Hands-On: The Agency

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Hands-On: The Agency

Level 19 Secret Agent Man LFG!


The MMOFPS is an odd beast. Given the overwhelming popularity of both FPS games and MMO games in the modern gaming world, it seems like a natural hybrid. Fast-paced, twitch-based gameplay eliminates one of the primary concerns about MMOGs - combat is boring and doesn't require skill - and the persistent and social MMOG elements give a reason to come back day after day to shoot people in the face. So why don't we see more of them?

The Agency is SOE's attempt to fill a strangely (mostly) empty void in the online gaming scene, and I sat down in front of it to get some hands-on time at the Las Vegas SOE Fan Faire 2010. "The shooter part has to feel right," said Agency Lead Designer Rory McGuire, formerly of Transformers: War for Cybertron studio High Moon. "I've had some people come up to me worrying that it didn't look like an MMO anymore - it still is, but we need to focus on the shooter part first or people won't have fun."

There was only one playable map that we saw, an attack/defense zone set in what looked like an old abandoned castle - naturally, in true James Bondian style, there was a secret agent base hidden within. There were three points for the assaulters to claim as their own, and doing so would extend the time limit for their team - if that sounds familiar to you, then great, it should.

The Agency has clearly taken inspiration from other popular shooters of the day. There are five classes, from the heavy-weapons Suppressor who blankets a corridor in covering fire and throws flashbang grenades to the lightly-armored Recon who is both meant to scout and to stay in the back and snipe. The game is built to encourage team-based play, said McGuire. "It feels like that in many modern shooters, there's less of an emphasis on integrated teamplay. If I go into a corridor with another guy, all it does is decrease the odds that I'm the one they'll be shooting at, and increase the firepower we have at our disposal."

"We want to make a game where you're glad to have another teammate because they bring something special to the table that you can't do on your own." The most obvious inspiration, then, is Valve's Team Fortress 2: the classes are distinct and all have unique abiities that complement each other. Group composition is something that MMOG players have been dealing with for years, but McGuire and his team are trying to make The Agency's classes do more than just bring extra buffs to the table.

The game also draws inspiration from shooters like Modern Warfare, Gears of War and Rainbow Six - the latter two in particular formed the basis for a hard cover system. It's obviously a new addition to the game, because it feels clunky: Depending on your controller input, the character can switch directions instantly with no real animation involved, and the blind-fire aiming rarely hits (though that could be intentional). Still, once I got the hang of it, it worked well despite an odd error here and there, and proper use of cover makes charging positions very foolhardy.

Teamwork is emphasized in The Agency - after you take lethal damage, you're incapacitated and injured for several seconds, during which you have another lifebar that slowly drains out. Getting shot will kill you faster, but if nobody takes you out, there's always the possibility that an ally will come along and revive you. It's a nice touch, and it's kind of fun to run out into the middle of a firefight in order to desperately bring a teammate back to fight without having to wait for the respawn.

The weapons and abilities feel cool once you understand what they do - the Assault class has a directional energy barrier that it can use to defend comrades, and the Commander heals all allies in range - but the game feels like it's still in need of a bit of polish.

Conceptually, it's fantastic, and I get the feeling that if SOE pulls this one off it'll have firmly planted its foot in a relatively untrodden area (the last major title in this space was SOE's own Planetside). The guns feel a bit too inaccurate, and the animations could use work, but the core feels like it has a ton of potential. An action-based shooter with persistant global domination elements? Yeah, I'm intrigued.

The Agency is currently slated for 2011, or "when it's ready."

Permalink
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Huh, I thought this had been dropped ages ago.

Looks quite interesting, but I have no PS3 unfortunately (oh how I yearn for Uncharted 2). Do you do anything outside of vs. maps though? I mean, to make it an actual MMOG?
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
Wow.. I know MMOs taking more time to develop than most game types, but this game really seems like it has been in development nigh on forever. Plus, given that overly long cycle, it really sounds like it's still very very rough as far as even the basics go. What has SOE been doing all this time?
 

Nimbus

Token Irish Guy
Oct 22, 2008
2,162
0
0
Unless I see a persistent, online, (mostly) non-instanced world, I'm not interested. Near as I can tell, the shooter part looks good. Unless the MMO part ties it all together, I just don't think it will work.
 

Callex

New member
Oct 20, 2008
93
0
0
I'm still waiting for Planetside 2. The orignal was by far the most enjoyable of the MMO's I've played. (The played list being: WoW, GW, EVE, APB, LOTRO)
 

gmacarthur81

<(^.^<) <(^.^)> (>^.^)>
Nov 13, 2009
217
0
0
John Funk said:
Conceptually, it's fantastic, and I get the feeling that if SOE pulls this one off it'll have firmly planted its foot in a relatively untrodden area (the last major title in this space was SOE's own Planetside).
Oh really?

So Global Agenda didn't release earlier this year? That was some sort of fever dream I guess.
 

Korten12

Now I want ma...!
Aug 26, 2009
10,766
0
0
Hopeless Bastard said:
Point:

The reason the mmofps genre doesn't really exist right now is the internet infrastructure of the first world countries it would target simply isn't up to the task of keeping ping times low and throughput high (save japan). All current online FPS operate on peer networking, something that simply isn't viable for a mmo that hopes to charge subscription Blizzard's mmo is barely playable with three strategically placed server farms across the continential US (swap "barely" for "not" If you're in ausland). Not to mention maintaining those three farms eats up a ton of their gross income.

Since the agency isn't subscription based, a guild wars type model is likely in place. A central server that for all intents and purposes is nothing but a 3D chatroom and all actual gameplay is peer-to-peer. Meaning its not an mmo. Just an online-only fps with pretense.
I believe they did say it will be guild wars like.
 

cardinalwiggles

is the king of kong
Jun 21, 2009
291
0
0
Woodsey said:
Huh, I thought this had been dropped ages ago.

Looks quite interesting, but I have no PS3 unfortunately (oh how I yearn for Uncharted 2). Do you do anything outside of vs. maps though? I mean, to make it an actual MMOG?
i was just about to mention this, the constant game world we havent seen yet, which is strange due to them pushing it as a MMOFPS so far FPS, seems just like any other multiplayer element of a normal FPS like call of duty and gears of war
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
gmacarthur81 said:
John Funk said:
Conceptually, it's fantastic, and I get the feeling that if SOE pulls this one off it'll have firmly planted its foot in a relatively untrodden area (the last major title in this space was SOE's own Planetside).
Oh really?

So Global Agenda didn't release earlier this year? That was some sort of fever dream I guess.
Third-person. :)
 

gmacarthur81

<(^.^<) <(^.^)> (>^.^)>
Nov 13, 2009
217
0
0
John Funk said:
gmacarthur81 said:
John Funk said:
Conceptually, it's fantastic, and I get the feeling that if SOE pulls this one off it'll have firmly planted its foot in a relatively untrodden area (the last major title in this space was SOE's own Planetside).
Oh really?

So Global Agenda didn't release earlier this year? That was some sort of fever dream I guess.
Third-person. :)
I always was zoomed in, so for me it was mostly First-person.

=P
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
The problem with this concept is that it's very difficult to reward any kind of long term play if you want to keep things "skill based". Any kind of meaningful loot or uses for money are hard to work in. Objectives and holding territory are also kind of pointless because they have to be rendered transient in a persistant world or nobody is going to want to play (or play for the losing side when they first join). MMO games with territory control elements generally give the controlling side a global "buff" or access to merchants that they wouldn't otherwise have, or similar things. However without stats being involved and the key element of conflict resolution you really can't handle the perks that way.

I understand the basic idea and the vision a lot of people have dancing through their head, but honestly there are some valid reasons why it hasn't succeeded and "shooters" have mostly been relegated to "match based" play online.

While "Planetside" has been mentioned, I'd point a finger more towards things like "War Rock" and perhaps "Neocron" as examples of other attempts to do this, and they have more or less failed. While they aren't the same engine, the central idea is the same as what they were doing with "Crimecraft" or "Global Agenda" (GA was mentioned as being third person as opposed to first person) and neither appears to have been a smash success.

I'll also make a point that I'm sure many will be rushing to disagree with: those who find RPG combat boring, are usually people who can't get their heads around it. The thing is that a player who isn't bright enough to be able to manage stats, gear, talents, etc... and wants immediate gratification from shooting people (and stuff) twitch style exclusively, wants what is fundementally a simple game of non-stop instant gratification. That kind of instant gratification is not served by a persistant world where there are variables well outside of the player's control, or where they might have to wander around and travel to find where something is going on. They want to just login, choose a character, and shoot people, make it much more complicated than that and your going to lose the interest of the target audience who might like the idea of a huge, epic, open world for them to shoot people in, but will not like it in practice. If there are only like six guys in a zone without any clear objectives right there (like in a persistant world) the size might be cool, but they are going to get bored if they are twitch junkies because they might not ever run into each other if that zone is say the size of "The Barrens" in World Of Warcraft.

I guess what I'm getting down to is that while there are players who enjoy both styles of games on their own merits, the hybrid people have dancing through their minds is not something that I think is workable, or at least not workable to bring in the massive numbers of people that he developers are hoping for. "Planetside" being fairly successful, but hardly anything like "World Of Warcraft" or even most second or third tier MMORPGs in terms of player base.

I have no vested interest at the moment since I don't think "The Agency" is my cup of tea exactly to begin with, but I can't help but feel we've been down this road before when you saw "War Rock" specifically being hyped in certain corners of the internet. A lot of people thought it was going to be the next big thing because of the same basic ideas and it seemed to flop utterly, few people like it in practice from what I was hearing, and on top of that I seem to remember hearing that it was a highly gimmicked "cash shop" game as well where you needed to exchange real money, for in-game currency to buy the weapons and such you inevitably needed to remain competitive. I didn't play it so of course this is all second hand.

In the end though (for those that read this far) I think the biggest problem is that someone who can't have fun with existing MMORPG games, is going to find that the very nature of a persistant world is going to annoy them. It's not so much a matter of simply reconciling the "twitch" aspects, but also player reward, and the desire for immediate gratification against long term play. With no meaningful stats involved rewards that are anything but purely cosmetic are going to be impossible, people who aren't patient enough to slowly build up in an RPG are also going to be bored when dealing with a huge world and long periods of nothing happening for all intents and purposes. I've said this before (yes I'm rambling), but again I think things have stayed the way they are for a reason... dedicated "twitch" gamers who don't also do other generes and can't derive satisfaction from them, are going to be happiest with the way things are now, which is why things developed that way. Drop them into a multiplayer map that is too small for any long term hide and seek, and let them blaze away, when it's over them them reset it and do it again. In the end that is what they want: constant twitching and action.
 

Dr. wonderful

New member
Dec 31, 2009
3,260
0
0
Oh man, I hadn't see this game in YEARS.

I mean, I thought it was dropped, hell I was about to make a thread about it this morning!
 

Korten12

Now I want ma...!
Aug 26, 2009
10,766
0
0
Dr. wonderful said:
Oh man, I hadn't see this game in YEARS.

I mean, I thought it was dropped, hell I was about to make a thread about it this morning!
Well I guess John did it for you. :D
 

Blueruler182

New member
May 21, 2010
1,549
0
0
Yeah, this is the big reason I want a PS3. There are titles like Infamous and those that interest me, but this is why I really want one.
 

mattaui

New member
Oct 16, 2008
689
0
0
I would really, truly like to see a non-fantasy MMO that was still in the mold of a traditional MMO take off. Yes, I know there's EVE Online, and as someone who love science fiction, I thought I'd be all over that, but it's just really not my type of game. A MMOFPS has the problem of feeling like you're just battling all day over the same stuff - but isn't that all Modern Warfare 2 is? It's arguably as much an MMOFPS as there ever has been, even if your character isn't all that well defined and mutable.