AvA is 16vs 16, am i not right?

Originally posted by vladakov

 AvA is 16vs 16, am i not right?

AvA is 12v12

Base Raids are 60v60 (Six teams of Ten in seperate, yet connected instances)

Thats a little misleading zukan.  AvA is both really.  a single hex (mine, lab, or factory) is max 12 v 12.  a base consists of 6 interconnected instances, each allowing 16-24 players (teams of 8-12) up to a maximum of 120 total (60v60).

I have to say its not an mmo. It really does lack a persistant world. However, its very close and looks good enough to feel like an mmo and thats all i care about.

Originally posted by Jetrpg

I have to say its not an mmo. It really does lack a persistant world. However, its very close and looks good enough to feel like an mmo and thats all i care about.

In this case there are so many mmo's that don't count, a lot of games operate off a central hub, where u can travel to areas for missions etc. guildwars to some extent is one of these with the hub cities used to gather parties and use auction houses vendors etc. this is no different o GA.

It is an MMO, because its  a massive multiplayer online game, that has an established community as well as class placed gameplay. its just a different format that is a breath of fresh air. I no longer get excited at having to travel for 5 minutes to get to a pack of birds that i could not care less about to kill. The only thing removed is the feeling of exploration but this would not be very inkeeping with the setting. why would we be traveling around by foot discovering new environments in the distant future. also the law specifies that much of the earth is now inhospitable so traveling to missions/facilities/pvp via a dropship is more than appropriate.

the other thing that establishes this as an mmo is how much hi rez have cared for the community and how well the game has been communicated to its dedicated followers. this is hands down one massive factor in GA that sets it apart from so many other mmo's.

Originally posted by mThree3

 

The 'ifs' on the Non-MMO part. Combat is restricted to 12vs12 (as of right now). We can compare that to battlegrounds.

Lack of explorable world.

Count me in! Totally canceling my CrimeCraft and Fury accounts for this.

MMO~RPG/T(PS)- so what?

People just need a reason to keep on complaining, that's how the average chubby user who never leaves his seat at home lives on...personally I'm glad GA is close to release(hopefully no delays) during this last 2 years we saw how many games come out? And actually how many of them were worth than 1-2 months of play? All mmorpgs live under the shadow of wow and are either a imperfect copy or a failed attempt at copying...and when they actually do want to release something different ie(Aion) it ended on failure aswell...so what if it isn't exactly a mmo(rpg)? The purpose all mmo's strive on are to try not being boring and to keep the clients entertained...I for one am fed up with trying betas and buying the so called mmorpgs only to have them all fail on me, at least GA, when all else should fail in it, there will be pvp to keep me entertained and thats not your average farm fest like the wow pvp

Ask yourself a few questions:

• Would you enjoy a game thats a cross between tf2 and tribes?
• Do you enjoy strict class and heavy teamplay based fps games?
• Would you play an fps/tps game where you have lots of customisation of your character, both cosmetic and performance wise?(and not just switching weapons)
• Would you enjoy an tps game with co-op pve play?
• Do you enjoy gathering and crafting your own items?

If yes to the above, youll like GA.

• Do you like games with an open explorable world?
• Do you prefer traditional point and click MMO combat?
• Do you dislike tps games like Savage 2 which also rely on a lot of hotkeys/weapon switching?
• Do you prefer to not rely on other players in pvp and pve and are more of a solo player?

If yes to the above, then you wont like GA.

I hope there will be a ladder world / continental comme guild wars for the agencies. Otherwise the game is not really interesting in the long term.

I haven't played this game yet,but I'm trying to gather info through posts.So correct me if im wrong here..

What I'm gathering is that this game is basically a big open lobby housing your characters where they can craft and do whatever.In order to see combat you queue up for 12vs12 man matches?

If that's the case I dunno if I'd pay a monthly fee for that,let alone 50$ when I can get the same fill for 20$ and no monthly fee in TF2.

Lets take Planetside for example - you have huge massive maps with plenty of bases to fight over.Yes,some are making the argument that "battles only happen in certain areas anyways,so who needs the rest of the map?"...the difference here is with that much space you can house massive battles between hundreds of people all at once.With vehicles roaming all over the place causing havoc,aircraft firing missile's and dropping bombs overhead,artillery raining death from literally miles away .Not too mention whats going on INSIDE the base and the surrounding areas all at once.. That,to me, is what an MMOFPS is all about...tons of people,massive battles...chaos.NOT 12vs12 TF2/UT type instanced maps..

if GA was anything LIKE PS was,Id fork over the money in a heartbeat,but right now im skeptical.

Originally posted by tank017

I haven't played this game yet,but I'm trying to gather info through posts.So correct me if im wrong here..

What I'm gathering is that this game is basically a big open lobby housing your characters where they can craft and do whatever.In order to see combat you queue up for 12vs12 man matches?

If that's the case I dunno if I'd pay a monthly fee for that,let alone 50$ when I can get the same fill for 20$ and no monthly fee in TF2.

Lets take Planetside for example - you have huge massive maps with plenty of bases to fight over.Yes,some are making the argument that "battles only happen in certain areas anyways,so who needs the rest of the map?"...the difference here is with that much space you can house massive battles between hundreds of people all at once.With vehicles roaming all over the place causing havoc,aircraft firing missile's and dropping bombs overhead,artillery raining death from literally miles away .Not too mention whats going on INSIDE the base and the surrounding areas all at once.. That,to me, is what an MMOFPS is all about...tons of people,massive battles...chaos.NOT 12vs12 TF2/UT type instanced maps..

 

if GA was anything LIKE PS was,Id fork over the money in a heartbeat,but right now im skeptical.

If you want to play it as say TF2 you DONT need to pay a monthly Sub.

I agree a Planet side 2 would be Nice.

But this is 12 Vs 12 ect Because you cant be Zerged. Some times thats Fun. Most the time its not.

It kinda bothers me that some mmo's get hyped like crazy despite being mostly a solo experience (I'm looking at you swtor). Yet Global Agenda which is almost pure multiplayer and it has to deal with this crap.

And as for the planetside comparisons just ask yourself, does any game NEED massive battles to be worth paying for?

Originally posted by Mechanism

It kinda bothers me that some mmo's get hyped like crazy despite being mostly a solo experience (I'm looking at you swtor). Yet Global Agenda which is almost pure multiplayer and it has to deal with this crap.

And as for the planetside comparisons just ask yourself, does any game NEED massive battles to be worth paying for?

No game NEEDS anything from any other game.

If Planetside 2 came out Tommorow Id buy it AND Global Agends. There is plenty of room for Both types of game.

Do I like Massive battles? Hell yes.

Do I like Fair, smaller scale battles? Hell yes.

Global Agenda is the latter (Yeah I know im preaching to the quior with you ;p)

Only ones makeing the claim its anything like planetside are Illinformed gamers.

Originally posted by GameRev

 

 

 

No but the game has to be massive in itself... I mean is BF2 a MMOFPS? Compared to what these companies trying to charge a subcription fee for today, i'd say it tops the ranks as one. Wow imagine if BF2 was a monthly fee... How epic it would would have been and still would be today....

Sorry for those of you that have their heart set on this title doing something fresh.... Good game or not, its not going to justify a monthly fee

i agree

add a virtual world/lobby with some tasks to do (crimecraft is the same) and call it something its really not by masking it with some random stuff

Originally posted by GameRev

 

 

 

No but the game has to be massive in itself... I mean is BF2 a MMOFPS? Compared to what these companies trying to charge a subcription fee for today, i'd say it tops the ranks as one. Wow imagine if BF2 was a monthly fee... How epic it would would have been and still would be today....

Sorry for those of you that have their heart set on this title doing something fresh.... Good game or not, its not going to justify a monthly fee

So im assuming that you have played that game to be able to justify that its not worth a monthly fee? GA is not BF2 really the only similarities are that they are Shooters. I wasnt aware that BF2 had land control and research. I didnt know that you could craft in it either. Hell does it even have a HUD where you can interact with other players? Can you change your gear? Hell can you even make your own character so you dont just look like everyone else? GA is worth a monthly fee in my eyes and i will be paying it upon release.

GA is the only quality MMO coming out in 2010. it has all the elements that jaded gamers are looking for, and most MMO'ers are now jaded. let me give you a quick rundown:

- Aion - fail

- CO - fail

- CoX - rip (well, almost)

- TR - rip

- EQ2 - fail

- LOTRO - not an mmo; it's a multiplayer RPG PVE game; still fail for making the books look so bad

- WAR - fail

- AOC - fail

- WoW - outdated but still the best; people are looking for a way out; tired of the same crap and the grind and the leveling and the gearing up; (cata will be same crap different package; theyre not changing their formula enough)

-  EVE - great game but very few play it because it's a huge timesink, it's too difficult to get into, and death penalty is second to diablo II's hardcore mode. most people dont want a death penalty, especially if they dont have a lot of RL time.

Why all these fail: grind. grind, grind, grind. people dont want this any more. additionally, people dont want to fulfill requirements to start playing (im looking at you wow raids and EVE-pvp-that-takes-6-months-to-skill-for-so-you-can-make-any-difference). people want to get into their game immediately. consumers also want customization. and finally, pvp is THE thing that gives a game longevity on the market. PVE encounters are fun to do once or twice but become pointless without persistence and pvp.

other things coming out:

- STO - a big resounding meh.

- SWTOR - not an mmo (maybe you should take this discussion to their forums. they havent said a single word about pvp or massively coop encounters or persistency) - will succeed because it's a quality rpg and people love star wars.

- Huxley - put her back in, she's not done yet

- Earthrise - theyve been dragging their feet for years and will continue to do so until Q2 2010. by then, the sci fi genre will be saturated. gg.

- starcraft 2 - ??? stopped caring about this appx. 2 years ago.

i basically answered your question. GA is an MMO because it has massive appeal due to: pvp-centricity, customization, persistency, character progression, small scale battles (only these are successful in the long run; zerg-fests get old very quick; this is why WoW arenas is the most popular pvp hub currently).

plus i added a bunch of other stuff dissing other games for no apparent reason.

oh, and u know what i respect about the game developers the most? they know theyve got a good formula going. they know beta has been a success. but theyre not trying to hype the game. this will take the pressure off it and allow people to truly enjoy it.

First of all wtf is a MMO? A massively multiplayer online? lol.... And who cares if it is a MMORPG or not? There are tons of threads arguing over whether or not a game is a MMORPG or not. What does it matter? That's like arguing over a 75 degree day is too cold or too hot, what will it change if its called too hot or too cold? Nothing! Its still a 75 degree day.....What will it change if it is called a MMORPG or not???? IT DOESNT MATTER

Originally posted by neonwire 

Oh indeed. I'm certainly not looking forward to Global Agenda because it will have fabulous fishing trips, fancy player houses where you can choose the colour of your curtains or wonderful sightseeing trips where you can find a hidden pond with a unique animated frog jumping around in it and a hidden fisherman who will give you a quest to find his waterproof hat.

Nope I'm looking forward to Global Agenda because it will (hopefully) be like playing an enhanced version of Battlefield 2142 (a game I used to really enjoy) where......

1. All of my individual battles actually count towards changing the outcome of a larger war

4. I get to influence and change the game world which NO other P2P mmo can offer (at least not one of decent quality anyway)

8. I can use strategy in picking and choosing which zones I attack and defend

6. Player vs Player battles are balanced, fair, action packed and fun

3 Player vs Player battles dont degenerate into brainless zergs

7. I dont have to wade through boring PvE shit to reach the fun part of the game (Aion cough cough AoC cough cough)

2. I can use cover and dodge enemies while trying to hit them (ie FPS gameplay) rather than it being a "Battle of the Calculators"

5. I dont have to play through a linear story which TELLS me what to do and removes my ability to think for myself

In short I'm looking forward to Global Agenda because it is offering something new.......something which people keep saying they want. It will give me a type of mmo to play which is currently unavailable (no I dont want to play Darkfall thanks for the suggestion lol). Yet so many people just moan and complain because it doesnt offer exactly what all the other games have been offering for years (even though people keep posting about how bored they are with quests, grinding, dumb stories etc)......and therefore that must of course mean it isnt a "real mmo" (ie the same as the rest) and is only worthy of contempt from elitist mmo snobs. Hmph! I wont be playing THAT game! Thats not how an mmo should be made. Instances?! Hmph!

If I want to watch my avatar walk around a big open fantasy world then there are plenty of games which already do that. Besides we dont even know what Global Agenda PvE element will be like yet. Who knows maybe that pond with the frog and the fisherman can be found in it somewhere.

WELL SAID!!! 

Why are people getting caught up in the rpg part? There are mmos of all sorts, mmorpgs, mmofps, mmorts, mmotbs, mmoflight simulators, etc. The question is it an mmo or not, and i dont think it is. I dont think guild wars is really an mmo either. Both games just have a fancy lobby.
 

Just where is the line however? Thats more tricky, you could say a game that has every player existing in the same game world qualifies, but that would exclude just about everything but eve and fallen earth and a few other mmos.

So id say you should judge based on potential. If the place you are inhabiting is;

1. There even if you/nobody else is there (persistant)

and

2. Allows other players to enter it regardless of any relationship with you (not needing to intend on playing with you (grouping) or against you (a matched pvp situation), up to a maximum number based on hardware limitations.

then it counts

 to the OP. Guild Wars has a huge explorable world. It's just a private instance.