I'm in the same situation as the original poster except I quit WoW about 9 months ago. Both of these games look cool, and i'm really hoping I can get into both open betas. But from what i've seen STO seems more like a mmo, lots of exploring etc. Global Agenda seems more like an fps, I don't really see how it's a mmo even the subscription being optional makes it kinda shady. 

I haven't tried either game but i've read a lot, i'll probably be buying the pre-order for STO. On the other hand if I don't get into open beta for GA I don't think i'll play to be honest. I've been burned by a couple fps style mmo's in the past and I won't be doing it again. 

Regardless both games in my mind look very different from the typical fantasy mmo genre that i'm pretty sick of by now. 

Honestly dude, I think you're looking at two very different games. If you want to play FPS style gameplay, get GA. If you want RPG style gameplay, get STO. Both are good games.

To go in depth some more:

GA is good, but personally I don't know how much of a "grab" it will have on your attention. It's definately fun, and it's worth playing if you don't have another current favourite shooter at the moment. Essentially you're getting Team Fortress 2 gameplay, except in a different setting. The thing though, is TF2 is readily available, pretty polished, and doesn't require a monthly fee. Now GA doesn't necessarily require one either, but you're going to be missing out on some of the potential experiences you might want if you aren't subscribed. Is it fun? Sure. Is it monthly fee fun? I don't know really. I have a hard time saying yes to that, and I do play quite a lot of shooters. I highly recommend doing a trial before you buy somehow. Last I played it was rather unbalanced and there were too many of those moments where you throw up your hands and shout "That's bullshit!", at least for me anyways. I think it can be very frustrating because they've essentially taken the 8 or whatever classes from TF2 and condensed them down into 4 classes. You've got the Recon (Sniper/Scout/Spy all rolled into one), the Medic, the Engineer, and the Soldier (HW Guy/Soldier). Essentially this gives the Recon quite a lot of bullshit skills like sniper rifles, stealth, speed, disables, etc, whereas the engineer and medic and soldier are all pretty straightforward comparatively. Basically my personal stance is I'm not going to buy the game, unless my friends end up buying it and want to play, at which point I'll cave just to play with them. Until then, I'm more than fine enough to play Team Fortress 2 and just wait until Bad Company 2 or Dust 514 for my next shooter. Hope this helps.

STO is definately fun as well, but as you must know from MMOs, not everyone can like every game. I would say try and do a trial of this too. There's certainly a lot of people who are bashing the game pretty hard, but I don't think they're giving it a fair shake, or holding up impossible ideals to it. Everyone who plays the game at least says it's fun (as evidenced by Dana in this sites preview), even if it is a bit rough around the edges. I think if you're a Trek fan you'll enjoy this game, and it will give you the rpg style gameplay you may be craving now that you're bored with wow. Remember that having fun is the point of these games, not striving for some perfect experience as you imagine it in your mind (because everyone will imagine it differently).  All of the complaints people seem to have about STO essentially come down to one idea, which is that there needs to be more stuff added on to the game. I think in quite short order Cryptic will be able to add the stuff that's missing, and likely you won't really encounter the gaps until the point when they're filled in, so you may not notice at all. It just needs some lovin and attention and I feel it'll probably be the best Star Trek game we could have hoped for.

For these reasons, I'll be giving STO a go, and passing on Global Agenda. I hope these personal opinions help you make your decision. (Also please try to ignore the trolls that I"m sure will come in to attack my personal opinions)

Good luck with whichever game you do decide to choose.

Originally posted by decoy26517

 

---

Originally posted by Hardanger

---

Originally posted by decoy26517

 

Global Agenda > STO.

---

 

 
This isn't helpful at all. 
 
 

---

 

To break down my statement and give more details as to why:

Global agenda - twitch based combat.
Global Agenda - better combat system, it plays like a FPS not a button masher like CO (Away missions in STO) or a point and click system like Eve (Space combat in STO).
Global Agenda - faster paced gameplay, STO is very slow like Eve.
Global Agenda - More PvP options.
Global Agenda - Best subscription options I've seen in a game so far.
Global Agenda - Better PvP options/gameplay.
Global Agenda - Better crafting system.
Global Agenda - better graphics and a more personalized feeling toward your character.

Star Trek Online - Hot green women.

 

You, sir, win.  Global Agenda it is.

Play for Global Agenda?  Its a fps lobby game, so why not just play Call of Duty?

---

Originally posted by Cik_Asalin
Play for Global Agenda?  Its a fps lobby game, so why not just play Call of Duty?

---

And someone like you would think STO is any different? lol

Originally posted by Hardanger

I'm bored of WoW (shocking, huh?), and am going to probably get one of them.  Which one do you think is worth a shot, and why (obviously)?

Tbh I have no idea which one would be worth a shot, for that I need to have played or tested both to give you a suggestion.

From the outside I would be more intrested in Star Trek, but then Cryptic has never been a company to satisfied my MMORPG needs and have serious doubts if they are capable to pull of a Star Trek MMORPG seeing their game experiance. I love Superheroes but didn't feel like one in their City of heroes nor in Champions, as they felt like normal online games with hugh costumisation options and just to much geared towards combat where to me MMORPG should be so much more then that.

Also which one might be worth it to you to suggest would be very difficult to tell you since you didn't say anything about your likes or dislikes with games in this genre. Other then you grew bored of WoW, which stil doesn't say much about your likes/dislikes.

Originally posted by Hardanger

I'm bored of WoW (shocking, huh?), and am going to probably get one of them.  Which one do you think is worth a shot, and why (obviously)?

Global agenda.
 

STO will most likely be a big disappointment,  the IP is the hardest to convert into a MMO there is. Cryptic have only experience with 2 super hero MMOs that are ok but not great.

SOE made EQ and EQ2, they are not bad even though they are not perfect. The game do seems to have some interesting features and there are few modern MMOs today, compared to quite a few Sci-fi MMOs.

Get Eve instead if you want Sci-fi.

Of course could Cryptic surprise us all and make a miracle but I think the chances of that is slim, I think their hit game will be their upcoming Forgotten realms MMO instead, it is almost impossible to mess up a MMO in that world.

Global agenda could suck or be fun, that is anybodies guess, so thereofr I would say the chances are in it's favor.

Global Agenda

Why? Star Trek Online is being backed by Atari... Do you like Champions Online? DDO? Or the most unforgivable sin, Temple of Elemental Evil? Trying to play that crashfest bugfilled game was worse than dryhumping a cheese grater.

So long story short, Atari will destroy Star Trek.

I have played both STO and GA.

I only played STO for about 30 minutes before I couldn't play it anymore. It was that bad. I was a fan of CoH/CoV (not a HUGE fan, but I played for quite a while). STO is CoH in space, with the same repetitive missions, with a very "inside the box" feel. Nothing is really revolutionary, or even evolutionary, about STO. It has customization options, but the game... just feels so bland.

GA on the other hand has the exact opposite problems from STO. It's core concept feels very new and refreshing, and it's constantly engaging.. However it is not polished, feels VERY rough around the edges, and has a lot of stupid issues that can be very frustrating (but will be easily fixed, once they get around to it).  But it's a lot faster, and a lot more engaging. At it's core, it's the better game, we'll just have to see how well they can polish off the rough edges!

My recommendation is to instead watch videos of puppies playing.  

However, that is just my personal opinion based on never playing either game and having a very limited knowledge of them.

Both suck but got in trouble for breaking the NDA earlier so can't say anything.

 I've been in the STO closed beta, and i can tell you i loved the game so far. The greatest problem you can have with STO is if you don't like Cryptic's shardless system (it's how they call it, i think)  Cryptic games aren't massive in the same concept and dimension as a game like WOW, but they're massive in their own way, they're a little more immersive (you don't fell like just one more in the crowd), and IMHO, STO is plain fun. 

So,  in other words, if you played CO, and like their shardless one server only system, rest assured, you will like STO and will have plain fun.

About GA i don't care, i hate fps games.

Originally posted by Hardanger

I'm bored of WoW (shocking, huh?), and am going to probably get one of them.  Which one do you think is worth a shot, and why (obviously)?

I bet you'll end up playing both, and within 3 months you'll be back in WoW again.

 I'm a CoH and CO player. Being based in Australia I used to get a bit bored of CoH due to the lack of people online, and I enjoy CO which suits me much better because of the fast pace at which things progress. Anyway, I have been playing the STO Closed Beta and am undecided about it. It is a very different game to CO and runs much slower with more of a role play / career feel to it. With CO I get the urge to create heaps of alts but with STO I was happy with just the one. The space combat is fun and the ground missions are varied (variety in missions is something that I think Cryptic have done well, but my experience is limited to only CoH, CO and STO). There are other aspects to the game which I thought were very good. I didn't really get that boxed in feeling people are talking about. I know that I didn't get very far in the game and was told that it gets more fun the further you go.

BUT a couple of times with STO I felt bored and I think it's because I prefer something a bit faster paced.

I'm an MMO noob so I haven't even heard of Global Agenda.

 Idr if I posted here, so apologies if I did already, but my vote is clearly on Global Agenda. Not sure if you want more than that or not. Will post more if you want.

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 Idr if I posted here, so apologies if I did already, but my vote is clearly on Global Agenda. Not sure if you want more than that or not. Will post more if you want.

reasons as to why would be nice

Global Agenda, though it wont replace your MMO.

Global Agenda if you like FPS and territorial PvP

STO if you like spaceships and PvE with instanced PvP scenarios without much purpose or meaning. Also I believe STO will have a RMT. Not sure about Global Agenda. Think it is a fremium game?

Originally posted by Hardanger

Originally posted by johnmatthais

 Idr if I posted here, so apologies if I did already, but my vote is clearly on Global Agenda. Not sure if you want more than that or not. Will post more if you want. 

reasons as to why would be nice

Reasons to play Global Agenda:

- Great graphics

- Player-skill-based gameplay

- No headshots

- You have to lead your target

- PvE provides a real challenge

- Bosses are insanely fun

- A few PvP modes are new and exciting, the rest are simply really well done

- Conquest Mode features persistent vying for territory and resources, by player-made and run Agencies, rather than factions.

Reasons not to play Star Trek Online:

- No challenge. You will hardly ever be faced with death.

- Healing can be done at a range, making it more of a holy trinity game and not staying true to the IP

- Ships don't need replaced when you do die.

- You can only play a captain. No other positions can be played. This completely screws over the chance of player made crews.

- I'm pretty sure you can't visit friends' ships.

Originally posted by Mardy

Originally posted by Hardanger

I'm bored of WoW (shocking, huh?), and am going to probably get one of them.  Which one do you think is worth a shot, and why (obviously)?

 

I bet you'll end up playing both, and within 3 months you'll be back in WoW again.

/thread