Global Agenda a new mmofps - Page 2

MrJengles · 07-31-2009, 05:01 PM

A slight bump

This game has moved from Alpha, to Beta testing. I was lucky enough to be accepted to the Beta, and the first "extended weekend" of testing is over. However, participants are being accepted in waves and it's a few weeks before the next session, so there's pleanty of time to try it out still.

So just to remind people about this game, and to remind them that if they apply on the Global Agenda website, they should also post here for a TG refferal code, and I will PM it to them.

Oh, and I can't say anything about the game myself until the beta is over and all that, unfortunately

Trailers:

No Elves Teaser - has given the game some hype and interest.

Global Agenda Trailer

Producer Interview + Gameplay

**Xmaster** · 07-31-2009, 07:36 PM

Well...having no storyline kills it for me. But will try it out for sure if there's a trial.

MrJengles · 07-31-2009, 08:06 PM

The main attraction is the online part, FPS style shooting and MMO style leveling and unlocks...a storyline is the last thing they'd bother ironing out.

**MrTango** · 07-31-2009, 11:11 PM

game looks sweet! I wish I could hop into the beta- but new job and new kid...
I'll be following this closely!

fuzzhead · 08-01-2009, 11:22 AM

Read about the game for about 20 min, not interested.

Heavily using instances, my guess is the maximum PvP "missions" (ie: servers) will be max 64 players or less, which is main reason I would think most would be interested in an mmofps, to participate in massive battles, not for collecting some futuristic gear?

And its not really an mmofps since most of the game is played in 3rd person and only some select sniper rifles have a zoomed in sniper scope 1st person view.

Graphics look below current level standards, and the art design looks uninspiring and "meh" from what I seen.

With no compelling storyline, its solely relying on the "action" based gameplay to get and retain players, and for me I lean more towards realism than gamey, so I just dont think its a game for me but I might give it a try anyways just to see how many players really CAN fight each other.

Planetside was a good idea and so was WW2 online, but for some reason both games failed in the "fun" department for me for various reasons, and their sales was less than stellar, not sure if either those games are even still around but theyre the only other mmofps that I can think of.

I swear if anyone ever actually does make an interesting and accesible mmofps, set in modern day of ww2 like battlefield or call of duty but with massive 500 player battles, that game will blow away all previous sales records, GTA4 and WOW will look like steam mini games when compared with this game.

The market is there, but sadly I dont think our computer and especially network infrastructure is ready for such an amazing game...

MrJengles · 08-01-2009, 12:29 PM

Random quote by HiRez being interviewed on the MMO subject:

Quote:

-"Global Agenda has foregone the standard server structure of most MMOs and instead has split players up based on which major geographic region they come from. Players within an area will work towards a single end-game. Can you shed some light on what that end game could be like? What will happen to Global Agenda when it comes? (Server reset, expansion, etc)."

-"Sure thing. We’re super excited about Global Agenda’s Campaign play which, as you say, allows all players within a major geographic region, for example all North American players, to compete in the same integrated end-game involving territory and resource control.

The typical MMO server convention requires you to ‘pick a server’ upon character creation which then limits the population you can play with from that point on. For Global Agenda we did not want a server-choice to get in the way of player-driven politics and strategy on a massive scale. So, our shard is designed to support tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of players interacting within the same game universe via systems like chat, teaming/ looking-for group, matchmaking, economy/auction house, and agency management. It is truly a massive world within which players create their own agencies, form alliances, and compete to acquire resources and capture territory in alliance vs. alliance campaigns.

When a player alliance successfully claims an entire zone, anticipated to take approximately 45 days, that group will be rewarded with prestige items, public display of their alliance banner, and permanent notation within the lore of the world; so they are truly making history! The player conflict then moves to a new zone available for conquest."

Another on the campaign:

Quote:

We expect most players will eventually participate in our Campaign mode which allows player groups to acquire territory within the world, construct facilities, defenses, and bases on that territory, produce resources, and engage in the player-driven drama to dominate a region.

The PvP fights themselves are limited down to around 10 Vs 10, but there can be many, many battles, with different people in, fighting for the same team, or agency. That number of people each match is what they found to be most fun, and at the speed it goes I'm sure it would've ruined it having any more.

The game graphics are usually the first thing that get complimented, nothing staggering or any new technology, but it looks cool to me. Most games based on the Unreal Engine 3 do look quite cool, and play smoothly. Maybe just not your cup of tea lol.

As for the storyline, this is the background if anyone wants to read:

Quote:

Global Agenda is [...] set in Earth’s near future, a spy-fi world of advanced technology and player-driven conflict. In the wake of severe global disaster, the political face of 22nd century earth has changed. Player created factions scheme against each other for power while simultaneously opposing a totalitarian world government bent on domination. Traditional full-scale wars a thing of the past, factions must rely on covert agencies, teams of elite special operatives able to seize and defend key facilities. The future of humanity is their battleground, where knowledge is power, technology is a race, and everyone has an agenda.

**PaintScratcher** · 08-01-2009, 12:38 PM

Sounds interesting, I'll be keeping an eye on it. Still not convinced but it has some interesting features.

Anymore info you collect through the beta would be good to know, although clearly you can't say too much

fuzzhead · 08-01-2009, 12:42 PM

Just seems kinda wrong to label this game a MASSIVE multiplayer online fps when its "10v10" and in 3rd person.

We were playing more than that back with quake2 mods, halflife1 mods, OFP and bf1942.

Now to say 10v10 is massive is a bit of a slap in face imo

/rant on
If was 100v100 it would be whole diff story, but honestly back in 1996-7 when I was just started really getting into multiplayer online games and their developement, I thought by the way things were progressing, by the time we hit 2010 we would have 250v250 huge battles, I never thought the graphics would be like what they are but instead thought the scale of battles would expand as thats whats really enjoyable. Well here we are nearly at 2010, graphics have gotten near photo realistic proportions but still we are stuck at the magic limit of "64" players in most games (stable) and it looks like most new games are coming with FEWER players and the developers telling us "Trust us, this is so much more fun". That answer is totally BS... am I not the only one who thinks the larger the size of the battle, the more awesome and fun it would be?!? Devs telling fans "Oh this is the amount we found most fun", I want to know what the hell they were smoking... well its more likely that is the easiest answer to give players because making many players in one instance is extremely challenging, yet they want to pretend that they actually TOOK ON that challenge by advertising this game as MASSIVE.
/rant off

anyways sorry on my pissy attitude hehe thank you MrJengles for the info on the game, at least these guys are trying something a bit diff.

MrJengles · 08-01-2009, 12:55 PM

Well the battles themselves may be small, but everytime you leave a match you go into an environment in which you can interact with everyone on the server...you just can't shoot them.

Also, that was just PvP, there's also PvE which can be by yourself, or with a team of players, in which you fight robots. That part is undergoing changes and I've only seen a very small part of it so far, so I've no idea how many robots you could end up fighting.

As for technology...well I think it must be a limitation on computing power being unable to handle more than 64 people with such high graphics. Or maybe the internet...or both.

fuzzhead · 08-01-2009, 03:36 PM

Definitely the internet.

ArmA2 can easily handle 500 vs 500 AI battles if you have a high end PC. But it struggles to even get 60 players stable on an open server where players can come and go.

**draeh** · 08-01-2009, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fuzzhead

Definitely the internet.

Absolutely.

Can you say IO bottleneck?

MrJengles · 11-09-2009, 10:23 PM

I havn't updated this in a while so I am now.

Pricing Details

The main points are:

- The game will cost $49.99
- You get access to most things for that, including Player vs Player, and Player vs Environment (bots) battles.
- All 30 levels and all weapons.

- Subscription will cost $12.99 per month, $11.49/mo for 3 months, $9.99/mo for 6 months
- This gains you access to the Agency vs Agency focus of the game, in which you can take and control territory and build defenses.
- New content

Full list here.

Alliance vs Alliance

More information on AvA here. Battles are all of 8 to 12 people per side, however, during AvA Base Raids six independant battles can be linked in real time.

Quote:

Technically speaking, there are six simultaneous Strike Force vs. Strike Force encounters ongoing. However, each has interdependent goals. These are things you’d expect. For example, if one Strike Force is out to take down a generator and they succeed, it might power down the automatic base weapons in the other five instances.

Collection of Videos

Global Agenda summed up - http://www.gametrailers.com/video/pa...l-agenda/56271

Montages by other people due to a contest:

General gameplay music video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc9HRfpCURQ&fmt=18

Funny comparison to TF2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvA2KrN7F8o&fmt=18

Comedic gameplay video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1jG4kzJGcA&fmt=18

Another gameplay music video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO8CXH225g0&fmt=18

Further videos:

Gametrailers.com list - http://www.gametrailers.com/game/glo...t=date#Content

Sixteen minute interview (+ tour and some gameplay) by BarnGamerz - http://barngamerz.com/global-agenda-...and-interview/

Twelve minutes of gameplay and interview by TenTonHammer - http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/74310

Closed Beta

Has finished CBT-1C, next will be CBT-2 and finally testing the AvA. More people are accepted into the Beta for each phase, and more people will be needed for the AvA anyway. If any TG still want to signup, please visit this thread for a refferal code and the link.