Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I don't get how some sites are rating this game 8 or higher...
brihtwulf
Member UncommonPosts: 975
I personally don't think this game is as good as many of the sites are stating it is. I don't know what exactly they're basing their comparisons on, or what motivation they have to rate it so high. But I definitely don't agree. I recently went in for their trial, and there are LOTS of better online shooters. And I don't see why you would want to pay a monthly fee for it. Personally, I agree more with the rating at MMO Sanctuary that gave it a 6/10 and said "While this MMORPG seems very unique in the beginning, the game quickly becomes repetitive in PvE and PvP." The article is here: http://www.mmosanctuary.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=90:global-agenda-review&catid=34:game-reviews&Itemid=56 They want you to pay a full box price AND a monthly subscription for this? Why do that when you can play Bad Company 2 or Modern Warfare 2 for no subscription?
Sounds shady to me, and giving it almost a 9/10 on a gaming site (IGN I think) sounds shady as well...
Comments
Well we Disagree.
I think a 8 is Spot on. Its a Great well ballanced game thats tons of fun. So im not sure why you dont like it.
And saying other games are better is silly. YOU enjoy other games More. That dosen't make them better.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
Well, I should qualify what I mean by "better". Primarily, it's my opinion. Second, I consider a game better when it has more content: appearances, maps, buildings, items, etc. And I felt like what was contained in Global Agenda was less than can be found in other similar games of the multiplayer shooter genre.
I would have to say from what I know about the trial, the trial does no justice to the game. First off you cap at level 15, 50 total levels, those levels up until level 30 give you more options on how to play, and what you can look like, you cannot group up with friends or play the AvA. Now I do however play BF2: BC more often than I play GA, but the 1.3 patch sounds great. One last note GA is B2P for the basic pve/pvp, sub for the rest.
Exocide
The motivation is to garner more ad money by not completely giving a horrible score. Doesnt happen all the time, but in more ad-heavy sites, you might have some'you gotta be kidding me'moments.
There thats the problem
Well yes, different gamers have different opinions. But I just feel that based on the one-sided nature of the game, that it focuses solely on online multiplayer PvP (because most people say the PvE isn't significant), it doesn't have the depth of content you get in some other games of the same genre. And many/most of the other FPS games with online play not only offer that component for free, but they often have an extensive single-play side of the game as well. So, you're paying the full box price, but you're getting both a single-play game, and the online multiplayer experience.
Global agenda expects you to pay a full box price, with no single-player, and a multiplayer experience not much different from its cousins like Modern Warfare 2 that have the same waiting-room type of PvP matchups, without the added cost of a subscription.
You missed the point, the game has the same pay method as games like MW2, it mearly adds on to the payment methods by adding a sub for new and added features, new AvA, more options to choose from and so on. Oh yes, and by patch 1.3 an open world to explore.
Exocide
While I'm having fun in the game so far, I don't think that you can call 2 zones (one with 50 max and the other with 30 max players per instance) "open world."
Do people read anymore? he is talking about next patch. No one said that currently the game gives you open world to explore. You are bringing same tired complaints from STO to GA. We all know GA is instanced but considering its designe, its hell of a fun game.
I think that you should take your own advice. The next patch will introduce two open zones. Those open zones will have a limit of 30 and 50 players. 30 for PvE, 50 for PvP. Once the limit is reached, a new instance of that zone is created.
It's a fun game, for sure. It could be so much better if it allowed for larger battles and allowing AvA-type gameplay to be available for those players not in agencies/guilds/whatever. Break up the players into two (or more) factions and let them fight over the zones.
I agree, this game is bearly a 7/10 in my book, although the gameplay mechanics are really good, I subtract points for the utter lack of content.
Go to your Emails and tell them you want 100 vs 100 battles in their Surveys. Ive filled it out 3 times now and never picked that one :P
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
They've only sent me one survey and I did write something about larger battles and opening up AvA type-game play to all players in the comments section. Don't ask me what I wrote, I don't remember, as I was kind of tipsy.
I completely agree with this post and the given link he posted. I personally gave the trial a try and came across the same problems. PvE in the game wasn't very exciting, and while PvP was very delighful for awhile, it quickly became repetitive and boring. That could have just been because of the trial version, but I'm going to go ahead and say the rest of the game wouldn't have gotten any better.
-Just my thoughts-
1.5 isn't 2
Man I don't know what you're talking about. Me and my buds all tried the trial and loved it right away. It's got elements in other games yeah but GA brings things to a whole new level, there's so much variety if you give it a chance. We all got to lvl 15 in two days and instantly bought the 4 pack to keep playing. I don't know why you're saying you to have to P2P, the only thing you have to pay monthly for is Conquest which is not even required, it's just an epic add on to this epic game. I don't know if I'm gonna do AvA right away, but I'm gonna keep playing, this game is simply amazing.
I'd just like to point out - for all trial players - you are restricted to 'low security' and 'medium security' missions while on the trial, the high and maximum security missions are a lot more interesting and actually challenging.
The end bosses require a fair bit of coordination and teamwork, some are usually very difficult in pug groups.
Just as an example- on a mission you might scale some rooftops, go through some elevator shafts, navigate through a hall of moving laser beams and dodge through crushing blocks and fire.
While not as exciting after your Xth time, it keeps it interesting IMO. Especially when someone sets off an alarm and you get ambushed while avoiding said traps.
You're also severely limited with equipment/skill points during the trial (capped at level 15), I find it a lot of fun changing up my equipment builds depending on the map and match type (PvP), at least as a robotics there's so many options for me.
Of course if you don't enjoy it then that's that, not everyone will.
"If all you can say is... "It's awful, it's not innovative, it's ugly, it's blah.." Then you're an unimaginative and unpolished excuse for human life" -eburn
Ok, there seem to be a couple things people are bringing up here:
1. They will be adding on open areas and larger battles.
If/when they do that, it might change my impressions about things. It's definitely lacking in persistent content, and content overall as far as MMO's are concerned.
2. The trial doesn't let you do "everything" in the game.
Ok, while that is true, the fundamental problems and lack of compelling gameplay aren't different. And having the excuse that the game is only good at the end or high levels is a poor arguement for the quality of the game. If it's not good for the first 10-20 levels, it's going to turn a lot of people away. One thing that WoW got right (even though I'm not really a big fan of that game) is that a fun and entertaining start-off can keep people interested right from the start.
Why have a trial if it's just going to leave people feeling like the game is boring and lacks depth?
I will say that if they come out with some large patches in the near future that add in open areas and other interesting things, it might be worth a second look.
This is exactly how I felt last night. I DLed the trial on steam. I spent a solid 5-6 hours in this game, up till 2am this morning.
I played up to level 10. I spent from 5-8 doing the PvE missions, once I hit 8 I spent from that time on in the PvP maps.
Out of the 20 or so PvE missions I ran on Noob and Medium modes, they were exactly the same, there was maybe 2-3 variations of the mission map, and they just repeat it over and over. Fighting the same end boss each time. The closest game I could compare this to, that I remember playing was Phantasy Star Universe style games. Matter of fact it is almost identical to PvE of PSU in almost every way. Run around a hub, go down to the surface, and run the same shit over and over for money and upgrades. Which gets incredibly boring really fast.
On the PvP side of things it looked up, I did about 7 PvP matches before bed, and the first 2-3 matches were great, people running around mass anarchy everywhere, was good fun. By match 7 though, it was the same maps repeating, the same tactics being used to win/lose the match, which was getting incredibly boring really fast.
So I can see the point made on the trial. From my perspective, if this is all that game had to offer, was a few cycled maps over and over for pve and pvp with the same tired way of playing it each time. It wasn't worth the 39.99 or whatever steam was asking, and definitly wasn't worth a sub fee.
Now if this had been built closer to Planetside, where you had a persistant battlefield always open and accessible regardless of level, and you fought to control the map. It would be worth it.
In it's current model, it is no different from PSU PVE wise and MW2 / BC2 PVP wise, and honestly, the games I just mentioned do this style of gaming much better, without the fee.
If they want to keep players, and if this game really does get better at higher levels, they either need to change the game mechanics and world, or open up that trial some. I was very disappointed. Sad part is I REALLY wanted to like this game.
qftw.
ive got the trial also and i could never understand why a companies would limit the trial version on the game, i mean for pve it got nothing, and i mean nothing, you have 1 dome, where you sit and wait for missions. the only reason to play this game is the pvp side of things, but wait you cant pvp 4v4 or ava, and for the mercs you can only start by the time your lvl 8.
so.... im forced to do GODDAMN boring pve missions in order to get to a lvl just to see how is the pvp. in my book thats a big FAIL in a game that was aimed at pvp from the start.
if im playing a pvp game, i want to pvp, not pve grind (and yes grind, you start at lvl 5 after the intro w/e missions are 500 xp mostly, to get from lvl 6 to 7 u need 4000xp so do the math,i have to do 8 pve missions just to get from 6 to 7.
that is shooting themselves in the leg imo.
maybe in half a year or so there will be more in to the game. for now its not worth my 40$ plus 12$ for the ava.
I 3930k -- Rampage IV Extreme -- G.skill RipjawsZ 32 GB -- Corsair Force Series 3 120gb -- G.skill Phoenix Pro 60gb -- WD 1 TB Black -- Corsair H 100 -- Thermaltake Level 10 Gt Snow Edition -- Corsair AX1200 -- Asus 560 Ti Sli -- Microsoft Sidewinder X4 -- Logitech G5 -- DELL UltraSharp 2007FP -- Samsung Syncmaster Sa700 -- Logitech Z2300 -- Logitech G35 -- Logitech G600 White -- coming soon : Dell U2711.
You're getting 500 exp most likely because your team dies too much, which is expected as you are a new player (challenge bonus is pretty key in getting exp and money from PvE missions). Depending on the class starting out could be easy to fairly hard. Though I agree that the trial isn't particularly good at highlighting "fun" aspects of the game, it is what it is; its a trial. At the moment AvA is free, and there are no content restrictions in not subscribing. However, it is subjective to change after the release of patch 1.3. From the looks of it, this patch will make or break the game; personally I think this game is on its way to fulfilling its potential, as they are adding many features to the game and in doing so it'll improve drastically.
Its definetly worth the initial one time fee; for the monthly fee however, most players are waiting on the next big patch to make the decision.
i hope your right, since being a gw player for 5 years i do love the buy to play model, it just show that you can make enough money with out taking 15$ a month from ppl and still make a great game.
i do hope that future updates will give some more into the game (1 hub is a problem for me, ive always liked the fact that you can go to 100 places in gw and each look different.) also if your doing low lvl pve you should be able to choose a script i think, or something, i hate the fact that i was doing the same mission 5-6 times in raw. and yeah i do also feel that trial might not give the best idea on the game.
I 3930k -- Rampage IV Extreme -- G.skill RipjawsZ 32 GB -- Corsair Force Series 3 120gb -- G.skill Phoenix Pro 60gb -- WD 1 TB Black -- Corsair H 100 -- Thermaltake Level 10 Gt Snow Edition -- Corsair AX1200 -- Asus 560 Ti Sli -- Microsoft Sidewinder X4 -- Logitech G5 -- DELL UltraSharp 2007FP -- Samsung Syncmaster Sa700 -- Logitech Z2300 -- Logitech G35 -- Logitech G600 White -- coming soon : Dell U2711.
^^ Yeah, I'm pretty much going to have to agree with that link and review. The game can be entertaining for awhile, but then the repetitiveness sets in...
1.5 isn't 2
^^ Yeah, I'm pretty much going to have to agree with that link and review. The game can be entertaining for awhile, but then the repetitiveness sets in...
Yeah but I think you are looking at it from the wrong perspective. For a one time purchase what you are saying warrants an "8".
Whereas if we were talking about Fallen Earth game combat mechanics but otherwise having only GA set of features then it woudl warrant something like a "6".
But Fallen Earth has the whole MMORPG part with its sub so I would move it to something like a "7" for the game itself (since its buggy and interface is not great).
Then if I had to rate GA in its current state with the sub I would give it like a "6" since you don't get the value for the sub, but the game it self is well balanced and smooth and has some features.
The "repetitiveness" is something that is mostly germaine to a subscription long term model. So for GA whether the game rates an "8" depends on the purchase you made.
Whereas Fallen Earth is sub only and is always a "7". And when you compare combat mechanics and interface GA is like 2 points better in the shooter area.
I'm still going to stick by my original response: Global Agenda is fun and entertaining - for awhile. The unique features (the jetpack, for example) are present, however, these unique features do not make up for the repetitiveness of the game and waiting around in a lobby for missions, all the while paying a monthly subscription.
In my opinion, giving the game a "6" is probably fair. Now, I would jump the score up a little if the monthly subscription went away, but until then... it's going to remain at a "6." Again, this is just my opinion and I'm well aware of it.
1.5 isn't 2
What subscription? As it is, there are NO subscription in GA. People should probably consider comparing this game to a $50 single player game which you complete in a weekend....people complain about repetitivenes, yet still get 40 hours+ out of this game. It's like complaining about repetitiveness after you completed Assassin's Creed for the 10th time.
I'd say, yes there's not exactly alot of options , it's pretty much a lobby and jumping into various maps.....no different from Counterstrike/TF2/etc and pretty much EVERY multiplayer game out there. Yet the actual combat and classes is very well rounded and balanced , the gamplay [which matters the most] is pretty solid too. So i'd give this game at least a 7 if you look at it as a standard $50 once-off multiplayer game.
I've paid $50 for far weaker games with far less content and far more repetition who got much better scores [for some reason] .