Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Is this really an MMO?

muchavezmuchavez Member UncommonPosts: 199

Does this game really have a persistant world that you can take over and control? Or is it one of those fake mmos where everytime you want to take over something or pvp you get put into an instance.  I'd rather not play a monthly fee for counter strike.


  • BruceybabyBruceybaby Member Posts: 254
    Originally posted by CNUChavez

    Does this game really have a persistant world that you can take over and control? Or is it one of those fake mmos where everytime you want to take over something or pvp you get put into an instance.  I'd rather not play a monthly fee for counter strike.


    It's not like WoW.. where there  are huge instanceless zones.


    Rather, you 'instance' into certain maps (where each map will make up a part of a zone) and you fight within those instanced matches. The more you win, the more you take over maps.


    At least, this is how it looks like it'll be. The unreal 3 engine can't handle sprawling landscapes like you see in traditional MMOs.

  • PTEDPTED Member Posts: 464

    Although the way they're doing it is acceptable, an uber'd up Face of Mankind would have been better.

  • Jack_FrostJack_Frost Member Posts: 19

    Wait till they release more info about their Hex-Map idea.

    Its not a real substitute for a open / persistent world...but w/e. You can still take over 'land mass' and such...but not really...its hard to explain without getting banned from these forums.

    This game will be very niche, and will not be for everyone...but for the target audience it will be a blast.



    Pwning for a Cure, participant *cough* >_>

  • SnakeFaceSnakeFace Member Posts: 31

    Yeah it will have instanced maps controlled and developed persistantly, and  definately is an MMO.

    As far as i know, thats all i can say.

  • VoidriderVoidrider Member Posts: 22

    Take Tabula Rasa, change the setting, remove aliens, remove most traditional MMORPG aspects, add more PvP aspects.

  • AshrikAshrik Member Posts: 381

    It seems to be an MMO on a smaller scale. It reminds me of how Guild Wars was described to me.

    The mass of players exist in a "lobby" of sorts, and then rival agencies pair off to go fight over grids on the map.

  • SnakeFaceSnakeFace Member Posts: 31

    Hmm. Kinda. It is both smaller and larger at the same time. On one hand, you dont have the large (to me, seemingly pointless) areas to explore. But on the other hand, there is  MASSIVE battlefield, divided into several regions under player control and management.

    So if you are a big explorer and like to look at the pretty tree and mountain in  game instead of actually doing something, then GA probably won't be for you.

  • JupstoJupsto Member UncommonPosts: 2,075

     depends if you think guildwars is an mmorpg. if guildwars is an morpg (no massive), then GA is a morpgfps.

    My blog: image

  • Timberwolf0Timberwolf0 Member Posts: 424

    Hope this "hex map" turns out well. Instanced land that goes away after the fight isn't a very compelling reason to fight.

  • vondemonvondemon Member Posts: 9

    I think a player's satisfaction will be determined almost exclusively by expectation.  If you ever played Planetside or even WWII Online (did they change the name?), you'll know some of the major downfalls of having a large battlefield.  The biggest of which is spending 10 minutes traveling to a fight only to die in a few seconds.  Or never finding the fight.  There was stuff to like about both those games but the large, never ending, empty landscape wasn't one of them.  At least not for me.

    I think that if people hope to have an FPS (like CS, TF2, Tribes, etc) with persistent characters that level up and Matches (Or Instances, Missions or whatever you want to call them), that have an impact beyond the final score, rewards that can be earned over many fights and a combined arms tactical element then this game may be for you.

    If however you want Warhammer, EQ and WoW all rolled into one game with guns, you may want to wait for a free trial before putting your coin on the counter.

    I for one am looking forward to a new take on an MMO game design.  The current paradigm is far too restrictive and stagnant.  It seems to me that if we allow the deffinition of what classifies as an MMO to become broader, we as gamers can only bennifit from the potential innovation.


  • AryasAryas Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 337

    To quote myself on this...

    "When I heard this game was going to be instanced I was over the moon! The graphics, setting and FPS-type action already had me drooling, but to find out you'd be able to log on and just 'get on with it' sold me.

    Best PvP game I'm played to date: CoD4. Why? Because everyone gets straight into the thick of it without riding around on some poxy horse for 20 minutes looking for some action, only to stumble on a whole gang of enemies who then just proceed to flatten you like a bug.

    I've been playing WAR and everytime I visit the WAR forums people are just moaning about how lame open RvR is and how everyone just plays scenarios. I can't understand why they just don't ditch open RvR completely and just create bigger, better scenarios. ORvR just doesn't work - most people don't want to hang about waiting for stuff to kill. I'm not the world's most experienced gamer but I've never played a game the offering free-roaming PvP that's actually worked. Maybe Darfkfall will change that, but I highly doubt it. If it's a hit, it won't be the free-for-all PvP that makes it.

    PvP is 80% players, 20% game so unless you get bums-on-seats (people in the PvP area), nothing will happen. Zoning or big instances will MAKE this game, not break it. People need to get over the whole instance thing; too many folk are hung up on it as if there's no way it could ever possibly be a good thing."

    Lots of people, playing together, in zones, online... sounds like an MMO to me!

    Otherwise the acronym would need to explicitly exclude zoning/instances, i.e. MMOUZRPG (Massively Mulit-Player Online Un-Zoned Role Playing Game).


    Playing: Ableton Live 8
    ~ ragequitcancelsubdeletegamesmashcomputerkillself ~

  • DevilXaphanDevilXaphan Member UncommonPosts: 1,144

    To put is simply, Global Agenda does not support mass zerg warfare like most mmo's do. The highest concentration of people will be 60v60 alliance which then is split into 12v12 battles so teams will be reuired to do battle and some skill and well placed turrets and shields will be crucial in key areas.

    Think of this game as like Tribes done in an urban enviroment, you need to build key structures to upgrade technology and open pve quests that lead to more advance tech, that while also trying to defend held territory from other agencies.

    Hopefully this will be a innovative game that changes mmo's future outlooks from what is already a rehash of past mmo's so far.


    Oh and GW is not an mmo it is a CORPG as stated in it's F.A.Q.

  • ZyllosZyllos Member UncommonPosts: 537

    I love the compairson to Tribes but did it not have some servers where their was like 30 vs 30 fights on a single map?

    MMOs Played: I can no longer list them all in the 500 character limit.

Sign In or Register to comment.