Global Agenda: RPS Agency

By Jim Rossignol on February 3rd, 2010 at 4:25 pm.


Okay, we’ve created an agency in Global Agenda, because we’d like a crack at that conquest game, which I should point out is open to all players, even non-subscribers, until March. The agency is simply called RPS, and anyone should be able to sign up. So come join us if you’re in-game. (I’m rather enjoying the PvP games playing as a mercenary, but not sure about the PvE stuff, the rewards aren’t high enough.)

__________________

« | »

, .

44 Comments »

  1. Duke Nasty VI says:

    Wait, what? It’s available for everyone? Where and how do I download this?

  2. Jim Rossignol says:

    All Global Agenda players. You still have to have bought the game.

  3. jsutcliffe says:

    Jim Rossignol said:
    All Global Agenda players. You still have to have bought the game.

    God Jim, you’re such a killjoy!

  4. Fneb says:

    But is the game any good? How does the core gameplay – the shooty bit – compare with other FPS games? Is it fun? There’s not a single review of the game out yet, and £35 is more than I can spend on a maybe.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Ha, well, I am trying to get a team together so I can do a proper review. The shooty bit of the game is *okay*, but not quite meaty enough. It’s no Team Fortress 2, but it’s got some interesting systems and I’m enjoying it so far. It’s full of interesting touches, like the way the skill set opens up as you level up, and physical stuff like being able to mantle up walls. Visually it’s like a very colourful Planetside or even Section 8, but it’s also in the third-person, which feels different. I can’t really report with any more certainty until I’ve played some more, but I don’t think we’re going to see particularly high review scores. That said, I can see myself playing this for pleasure for a while, even with other stuff to get through.

    • Howl says:

      Just forked out £35 myself on this maybe. Still downloading but already discovered that it doesn’t support multi-monitor aspect ratios because the developers think it gives ‘an unfair advantage’… *sigh*

      I had some crazed fantasy of a futuristic Dark Age of Camelot when I clicked the purchase button, with hundreds of players all assaulting bases at the same time but it’s actually just 10v10 instanced mini-games a la WoW…

      Oh well. At least my sights are set quite low now so it can only be a nice surprise if it doesn’t suck.

    • Tei says:

      tl;dr version:
      think a unreal3 version of TF2

  5. MortiZ says:

    Good to see you creating an agency for interested players. I’m currently playing in the agency IRONFIST in the alliance CTC (active players probably know the name).

  6. lhzr says:

    http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-global-agenda/17-1964/

    i wouldn’t pay any money for this. i can’t even see the point of playing it for free.

    • Furniture Merchant says:

      Eww, looks boring and uninspired.

    • Warskull says:

      Having played GA, I can vouch for the fact that what you see in that quick look is the whole game. It never really changes. The context which you run around spamming your weapon changes slightly, but the basic gameplay is always the same.

      GA is a horrible game that advertised itself as an MMO to try and trick ex-planet side players into buying it.

    • EaterOfCheese says:

      I see where you’re coming from, but I disagree – Global Agenda’s quite fun. I like the mechs and vehicles, and the reconfigurable skills and various levels of devices which allow for a pretty high level of depth, once you get the hang of it. e.g. you could setup a a recon strike force with high level firebombs, sprint stealth and bionics for some hit and run goodtimes!

      Enjoying it so far :)

  7. mudkipz says:

    I have actually really been enjoying GA so far, possibly more than I enjoyed TF2 at launch which may sound odd…

  8. LionsPhil says:

    “I had some crazed fantasy of a futuristic Dark Age of Camelot when I clicked the purchase button, with hundreds of players all assaulting bases at the same time…”

    There aren’t “hundreds” of players left who have any interest on MMOs that aren’t already completely committed to either EVE or World of Warcrack.

    HAY GUYZ I HAS AN IDEAS FOR A GAME THAT REQUIRES A LARGE PLAYER BASE TO BE ANY FUNS—LET’S PUT IT IN THIS HORRIBLY OVERSATURATED MARKET AREA WHERE THREE PEOPLE WILL ONLINE AT ONCE TOPS HURRRRR.

    • Howl says:

      I haven’t played DAOC for years as it’s now pushing 9 years old or something like that but right now there are over 2,300 people logged into one server, the majority of whom are likely to be lvl 50′s doing mass scale PvP. It’s not even peak time EU right now, let alone US. The server caps out at 4k people usually. (EDIT: It used to have 10-20 servers, all > 4k people at peak times at launch)

      So, you’re quite horribly misinformed I think. As well as rude. Are you a GA fanboy?

    • Lilliput King says:

      If you build it [well], they will come.

      Honestly. I’m sure lots of people (like me) are waiting for a full scale ground warfare MMOG that doesn’t play like butt.

    • Howl says:

      I completely agree Lilliput. It’s not a saturated market at all. It’s a genre starving for anything decent to play. I’d love a competent developer to bring out a polished MMO, with modern tech, in a persistent world, with large scale PvP, that’s fun to play.

      People blame WoW for poor MMO success but the truth is that there haven’t been any MMO’s worth playing in the last 5 years. I don’t understand what the problem is. Devs seem to think they can churn out some piece of rubbish, stick levels on it and a chat interface and make millions.

      Speaking of which. I just played GA for the last few hours and it seems like this year’s Fury to me.

    • The Pink Ninja says:

      Lilli is right. There is a huge market for MMO’s that break outside the box, there just aren’t devs making them and if they they’re not doing a good job.

      Given SoE was the dev I was impressed at how good Planetside was despite itself

  9. Heliocentric says:

    £35 and then a sub on top? Eat a poo friend, eat a poo.

  10. Distepheno says:

    I’ll be signing up been playing for a month now (Beta etc) and really enjoying the pace and general fun of the gameplay. Its not too deep but instead of going against it enhances the experience. Can reccomend it highly.

  11. Spoon says:

    I have mixed feelings on this game. On one hand, the shooting mechanics aren’t the greatest, and the game doesn’t really deserve the title of MMO. On the other hand, I must admit I have a blast playing the game with friends. Was roped me into buying the 4 pack, and I’ve been playing beta since they offered it with preorder. The game has a good skeleton, but needs more everything. Especially if they want sub money.

  12. Finn says:

    No free trial? Nah….

    • EaterOfCheese says:

      @ Finn, note that the one-off purchase gives you access to *almost* everything, forever, with no subs.

  13. FRIENDLYUNIT says:

    Yeah I’m going to need a demo of this one or no sale.
    Shame they didnt let me into the beta.

    Also, if I have to read “no elves” just one more freaking time I’m going to actually fly over there and unplug their servers.

  14. LionsPhil says:

    @Howl: GA fanboy? Hardly—there’s no damn demo and they want to charge twice for the full game, so they can enjoy their hot bowl of steaming online failure.

    • Antilogic says:

      Actually you can play the non-mmo game, which is basicly a fun TPS, with a teamwork rather then twitch focus, with a PVE mode as well, for free, forever.

      You only pay to get access to most future content, and the conquest mode.

  15. CaseytheBrash says:

    I’d like a go with you, yank here -8GMT about now but I work graveyard, so I keep odd hours. Trying my hand at ST:O as of now but I own Global Agenda. Why are all these shooters third person now, am i getting old> did 1st person become passe or some such?

  16. LionsPhil says:

    @Antilogic: I believe the operative word would be “full”.

    I am not under the impression that the plain-DM part is “free”; it’s a one-off pay-for game like any other. Except with an even more fragmented playerbase because half the people will be off doing the leased MMO missions. And presumably racking up an equipment imbalance.

    • Antilogic says:

      Well stop presuming :)

      The free game is as full as any FPS, with at any one time well in excess of 100 missions going on.

      Equipment gained in AvA is used in AvA only, and doesnt translate to the “free” game. in standard PVP missions, sub players and free players are 100% on the level.

      Basicly all that the MMO part is: the majority of the new content, (freebies will get reguarler new maps and map cycles for pve, pvp, and new mobs for pve, and new devices and the like for everything.), AvA, which is the MMO part of the game, which your agency fights for victory with 100′s of others in a massive war, which, haven taken part in the last couple of nights, is exausing and very fun :D

      If all you want is a teamwork focused TPS, then the free version will do you very well, in fact its generally offering more then most mp only titles due to the PVE aspect as well.

  17. geldonyetich says:

    Surprised to see so much negativity on this comment thread, really. It’s a pretty decent game all around. Balanced better than usual. Sort of a thinking man’s FPS.

  18. Elusive says:

    I don’t know why any anyone would subscribe to this game. I mean, it’s Guild Wars in space, with the “guild wars” part being only for the subscribers. Of course, it’s good for a one-month buy now, I believe, but one shouldn’t encourage the developers into thinking they could gain money by employing such cheap tricks. Partially, this is the result of people not knowing enough history.

    • Antilogic says:

      Actually its guild wars on earth :P

      As for subbing, my sub is depending on what happens with reguards to the content patches. AvA is great fun, but to thin on the ground right now to last more then 2-3 months. However, the devs have promised constant content patches, the first before conquest goes pay to play, so my sub is living on that, and I think a lot of peoples is as well.

      If they deliver, then im pretty happy to give them subs for the ava access and moar content :)

  19. mrmud says:

    So how do I actually get in touch with the RPS agency to get invited?

    • EaterOfCheese says:

      just go to the ‘agency center’, i think its called, and search for RPS

  20. We Fly Spitfires says:

    Awesome, gonna look you chaps up once I download the game.

  21. Fun play online says:

    I agree with Elusive, and I don’t see the point either. Bit of a waste to me.

  22. Stan says:

    The game is likea bizzare combination of syndicate, borderlands & guildwars. Im sure you have all seen the graphics by now, but imagine borderlands style action with those graphics and 3rd person. The mmo aspect of the game is a bit like guildwars with most stuff instanced but instead of just guild vs guild battles you fight for territories. The overall theme and the territory idea is similar to syndicate.

    Dont try and imagine a mmorpg with 3rd person combat.
    Imagine a 3rd person fun multiplayer squad shooter with capturable lands.

    Personally I’m not convinced yet that the monthly price will be worth it, especially when you look at its mmo features/requirements side by side with guildwars one-time payment. But I was surpised at how addictive the game actually is.

    Global Agenda is a really difficult game to recommend because you know that someone who hasnt played it will expect something totally different. Don’t judge it too harshly until you play it, the game is more fun than I expected it to be.

    • Stan says:

      Just to be clear, your one time payment lets you do everything except participate in the Agency vs Agency fights for land.

      Witha one time payment you can play as long as you like, do all the squad multiplayer PvE missions or sign up for mercenary pvp fights.. much like any multiplayer FPS.

      The monthly payment gives you access to the Agency vs Agency battles.

      I agree that the monthly payment may not be worth it (I’m not sure yet) but you can still play and enjoy the game as long as you like without it. I will get more playtime out of the game than I got out of finishing Assassins Creed. So even if I don’t sign up for the monthly charge, I think I will get my moneys worth out of the rest of the game.