forums, but if you decide to endorse a company its your wallets that do the talking. To me it wasn't worth 50 bucks and a $13 sub. I've said all I am going to say about Global Agenda. Play safe, Inktomi
A well written post. I take my virtual hat off to you.
I dont view you as a troll either. There is nothing wrong with posting negative feedback about a game. Its your opinion and expressing it is the whole point of these forums. Fanboy. Troll. Silly over-used names that pop up in virtually every thread.
The only thing I have against your previous posts is the notion you put forward that there is a decent selection of much better persistent online shooters to choose from when there clearly arent. You were only able to list two games that are about 5 years old. Thats why a lot of people have been getting excited about Global Agenda, because it fills a gap in the mmo market. There is a certain level of persistence in some shooters like the Battlefield games I suppose but its really not the same thing.
Your reasons for disliking GA are perfectly valid though. I'm sure there will be more fpsmmos on the way, such as Face of Mankind which you mentioned.
Comments
Because it is. Next question?
Because it isn't. Next question?
A persistent campaign where alliances and agencies consisting of thousands of players are constantly struggling for strategic advantage over territory and resources isn't an MMO? Are you really dense or just roleplaying as somebody who's incredibly ignorant?
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
Kinda like what you are doing...
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
Kinda like what you are doing...
Pot calling the kettle black? Sorry, my insecure friend, but look at the guy's post history. He's gone from thread to thread bashing the game for the sake of bashing it with ice-thin arguments and insults. You can continue to play the hypocrite part though and try to discredit the people who discredit the people who discredit the people, etc. Grow up.
Why I don't love Global Agenda.
- By Inktomi (who is now a known troll
As back as I can remember I played Doom and Doom II through a doomshell online over an AOL 56k modem connection. I graduated to Quake I, not Quake arena, Quake I online, where everyone either had a rocket launcher and a grappling hook or both. After I met with Half-life, it was all over. I played TFC and HL Online for hours on end. Needless to say I know my shooters.
What I felt was lacking about GA is that it felt that it was trying too hard to be state of the art. Kinda like your favorite old cartoon redone with CGI graphics and different voices, it just doesn't FEEL RIGHT. But I was lucky to get into Closed Beta CB1 A-1 and took advantage. This was offsetting my Aion Beta schedule over the summer, so I alternated weekends between the two. I was having a great time.
Unfortunately, they ran into some technical difficulties after the 4th installment and I couldn't play. I wrote to support and I really gave it my all. I was met with a weak response and it sounded like an IDUNNOWHATTODO email. It wasn't just me having the problem, it was quite a few players. But I kept up and got into the next one. But I don't write down names and dates, I just log in and go. I don't hold technical problems against games in beta, that is the time to have difficulties. It was the response of the company that rubbed me wrong.
The Graphics felt too glitzy and two dimensional. I like the glowing fringes on armor, but it seemed to lose it's luster when you can get it at level 5. The environment felt a bit dated, boxy, overglamorized yet undetailed. It felt as if I played this before in a different wrapper, just different names and abilities, it's been done.
At certain points it felt repetitive and when it comes down to straight fragging and melting faces, I have a shelf full of games for that. I didn't feel the need to jump on the bandwagon with this game on release. With some games I do, because I've done enough research and know what I like and what I don't like, although I have been known to be wrong. No one here is 100% perfect in their game picking record, but I don't mind getting into a game 1-2 years after release. I feel at that time all the bugs are worked out, the community has been formed and after 2 years running, the game shows strength. Much like GA does for some of you.
The bottom line is: I didn't like it. And that's that. I won't tell anyone to play it or not to play it, decide for yourself. It's your money at the end of the day and that really is what counts. Not the ranting and raving in forums, but if you decide to endorse a company its your wallets that do the talking. To me it wasn't worth 50 bucks and a $13 sub.
I've said all I am going to say about Global Agenda.
Play safe,
Inktomi
I dont think your a troll - GA isn't for everyone and that's totally fine.... you make reasonable posts to explain why you dont LIKE it - not posts like "Zomg GA is utter fail <insert random flames here>....
I guess Im just trying to say.... we're just all enjoying our time with Shadow using him as a penyada.
I've read your posts before... never had any problems what what you're saying and SOME parts I even agree with. I believe GA has some room to grow and improve (like all MMOs) but I think its fun and the rest falls into place. Ill likely not even sub (I don't usually sub two games per month) but we'll see.. Ill wait for the finish product before I pass final judgement. Even for just the $50 dollar box game - Im pleased with it and always wanted a shooter where I could progress my character and change up my gear. The gameplay is enjoyable but I dunno if Im a big fan of AvA yet... again - we'll see...
Ha ha ha! You're absolutely determined to have the last say arent you.
Inktomi said "If I want a persistent shooter there are plenty out there that are better"
By Inktomi's falty logic "plenty" = 2 old out-dated games.
As you chose to play Global Agenda you are clearly keen on playing an mmofps so out of this wide selection of 2 old games which one will you be playing? Will it be be Neocron 2 or Planetside?
Go on admit it. Be honest. You have no intention of playing either of them do you. Admit it. You played Global Agenda because its the only viable option for an mmo fps at the moment.
End of dialogue
Couldn't have said it better. Inktomi is a known troll among these parts, and it's good he's getting his just desserts.
The term "troll" is just thrown around as a personal attack nowadays. It has no meaning and is only used as a desperate last ditch attack to discredit the messenger by guilt by association.
It was claimed that there have never been persistent shooters, which is blatantly false. This claim was made by someone that goes around these forums trying to discredit people while refusing to actually address arguments.
Kinda like what you are doing...
Pot calling the kettle black? Sorry, my insecure friend, but look at the guy's post history. He's gone from thread to thread bashing the game for the sake of bashing it with ice-thin arguments and insults. You can continue to play the hypocrite part though and try to discredit the people who discredit the people who discredit the people, etc. Grow up.
Hmm, I guess when you have no content...you must attack.
But instead of trying to rationalize with you, I will simply report your attacks as harassment next time. Enjoy!
Please stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks.
Fortune favours the bold.
A well written post. I take my virtual hat off to you.
I dont view you as a troll either. There is nothing wrong with posting negative feedback about a game. Its your opinion and expressing it is the whole point of these forums. Fanboy. Troll. Silly over-used names that pop up in virtually every thread.
The only thing I have against your previous posts is the notion you put forward that there is a decent selection of much better persistent online shooters to choose from when there clearly arent. You were only able to list two games that are about 5 years old. Thats why a lot of people have been getting excited about Global Agenda, because it fills a gap in the mmo market. There is a certain level of persistence in some shooters like the Battlefield games I suppose but its really not the same thing.
Your reasons for disliking GA are perfectly valid though. I'm sure there will be more fpsmmos on the way, such as Face of Mankind which you mentioned.