MMORPG.com's Carolyn Koh had the opportunity recently to sit down for a play test demo of Hi-Rez Studios' upcoming shooter MMO Global Agenda.

"Team Fortress on Speed!" was how my compatriot described his hands-on play session with Global Agenda. I do not do well with FPS games being that most of them give me vertigo. I had seen Global Agenda and played through the tutorial at E3 and thusly hauled a gamer bud with me to PAX to play the game while I took notes. This was his first look at Global Agenda and he was still talking about it through the next weekend when I saw him again at a house warming party.

Although I spent all of my in-game time at E3 indoors, most of the maps were outdoors although some had some in-door bits, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that it did NOT give me vertigo. Although the bits of maneuvering inside a building did make me a little queasy, it was nowhere as bad as games such as the aforementioned TF2. The game Fury came to mind when I first saw Global Agenda. It was a game that MMORPG.com had given a graphics award to one E3 which subsequently crashed and burned due to unnecessarily complicated leveling through complex fantasy skills and builds. Global Agenda has much of the same game play mechanic behind it; Match-made, team based PvP on several different maps. That is where the similarity ends as Global Agenda is a futuristic sci-fi game with PvE as well as PvP components to it. With much simpler weapon systems and skill trees as compared to Fury, it was easy to get into and did not lack depth in the classes I had seen thus far - Mechanic and now Assault.

Read the Hands-On Preview

 Team Fortress on speed eh? Guess ill have to closely monitor this game :)

I'm still not sure if it will survive very long on a pay-to-play basis.
It will be no game for soloers, have a proper guild/clan or you will perish.

Looks great, my only concern is that it will be too fast paced. TF2 is pretty fast paced as is and if this game is any faster , I am afraid it will cut out the major part for me.

The major part being slowing down for a second or two to strategize and plan before rushing in.

Team Fortress on speed doesn't justify an mmo subscription fee.  I'll pass.

I am so anxious about this game, I think it will do just fine and people will flock to this game to play after they realize how amazing it is going to be!!!

Not that it matters much, but its robotics, not mechanic.

>_>

I can't wait for a realease date on this one. I think they are the 1st one that will get the MMOFPS genre right. I hope they will...

Failing to see the MMO aspect of this. If a glorified server browser qualifies as "shared space" for MMORPG I move that all FPS since Quake be classified as MMOs since the server browser portion is "shared space". :/

What's the top end of GA's matches? 32 x 32 or less puts it in the same realm as TF2, BF2, BF2142, et al. Even 64 x 64 would pale compare to PS and WWIIOL. Massive means massive. 8x8 on a hands on preview. Meh.

It may sound not all that fun but when you play it trust me your hooked. Wise I could give some info but NDA is in place for now  but most core part are already out in interveiws.

For the record their site lists the normal match as being 10 x 10 with an occasional "raid" as 60 x 60. 10 x 10.... *sigh*

This game is incredibly good fun to play. The pace makes it extremely engaging and tiring, but in a good way. Time flies when you play it and it's just so enjoyable, even if you're not very good at it - like me!

I have 2 major concerns for the game, which may limit it's long-term appeal:

- Limited immersion and depth - may end-up feeling like a multiplayer coin-op with little character depth and basic, samey environments.

- The PvE may look weak next to the excellent PvP.

If these 2 elements can be addressed before release, this will be massive. If not, it'll play like a ramped up Battlefield Heroes meets CoD4 with a pricetag attached to it.

Aryas

Originally posted by Greyed

For the record their site lists the normal match as being 10 x 10 with an occasional "raid" as 60 x 60. 10 x 10.... *sigh*

Quality rather than quantity.

You're choice depends on your preference tbh.

But I'm the sort of guy that would rather date 1 model than date 50 trogs.

In the same way, I appreciate the approach used in GA.

Aryas

I do know that this closed beta coming up they will be working on the PvE stuff.

So far this almost closely rivals PlanetSide but without the vehicles.

Originally posted by Greyed

Failing to see the MMO aspect of this. If a glorified server browser qualifies as "shared space" for MMORPG I move that all FPS since Quake be classified as MMOs since the server browser portion is "shared space". :/

What's the top end of GA's matches? 32 x 32 or less puts it in the same realm as TF2, BF2, BF2142, et al. Even 64 x 64 would pale compare to PS and WWIIOL. Massive means massive. 8x8 on a hands on preview. Meh.

Each battle in the instanced hex affects the outcome of other hex battlegorunds adjacent to it.

From the begining they said they want to go with small tactical battles rather than zerg warfare.

As was said before quality over quanity makes for interesting battles.

I love this trailer for Global Agenda .. NO ELVES! .. you have to at least watch it...

www.youtube.com/watch

Anyways, the game reminds of my favorite game of all time and I am not kidding you. Tribes and Tribes 2 were big hits in late 90s and early 2000's. I miss those games now and then. I see elements of Tribes in this game.

However I hope GA is more that just a PvP game,  I really don't see me paying a monthly subscription to it, unless its got more in depth PvE elements as well.

Oh yeah.. Watch that video link.. truly classic, I am glad game companies are realizing there is people out there that are just sick to death with Magical Elves, Dwarfs and Orcs.

if and I mean IF they get the persistence to however the territory control works then I might get excited about this one.

I can live with the 'mini-game' 'small arena' concept (shooters work better 8v8 or 16v16 anyways) as long as there is something worth fighting for that matters! I have always wanted an MMO experience that did that, Planetside, flawed as it was, got close, I just await the day someone nails it and I am there!

Originally posted by CyanSword

if and I mean IF they get the persistence to however the territory control works then I might get excited about this one.

I can live with the 'mini-game' 'small arena' concept (shooters work better 8v8 or 16v16 anyways) as long as there is something worth fighting for that matters! I have always wanted an MMO experience that did that, Planetside, flawed as it was, got close, I just await the day someone nails it and I am there!

This is similar to how I feel as well.  If this game works like a "hex grid" with each cell being an area where the mini fights occur, that sounds good to me.  At least there is some over-all map where we can see our progress and where we need to concentrate fighting at.

This is the only game I'm actually looking forward to, in a sea of mediocre games that are going to be released.  Hope it delivers.

 I wish they had more then 3 skill  trees. What is with 3 and skilll trees? Wow, Warhammer ect always 3 per class.    I don't think Furies complexity ruined it seriously. The author makes us out as retarded. Fury was just not that fun and power ups on a map was silly. 

I was in the Closed Beta. All I can say is that is looking very good! And Im very anxious about the Campaign Map stuff, because is going to be the core of this game.

Im looking forward to this game but until more information comes out im not going to bother assuming anything or end up a "fan boi".  All we can hope is that this game will deliver.

I like how he said the game will be balanced around PvP, then they will match those pvp skills to the pve content.  This setup sounds like it may be worth the gamble.

---

Quality rather than quantity.

---

But that misses the entire point. We're on MMORPG.com, which stands for Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Now, not all MMOs are RPGs so that's often shortened to MMO or MMOG. Notice that the Massively Multiplayer is never the part that is dropped.

Exceptionally instanced, 10 v 10 battles is not "Massive". I love(d) CS, CS:S, TF2 & BF2142. I wouldn't call any of them "Massive".

It may be a great game. I'll probably give it a go. But I don't consider it an MMO when the base conflict is the very antithesis of massive! I'm all for great games coming out. I'm against calling them cats when they're clearly oranges.

---

Originally posted by tbox
 I wish they had more then 3 skill  trees. What is with 3 and skilll trees? Wow, Warhammer ect always 3 per class.    I don't think Furies complexity ruined it seriously. The author makes us out as retarded. Fury was just not that fun and power ups on a map was silly. 

---

DAOC had 3 skill trees as well.

So can I level without ever touching pve?  Is gear involved in the game, if so do I have to pve for it?