•Blurring the Lines Between Offline and Online - Advance your character’s development across every gameplay mode: single player, co-op, and multiplayer. Gain experience points that you can spend on customizing and upgrading your skills and abilities, designing an entirely unique look and feel for your character.
•Groundbreaking Kinesthetics - Brink uses the familiar shooter controls that you’re used to, without frustrating, artificial constraints and takes advantage of a new feature: the SMART button. When you press the SMART button, the game dynamically evaluates where you’re trying to get to, and makes it happen. No need to perfectly time a jump or vault, the game knows what you want to do.
•Context-Sensitive Goals and Rewards - Objectives, communications, mission generation, and inventory selection are all dynamically generated based on your role, your status, your location, your squad-mates, and the status of the battle in all gameplay modes. You’ll always know exactly where to go, what to do when you get there, and what your reward will be for success.
•Virtual Texturing - Brink’s proprietary technology, Virtual Texturing, breaks new ground on current-gen consoles and PCs with an even greater focus on highly detailed characters, realistic environments, lighting, effects, and atmospherics,. This competitive lead on the squad-combat genre helps thrust players into the gritty reality of the Ark's epic secluded arcology.
This game looks fucking magnificent. There is NO game at all to compare it to, it is just one of those games. The best way I could describe it is a multiplayer FPS version of Mirrors Edge that has a Team Fortress based class system. Completely customizable characters, and by everything, I mean EVERYTHING is customizable. Even down to the girth of your character, which determines how agile you are in your acrobatic moves -- or if you can even do them at all. Weapons are customizable to the nth degree.
Developed by Splash Damage and Produced by Bethesda. Comes out May 10th, 2011. Yes, THIS YEAR. In a month of when I am posting this. Stay posted on their official website:
I think it's a tad overhyped but still the only FPS worth buying since TF2. Sadly it got delayed constantly and now has to compete with RAGE, Duke Nukem and BF3 coming out shortly after.
The SMART mechanic looks unbelievable cool, and I love that it will make games have more of a vertical movement aspect, but the one sort of iffy thing is as the guy in the video mentioned, what if it turns out to be just an auto-pilot that takes away from skill, which might be a problem depending on just how well it's actually implemented, but I think it will probably work out well and take skill to use to potential, either way this looks like a sick new game and thanks for showing it.
Edit: just noticed, it comes out the day before my B-day, guess what I'm about to ask for
On April 12 2011 08:12 Moda wrote: It looks like a 100% ripoff from Borderlands..
Why? Because it takes place in a junkyard and you're fighting Jason Vorhan's? That's the only similarity I see.
I think it's a tad overhyped but still the only FPS worth buying since TF2. Sadly it got delayed constantly and now has to compete with RAGE, Duke Nukem and BF3 coming out shortly after.
It is overhyped, I admit. But I did pre-order it out of the hype, the first time I've done that in years. However, BF3 comes out at the end of the year, as do most of the other big names. So it has time to establish itself on the field before the huge names come out.
The SMART mechanic looks unbelievable cool, and I love that it will make games have more of a vertical movement aspect, but the one sort of iffy thing is as the guy in the video mentioned, what if it turns out to be just an auto-pilot that takes away from skill, which might be a problem depending on just how well it's actually implemented, but I think it will probably work out well and take skill to use to potential, either way this looks like a sick new game and thanks for showing it.
Edit: just noticed, it comes out the day before my B-day, guess what I'm about to ask for
Oh, it's not going to become auto pilot. The developer explicitly mentioned that it wont turn on some auto pilot. There are a couple demonstrations of gameplay that show it, and it's far from it. It gives as much auto pilot as Mirrors Edge's "Smart" button gave.
Bear in mind the S.M.A.R.T button won't be as smooth as someone manually using the controls, and in fact has a noticeable lag time. From a design point of view the game is amazing, but i haven't seen that much to impress me about it as a shooter specifically, which is my major issue with it. Definitely going to take a very close look at it once it comes out, i want to see how everything works first.
A major concern of mine is if it is going to be poorly balanced on release, and if so how the dev team will react.
On April 12 2011 08:12 Moda wrote: It looks like a 100% ripoff from Borderlands..
Okay yea right, sorry but Brink is a sequel to the Enemy Territory series that have been around since before Borderland was even thought of. You might as well of said that Doom was a Halo rip off.
On April 12 2011 09:14 TheMango wrote: I preordered this game like 6 months ago... I just hope it comes out at this point.
It's already official that it's coming out in exactly one month.
My main problem is people complaining how it's been delayed. As far as I can tell, a game being constantly delayed for this long only means they want to refine it and make it the best they can. That bodes well for me. At least better than the CoD franchises mentality of release it even though it's not finished.
The game looks decent, but my god does that cinematic trailer look fricking epic kick-ass? I would like to see these guys make a full length animated movie with that theme!
Am I the only one who can't get excited about FPS releases anymore? I dunno, I've just been burned so many times, and FPS has been in a steady, steep decline since 2007 or so. I'm just waiting for the shit metacritic score and the forum bitching about network problems, performance issues, and gameplay imbalance that developers could have fixed if they gave a shit. And that is in addition to the now-standard "unlock" schemes that force you to invest tons of time to experience all of the game, and the community-splitting DLC that nobody wants shoved down their throat.
I'll love it if this game is good. Same goes for BF3, Rage, CoD #500, etc. Not getting my hopes up for anything but Skyrim, though.
this game doesnt seem all that great. the only real different thing it had going was the "SMART" system, but a lot of that stuff has already been done by crysis 2 now (sliding, auto-climbing stuff by jumping near it). the actual gunplay doesnt seem that impressive, but I'll wait for a demo to really judge it. my hopes arent up for it at all, but i wont judge it until it comes out.
Hmm it looks amazing, but that smart button looks slightly dubious lol
I'm not sure how "hardcore" the game is supposed to be, but if the acrobatics are supposed to require lots of skill, does the smart button take away from the game? Doesn't seem like a deal-breaker at all, but does seem sort of funky.
"Smart" button reminds me of FEAR. But I wish such a system could be implemented universally rather than having context-sensitive actions; i.e. you can slide any time by looking down while holding SMART, rather than having to be near something you can slide under. This reminds me too much of so many other good-looking games that have burned me: APB, Huxley, Hellgate: London... great ideas but hastily executed and lacking direction.
I really wish companies would stop using unlockables and use a system like Planetside used to use with certifications...
Tbh I feel like modern fps who want to stray away from glitchy animations and towers of people stacking onto eachother need a smart key. I preordered brink this winter and I kept forgetting about it since it looked like it was about to come out and then it was delayed over and over-.-
I wish games would implement more weaponry than bullet based weapons. I'm not trying to talk down about Brink. It looks pretty cool. I just miss my soldier from TF2.
Been looking forward to this game for awhile now, It has been delayed a lot but with the intricacy of the SMART system and all the other aspects I'm not surprised that there is a lot of ground to cover and a lot of bugs to iron out, they want to release this game and uphold the expectations they have set for themselves and their customers so it isn't really such a bad thing.
People have been saying this was overhyped. Guess I just haven't been looking but I have never heard of it til now. Looks awesome and I need a new FPS to sink my teeth into. I went with Medal of Honor and that just failed horribly.
It's supposed to be based a bit on an old FPS from splash damage, enemy territory, richard ham some important guy on brink even went to the community site (www.crossfire.nu) to ask questions on what they would like to see etc.
Is the developer the same Splash Damage who made Wolf ET? That game consumed a lot of my teenage life, and if its half as good, I'll definitely be looking to pick up Brink. Oh, and I loved Mirror's Edge a lot so I hope the platforming is similar in Brink.
Game looks great, not only in terms of graphics, but of course gameplay. I won't preorder it though, it looks like they prioritize consoles a lot, so it can be a poor console port, like bad company 2 was in the beginning.
You can do ANYTHING you can do with the SMART system using crouch, sprint and jump as well. Also, SMART is slightly slower than doing the moves manually.
Makes it more like Quake 3 if it works out well. I don't see anything bad about making ANY shooter more like Quake 3.
Nothing in that interview makes it more like Quake 3? In fact in the interview it is the exact opposite. "you shouldn't have to play 1000 of hours to get good". Console game coming up.
Delaying the game for quality purposes is fine, before Blizzard met Activision they constantly went past the release dates, look at the insanely good games that has produced. The problems begin when it gets a bit too quiet around the game tbh. When Brink was looking close to completion and a lot of videos were released, I was getting very excited about it. Then suddenly it was almost half a year completely quiet around the subject, which is a major buzzkill.
Makes it more like Quake 3 if it works out well. I don't see anything bad about making ANY shooter more like Quake 3.
Nothing in that interview makes it more like Quake 3? In fact in the interview it is the exact opposite. "you shouldn't have to play 1000 of hours to get good". Console game coming up.
So a game is instantly bad if it doesn't take 1000 hours to get good? I guess every game but Brood War is fucking terrible then, huh?
Makes it more like Quake 3 if it works out well. I don't see anything bad about making ANY shooter more like Quake 3.
Nothing in that interview makes it more like Quake 3? In fact in the interview it is the exact opposite. "you shouldn't have to play 1000 of hours to get good". Console game coming up.
So a game is instantly bad if it doesn't take 1000 hours to get good? I guess every game but Brood War is fucking terrible then, huh?
I doubt he's saying "any game that takes any less than 1k hours to get good is bad." A player who's played 1000 hours should be much better compared to a player who hasn't (assuming he's trying to improve). I don't want an FPS with a low skill cap when it comes to movement. What's so wrong with it taking a long time to master that aspect of the game? If I spend hours in Q3 or TF2 on jump maps practicing strafe jumping/air strafing I should be better than a person who hasn't (when it comes to those specific skills).
What's the point of that kind of sarcasm when you're not even making a point with it :|
Mixed feelings from the small bit I've read and seen so far.
Character design seems to be trying too hard to look "gangster."
The "SMART" system doesn't sound very special (even if it's basically a button that does what you can do manually, just a little slower due to being automated on the smart button). You can slide or jump over stuff. To me that doesn't feel "dynamic" or "exciting." A slide is a slide, as evidenced by all the random clips of a dude sliding towards someone else out in the open while shooting them.
He mentioned in the interview trying to get away from one hit kills. That's something I have to applaud for a few reasons. Going from full to dead instantly isn't fun for anyone, to be sure. Also, the longer a gunfight is (aka, longer it takes to kill someone) the more likely it is for a more skillful player to win, causing it to be slightly less of a game of "I saw you first" cat and mouse (though shooters will always be like that to an extent) making deaths feel a little less random and out of your control.
Then he turns around and says the lightest, most agile characters will have a knife (when they have their pistol out, I think) as opposed to heavier character types having to melee with their gun. Remind anyone else of MW2's MLC knifers? Obviously a lot more factors play into that though, such how many hits w/knife vs. how many for other characters as well level design and how easy it'll be to get close without being seen and just the overall design.
On April 12 2011 13:40 T3tra wrote: I wish games would implement more weaponry than bullet based weapons. I'm not trying to talk down about Brink. It looks pretty cool. I just miss my soldier from TF2.
Agreed. Unfortunately most gamers seem to be obsessed with military shooters that are as close to RL (possible) weaponry as possible. It's what sells so that's what gets made. Bullets are a boring (though effective) way of killing something. Non insta-travel bullet weapons are much harder to design while still being interesting/balanced/not overlapping, though. Halo's a decent example. It has alien counterparts for half the "human" guns and they don't really function all that differently (bullets have travel time for some guns, do different amounts to shielded/nonshielded.... woo....), outside of the Needler.
Brink looks like it has potential, but I'm not really holding my breath for it to be super special at the moment.
preordered and got a new computer for it (i5-2500k, 560TI SOC, 8Gb, SSD). can't fuckin wait! I've been an avid ET and ETQW player and I miss this type of game so much (fast paced (Quake!=BF2) team-based FPS)
Minimum Specs Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz or equivalent Memory: 2GB RAM Graphics: NVIDIA 8800GS / ATI Radeon HD 2900 Pro or equivalent OS: Windows XP(SP3)/Vista/Windows 7 Hard Drive: 8GB of free space
Recommended Specs Processor: Intel Quad Core i5 Memory: 3GB RAM Graphics: Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 / ATI Radeon HD 5850 OS: Windows XP(SP3)/Vista/Windows 7 Hard Drive: 8GB of free space
Makes it more like Quake 3 if it works out well. I don't see anything bad about making ANY shooter more like Quake 3.
Nothing in that interview makes it more like Quake 3? In fact in the interview it is the exact opposite. "you shouldn't have to play 1000 of hours to get good". Console game coming up.
So a game is instantly bad if it doesn't take 1000 hours to get good? I guess every game but Brood War is fucking terrible then, huh?
As long as it's not 1000 hours of grinding to unlock good weapons and shit, which seems to be the popular thing nowadays =_=
* Soldier has a feature where he can attach himself sort of like a turret to a teammate, and all damage the teammate takes the Soldier take sinstead
* Leaning around corners is confirmed in a gameplay video in there
* Medics throw a syringe at a teammate, and it's up to the teammate when or if they want to be revived. No more medics chain rezzing you BC2 style and giving you 50 thousand deaths
* Grenades are not insta kill buttons, all they do is minor damage and knock you off your feet -- like other shockwaves
* Melee attacks are with the weapon itself and simply knock the enemy down, only knives are used when pistol is out -- still not one shot kill on most people
* Engineers will be able to plant mines, give damage buffs, and plant down turrets that will not do significant damage but enough to 'shut down a lane'
* Every class can be used with every body type. IE: An engineer can be a light engineer running around parkouring and planting turrets everywhere, or a big bulky guy holding down the fort.
So on and so forth. There are boat loads of information there.
Excellent link. Lot of meaty info to look through. I'm still not convinced - but the "hope this doesn't suck and is instead amazing like it looks like it can be" level has gone up. Lots of little things that just make sense.
For example, everyone has unlimited grenades, but on a longish cooldown (20-30 seconds was the timer I saw mentioned). I can think of multiple times playing something like Call of Duty (if I'm not using Scavenger, and sometimes even if I am) where I really wish I had a grenade, but because I was doing well that life I'd already used it while fighting someone 4 kills back.
The Light/Medium/Heavy body types are an interesting mechanic/concept, at the very least. Light guys are faster, but have less health and less "mana" (class ability points - used on stuff like healing for medics, giving out ammo for soldiers, etc.) and are independent of class. So you could make a Light engineer that can sprint way the hell out in front, climb up a wall and set up a turret in a good spot, or you can make a heavy engineer that can drop mines and buff teammates ammo (aka, bullet damage) for extended periods of time. Heavier body types can hold heavier weapons, so the dude sprinting out front probably only has a SMG. The big heavy dude (even if it's a role typically more fragile in other games, like a Medic) could be plodding a long a little slower, but while wielding a minigun. With weapons tied to body type and not character class, the Medic (healer) is suddenly less of a free kill when you only have a SMG and he has a 100+ round bullet hose to point in your general direction, as well has having a lot more health than you do.
The gameplay appears to be very objective based, kinda like the Assault game mode in Unreal Tournament (a mode I really liked), as opposed to a "capture this generic hill" objective gameplay. I believe I read that they said there isn't actually a TDM/FFA (aka, kill/death ratio focused) game mode at all. However, there does appear to be a risk of things getting repetitive as it sounds like they basically have their campaign missions that are designed to be played solo/co-op/online versus. So variety could be a possible issue. With them quoting the campaign taking roughly 10 hours to do both sides (so 6-7 hours if you're mildly skilled most likely) for a straight run through, there may be enough maps for it to not get stale too quickly.
Has some serious potential, but until people can get their hands on it for extended periods of time it's hard to say if they also nailed the execution.
This game looks amazing, I cannot wait to never play CoD:BO ever again on my xbox once this game drops. Much more content has been added to the website since this post was made. All those who are weary should check that out...
The Light/Medium/Heavy body types are an interesting mechanic/concept, at the very least. Light guys are faster, but have less health and less "mana" (class ability points - used on stuff like healing for medics, giving out ammo for soldiers, etc.) and are independent of class. So you could make a Light engineer that can sprint way the hell out in front, climb up a wall and set up a turret in a good spot, or you can make a heavy engineer that can drop mines and buff teammates ammo (aka, bullet damage) for extended periods of time. Heavier body types can hold heavier weapons, so the dude sprinting out front probably only has a SMG. The big heavy dude (even if it's a role typically more fragile in other games, like a Medic) could be plodding a long a little slower, but while wielding a minigun. With weapons tied to body type and not character class, the Medic (healer) is suddenly less of a free kill when you only have a SMG and he has a 100+ round bullet hose to point in your general direction, as well has having a lot more health than you do.
Uhh that is basically TeamFortress gameplay from 1996.. just dumbed down for the masses by removing mechanically difficult concepts like quake 1 air acceleration physics, grenade jumping, rocket jumping
The common thing about this new gameplay is that it has the same kind of results as the classic features of old games, aka turrets, advanced movement techniques, healing etc. BUT instead of requiring high learning curve acrobatic actions, it is achieved by single button easy-mode options, ready for consumption by the masses.
If I spend hours in Q3 or TF2 on jump maps practicing strafe jumping/air strafing
Air strafing was removed after quake 1 to simplify movement.. so your example is kind of contradicting the premise of the argument..
On April 28 2011 00:25 Nebula wrote: Air strafing is in quake 3, what are you on about ?
A tangent but alas- in quake 1 you can accelerate in air by strafing, in q2 q3 q4 you cant. in those games you can only increase the forward velocity component by the vectorial sum of it and the sideways acceleration, but you are still moving forward in air, not sideways. that is forward movement, not turning or strafing like is possible in quake 1(and cpma mod).
I really wish companies would stop using unlockables and use a system like Planetside used to use with certifications...
QFT! I loved Planetside's system. Talk about a game that was way before it's time. I stopped playing after about the first 6-8 months, but that was the most fun I had playing an MMO of any kind. Group PVP to the core. NO grinding. Awesome map markings so you could hop on to the server and find out where the battles were. I use to find a battle that was between two other factions and hide on the sidelines with a sniper rifle picking off both teams for fun. New Conglomerate FTW.
I pre-ordered from Direct2drive for $38, it's a steamworks game so it's the same wherever you buy it (except for pre order bonuses)
People keep bringing up Enemy Territory, and WolfET was one of my all time favorite games. Hopefully it's closer to that than ETQW (not that QW was all that awful)
I just can not believe that this game will be any good on PC. Why would any game developer that has a background in making pc games play every single promotional gameplay video on a console?
On April 30 2011 06:24 sonigo wrote: I just can not believe that this game will be any good on PC. Why would any game developer that has a background in making pc games play every single promotional gameplay video on a console?
yeah.. same what i thought.. i cancelled my pre order and i will wait 5-6 days after release and read some posts in the steam forum.. and some reviews..
performance wise i will not have any troubles with the upcoming games for the next 2years but i just cant believe that they programmed it for the PC and are porting it on the consoles.. i bet they do it the other way..
here are the recommended system req. lolz, for a game that looks not even good in the trailers this is just ridiculous
CPU Recommended: Intel Quad Core i5
RAM Recommended: 3 GB
Video Card Recommended: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 / ATI Radeon™ HD 5850
since it runs on steam.. it uses the most useless anti cheat ever
The game is going to be casual player friendly. I was looking into it because of all the hype and I am extremely dissappointed with what I've read. My pc will easily run this game, but I'll let the hype die down and see if competition will be any good on this game before I think about buying it. Considering bf3 isn't a port from a console. Pc gamers are probably better off waiting for that.
On April 28 2011 00:25 Nebula wrote: Air strafing is in quake 3, what are you on about ?
Strafe jumping is in q3, what he's talking about is air control like in tf2 or quake 1, where if you do it right you have as much control over your movement while you're in the air as when you're on the ground - you can do little loops around buildings and shit - it's awesome.
Yeah I'm starting to rethink this game as well. They had a lot of potential I feel but all the casual friendliness has made it much less attractive to me.
That said, TF2 is very casual-friendly but is still incredibly fun to play at a high level. I'm hoping Brink will be similar because I like the concept of the game, but I'm defiantly going to wait on more information before I buy
On April 30 2011 14:50 icemanzdoinwork wrote: The game is going to be casual player friendly. I was looking into it because of all the hype and I am extremely dissappointed with what I've read. My pc will easily run this game, but I'll let the hype die down and see if competition will be any good on this game before I think about buying it. Considering bf3 isn't a port from a console. Pc gamers are probably better off waiting for that.
You have to consider that Splash Damage is emphasizing casual friendliness and good gameplay with controller/on console a lot in public cause they come from a hardcore PC background with Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory and Enemy Territory:Quake Wars. These games were extremely complex and very hard for beginners to understand. With BRINK they try to preserve the complexity but make it easier for noobies to pick up the game. And that's what they want to proof in public, that this game is really easy for noobs to pick up.
In the end the core of the Splash Damage studio still consists of the makers of mods like Quake 3 Fortress and Quake clan players and that's why I trust them to a certain degree when they say that for them, if the long time followers of SD don't like this and it doesn't work for competition, it kinda failed.
It's kinda similar to Blizzard and SC2. Catering the casuals and newbies and at the same time sticking to extremely complex and competitive RTS gameplay.
It's only 2 weeks until release now but sadly there wasn't an open beta nor will there be a demo, so if anyone has any questions I can try to answer them. I follow BRINK for over a year now on a daily basis over at the Splash Damage forum and know nearly anything they made public
On April 28 2011 00:25 Nebula wrote: Air strafing is in quake 3, what are you on about ?
Strafe jumping is in q3, what he's talking about is air control like in tf2 or quake 1, where if you do it right you have as much control over your movement while you're in the air as when you're on the ground - you can do little loops around buildings and shit - it's awesome.
Don't we have that too ? It's called CPM, unless maybe it's more control than this then sorry. Never played tf2 nor q1
On April 30 2011 14:50 icemanzdoinwork wrote: The game is going to be casual player friendly. I was looking into it because of all the hype and I am extremely dissappointed with what I've read. My pc will easily run this game, but I'll let the hype die down and see if competition will be any good on this game before I think about buying it. Considering bf3 isn't a port from a console. Pc gamers are probably better off waiting for that.
You have to consider that Splash Damage is emphasizing casual friendliness and good gameplay with controller/on console a lot in public cause they come from a hardcore PC background with Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory and Enemy Territory:Quake Wars. These games were extremely complex and very hard for beginners to understand. With BRINK they try to preserve the complexity but make it easier for noobies to pick up the game. And that's what they want to proof in public, that this game is really easy for noobs to pick up.
In the end the core of the Splash Damage studio still consists of the makers of mods like Quake 3 Fortress and Quake clan players and that's why I trust them to a certain degree when they say that for them, if the long time followers of SD don't like this and it doesn't work for competition, it kinda failed.
It's kinda similar to Blizzard and SC2. Catering the casuals and newbies and at the same time sticking to extremely complex and competitive RTS gameplay.
It's only 2 weeks until release now but sadly there wasn't an open beta nor will there be a demo, so if anyone has any questions I can try to answer them. I follow BRINK for over a year now on a daily basis over at the Splash Damage forum and know nearly anything they made public
See that's the problem though. They've thrown out deadly one hit kills including Snipers to appeal to the casual crowd. I just don't see the use for Snipers then and I can't see how a team rifle competition will gain any steam with the competitive fps players.
Et was amazing. Never played qw.
Just can't see it being competitive with no headshots and one hit kill Snipers. They tried to justify it by saying headshots are luck.....
Am I the only one who thinks the game looks incredibly boring? Just a standard "shooter with classes".
On top of the generic gameplay, the graphics look really bad. Not in a "too few polygons and bad textures" way, but in a way which makes it seem like your character is too disconnected from the world. When he grabs a ledge, it doesn't look like he's actually grabbing it, it looks like he's grabbing the air in front of it. Did you see how it looked when the guy shot at you while you were lying on the ground incapacitated? Like he was shooting yellow pellets at you (and it sounded like it, too).
At the very least, I don't see why I should play this instead of TF2 or some other random multiplayer shooter. And I don't see why I should pay 40€ for it.
O M G, i totally need this game, so i can use one smart button to master the whole movement mechanic, cool.
Ok seriously. Where exactly is the depth of this game? For me it looks like the usual newschool casual shooter who tries very hard to be innovative. But maybe just too spoiled by quake.
On April 28 2011 00:25 Nebula wrote: Air strafing is in quake 3, what are you on about ?
Strafe jumping is in q3, what he's talking about is air control like in tf2 or quake 1, where if you do it right you have as much control over your movement while you're in the air as when you're on the ground - you can do little loops around buildings and shit - it's awesome.
Don't we have that too ? It's called CPM, unless maybe it's more control than this then sorry. Never played tf2 nor q1
Nah CPM is exactly what he is describing. Infact even in VQ3 you can do slight air control but whatever.
On April 30 2011 19:16 icemanzdoinwork wrote: See that's the problem though. They've thrown out deadly one hit kills including Snipers to appeal to the casual crowd. I just don't see the use for Snipers then and I can't see how a team rifle competition will gain any steam with the competitive fps players.
Et was amazing. Never played qw.
Just can't see it being competitive with no headshots and one hit kill Snipers. They tried to justify it by saying headshots are luck.....
No, the casual crowd actually doesn't like this cause the casual crowd plays CoD and they are used to higher weapon damage.
What does competitive gaming have to do with one hit sniping? Is Quake not competitive then? Headshots are in the game, it's just that not all headshots kill instantly (some do tho).
This shifts the game away from slow, camping style (CS) more towards a fast, dynamic style with fights where tracing, movement and dodging are more important (like Quake 3 close combat with Lightning Gun etc).
You also have to take into account that the game is not played like CS or CoD competitively. It'll be played in Stopwatch mode where one team are the attackers and the other are defenders, and attackers have to do all objective and set a time. Then teams will swap and now the former defenders are attackers and have to beat the time. The respawn timer runs at all times, meaning you won't spawn a set x seconds after you died but rather whenever the respawn timer hits 0 (normally it's like 20 seconds countdown or so). This game mode emphasizes teamplay and makes kills less important compared to CS or any random team deathmatch shooter.
Everyone saying this isn't very original, Splash Damage are basically THE studio that made class based shooters big. Some of them these guys developed Quake 3 Fortress and Splash Damage developed both Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory and Enemy Territory:Quake Wars. What else do you expect from a studio like that? BRINK will be a worthy successor for the Enemy Territory series. It'll be up to date regarding graphics, sound etc and it will have some exciting new stuff like the SMART movement and character and weapon customization. But in the end it will play like an Enemy Territory game, an objective driven, class based shooter. Cause that's what Splash Damage does and what they do best.
That you might think this is to consol-ish I understand. Sadly SD (or their publisher Bethesda?) think they already have such a strong PC reputation that they don't need to show how good they are at it. Seems this is a big mistake when you want to attract those player who are sick and tired of noobshooters like CoD but don't know SD that much Guess for those guys it's really best waiting for some good PC reviews after release before buying.
edit:
On April 30 2011 20:19 koR wrote: O M G, i totally need this game, so i can use one smart button to master the whole movement mechanic, cool.
I guess what you are trying to say that the SMART button is noobyfying the movement right? That's a slight misunderstanding, you can do all the movement stuff manually with crouch/jump/sprint and you will be 10%+ faster then. There are also certain tricks and areas you can only access when doing manual movement. So yes, they try to make it simple for beginners but there is still depth in the movement that you can master.
To me this just looks like another copy of CoD, and the SMART movement system looks really nooby. I might end up getting it if there is a really cheap steam sale or something.
On April 30 2011 21:18 bobbingmatt wrote: To me this just looks like another copy of CoD, and the SMART movement system looks really nooby. I might end up getting it if there is a really cheap steam sale or something.
On April 30 2011 21:18 bobbingmatt wrote: To me this just looks like another copy of CoD, and the SMART movement system looks really nooby. I might end up getting it if there is a really cheap steam sale or something.
Oh my god, another CoD :/
Did you inform yourself at all before writing this? How is a class based shooter (classes with very different abilites like healing/building turrets etc), where you have to do objectives, which has the SMART movement system, where weapon damage is way lower (around 3-6 bodyshots with a normal gun, depending on weapon and bodytype), which has a completely unique and colorful artstyle and which is set in a post apocalyptic type of setting anything like CoD?
I guess I can't answer everyone who writes totally stupid, uninformed stuff , but please inform yourself before saying something as random as BRINK is like CoD.
I haven't looked too deeply into the class mechanics or gameplay modes or whatever, but from the few videos I've seen of it, it seems like (for me personally, at least) this game will replace the gap that TF2 created when it changed into a game about collecting hats.
The way I see it, this will take care of the fast-paced, dynamic, mid-to-close quarters fps, while BF3 will handle the more open 'battlefield'-based fps and maybe the new Red Orchestra will take care of the more hardcore side of things.
some TF2 ppl will buy this, and after 2 months brink is dead because its just another shitty consol port and everyone will be playing tf2 again..
mark my words
I am also really starting to worry about lack of PC footage. Starting to hear reports the game feels under polished, the graphics are poor and moves too slow. As the PC uses the same assets as the console I have a feeling this might not turn out to be the game we are all hoping for.
Looked cool at first but as I keep watching videos it seems more and more dull and consolized. I'll probably watch a few videos first and if it looks good enough or enough of my friends get it I'll drop some money on it. Hopefully this will replace TF2 since, like jtype said, it's all about collecting hats now.
edit: I don't really mind the SMART system as long as I can do all the stuff manually. Also from the sound of it I'll be able to do everything faster and have a better range of movement with manual control. I also believe will set the skill levels apart and to an extent the PC from the consoles. PC players will be able to take the movement to the next level.
On April 30 2011 21:18 bobbingmatt wrote: To me this just looks like another copy of CoD, and the SMART movement system looks really nooby. I might end up getting it if there is a really cheap steam sale or something.
On April 30 2011 21:18 bobbingmatt wrote: To me this just looks like another copy of CoD, and the SMART movement system looks really nooby. I might end up getting it if there is a really cheap steam sale or something.
Oh my god, another CoD :/
Did you inform yourself at all before writing this? How is a class based shooter (classes with very different abilites like healing/building turrets etc), where you have to do objectives, which has the SMART movement system, where weapon damage is way lower (around 3-6 bodyshots with a normal gun, depending on weapon and bodytype), which has a completely unique and colorful artstyle and which is set in a post apocalyptic type of setting anything like CoD?
I guess I can't answer everyone who writes totally stupid, uninformed stuff , but please inform yourself before saying something as random as BRINK is like CoD.
Everything I have seen and heard about this game makes it look like CoD with a few tweaks (like deeper classes, SMART and the art style). Notice how i said "To me", meaning my opinion, I really don't see the need for you to attack me solely because i have a different opinion than you...
On April 30 2011 21:45 noidontthinkso wrote: bullshit, this game will never kill TF2.. lol
some TF2 ppl will buy this, and after 2 months brink is dead because its just another shitty consol port and everyone will be playing tf2 again..
mark my words
why i think its a consol port?
just look at those gameplay trailers.. its played on xbox or ps3..
As I said earlier, Splash Damage was only PC previously and their games were very hard for casuals to pick up. Now they made BRINK for all three platforms and they want to prove to the public that they can make it work for console (/controllers) and made the start a lot easier for beginners. That's why there is mostly console footage and everything looks very beginner friendly and newby. That's at least what SD tells us in their forum, you don't have to believe this, I just trust them to a certain degree + Show Spoiler [example] +
Just as an example: In the videos you see Ironsights being used like in CoD, basically all the time. Most FPS players that play games like CoD are used to this but in Wolfenstein:ET you didn't have Ironisghts and in Quake Wars you did only need them when firing far distance. No Ironsights is the case in CS or TF2 as well. So many PC players don't want to use Ironsights cause it makes fights less dynamic and they also cover like the whole screen . Splash Damage said on the forum in their internal tests many of them don't use any Ironsight at all (obviously you can't do this with every weapon). To me this can only mean one thing: Videos are looking very nooby and simple for the CoD casuals on purpose, while the game will play differently for the more experienced (PC) players.
Brink might be cool, but it is literally overhyped indeed. But still, it reminds me of Sven/Tim-Coop for HL1 :D. Was really objective orientated. I wonder why one is working on a NATURAL SELECTION 2 Source version or something. Natural Selelction was a really awesome game...
If thís becomes an esport, I might switch from Quake Live to this - well lets see.
What I am REALLY waiting for is Diablo III and RAGE. Because RAGE looks really epic
On April 30 2011 22:21 insta wrote: Brink might be cool, but it is literally overhyped indeed. But still, it reminds me of Sven/Tim-Coop for HL1 :D. Was really objective orientated. I wonder why one is working on a NATURAL SELECTION 2 Source version or something. Natural Selelction was a really awesome game...
If thís becomes an esport, I might switch from Quake Live to this - well lets see.
What I am REALLY waiting for is Diablo III and RAGE. Because RAGE looks really epic
Greetings, insta
lol natural selection2 is being worked on since idk. but u can pre order and enter the closed beta since 2010..
On April 30 2011 22:21 insta wrote: Brink might be cool, but it is literally overhyped indeed. But still, it reminds me of Sven/Tim-Coop for HL1 :D. Was really objective orientated. I wonder why one is working on a NATURAL SELECTION 2 Source version or something. Natural Selelction was a really awesome game...
If thís becomes an esport, I might switch from Quake Live to this - well lets see.
What I am REALLY waiting for is Diablo III and RAGE. Because RAGE looks really epic
Greetings, insta
lol natural selection2 is being worked on since idk. but u can pre order and enter the closed beta since 2010..
I just wonder whether this will be the new big thing in fps esports. The game play looks ok i guess but we'll see... maybe i'll give it a try. When you've played qw and q3 every other game will dissapoint you in one way or another. I do like the fact that they removed 1 shotting from the game, awp in cs has too good risk/reward but at the same time ak/m4 deal shit load of damage aswell. I would like that movement/dodging would actually be part of the game instead of pixel aiming heads.
On April 30 2011 21:14 Ragoo wrote: I guess what you are trying to say that the SMART button is noobyfying the movement right? That's a slight misunderstanding, you can do all the movement stuff manually with crouch/jump/sprint and you will be 10%+ faster then. There are also certain tricks and areas you can only access when doing manual movement. So yes, they try to make it simple for beginners but there is still depth in the movement that you can master.
Well, ok, but i guess all those moves are fixed animations, could be hard for spectators to see individual styles on higher levels, because also the manual control could be dumbed down and capped too strictly.
Its all glitzy and stuff, but if you are able to master the movement, theres something wrong, in my opinion.
as a former TacticalOps and ET fan I am looking forward to another fast paced Shooter. I hope that I can tweak my ini for stuff like weapon bob etc. I'm kinda close minded in that regard. It looks too much like a console shooter so far but I will give it a try for sure. What I like is that there are no vehicles (Quake Wars was a big disappointment for me).
Quite disappointed with this game, expecting something new but its looking like the only actual new feature we get is tac-ing off walls (and scouts in TF2 can basically do this anyway).
Hopefully it will be a fun game if not original, but the actual shooting looks pretty damn stale.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
dislike it, together with basically every shooter in the last (how many years has it been since q3 came out?) years.
the reason I like starcraft 2 is because it is essentially the same game as starcraft 1 has been 13 years ago, minus the graphical advancements and the more user-friendly game mechanics.
the shooters nowadays are all trying to do something "new" and "revolutionary", while all that true MP fps fans want is a pure FPS without all the gadgets and new stuff. just give me quake2 all over again with refreshed graphics and maybe new maps - enough to get the community rolling and i'll be a happy monkey. i'd still be playing q2 if my local community hadn't died out
anyway, i'm sick of realism and revolutions in FPS games, shit needs to go oldschool fast or it's gonna die out and remain on the console casual level only.
On May 03 2011 06:15 Zidane wrote: Wait i know there aren't 1 hit kills, but not headshots? Or did i misunderstand
Headshots do more damage, but there is nothing that one hit kills except for very rare cases of someone being buffed heavily and someone else being light and unbuffed completely. There are no snipers; there are guns that are bolt actions or very high powered that do significant damage -- but nothing that you sit back and snipe with. Even melees are not one hit, and if you are using a knife it only does like a third of their health, maybe a half.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
2 seperate dev teams means 2 completely different games????
im sure you mean they just had 1 small team work on the pc port to get things like custom graphic settings/resolutions/ dedicated servers. content wise im sure it will be exactly the same, no?
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a PC as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a console as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
Did you just kind of skip over my post and go "It's still a console port" essentially in differnet words?
Two. Separate. Development. Teams.
They have the same basic engine, but how they balance the game otherwise (IE: Overall gunplay, SMART and parkour physics, class balance, etc.) is up to the separate dev teams.
You see, that's what it means when someone says two different development teams. The two won't be DRASTICALLY different, but you can tell one will be a console port and one will not.
And yes, I do expect you to research it because there is a little link to fragworld out there that has about 20 pages worth of information on the game that is freaking astoundingly in depth.
On April 12 2011 22:27 ambientmf wrote: Is the developer the same Splash Damage who made Wolf ET? That game consumed a lot of my teenage life, and if its half as good, I'll definitely be looking to pick up Brink. Oh, and I loved Mirror's Edge a lot so I hope the platforming is similar in Brink.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a console as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
Did you just kind of skip over my post and go "It's still a console port" essentially in differnet words?
Two. Separate. Development. Teams.
They have the same basic engine, but how they balance the game otherwise (IE: Overall gunplay, SMART and parkour physics, class balance, etc.) is up to the separate dev teams.
You see, that's what it means when someone says two different development teams. The two won't be DRASTICALLY different, but you can tell one will be a console port and one will not.
And yes, I do expect you to research it because there is a little link to fragworld out there that has about 20 pages worth of information on the game that is freaking astoundingly in depth.
You expect people to read 20 pages of information just to satisfy you for doing "research"? No thanks. You still make it sound like they're making 2 separate games. I'm not sure you know how porting and development works.
I'm glad you're super stoked about the game, but just because I think it looks like a console port, you get really defensive about it. It's as if I told you it was delayed another 2 months or something, calm down.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a console as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
Did you just kind of skip over my post and go "It's still a console port" essentially in differnet words?
Two. Separate. Development. Teams.
They have the same basic engine, but how they balance the game otherwise (IE: Overall gunplay, SMART and parkour physics, class balance, etc.) is up to the separate dev teams.
You see, that's what it means when someone says two different development teams. The two won't be DRASTICALLY different, but you can tell one will be a console port and one will not.
And yes, I do expect you to research it because there is a little link to fragworld out there that has about 20 pages worth of information on the game that is freaking astoundingly in depth.
You expect people to read 20 pages of information just to satisfy you for doing "research"? No thanks. You still make it sound like they're making 2 separate games. I'm not sure you know how porting and development works.
I'm glad you're super stoked about the game, but just because I think it looks like a console port, you get really defensive about it. It's as if I told you it was delayed another 2 months or something, calm down.
Let's not make this into some back and forth flame war, so let's back up and at least try to keep it civil on both sides first and foremost.
Secondly, if someone is making an opinion about something and sharing it -- I do expect them to research what information is given. I thought that was a given, if you wanted a valid opinion you knew what you were talking about. And I do know how a console port works, I can look at many cases ala Crysis 2 for that knowledge. This game is essentially one game, but one version being specified for consoles and one for PC. They have made it very, very clear that you will notice a difference between console and PC versions, and there will be no "port" They were separately developed for PC and Consoles. Are they the same game? Essentially, yes. However, neither will be a port.
Besides, it was already delayed for what, a year or two now? I dont think another two months would piss me off THAT much. Don't take it personally, it is just I see and hear people saying the same inane shit (LOL CALL OF DUTY CLONE, CONSOLE PORT, TF2 CLONE, etc.) so I get defensive about it, considering I have been waiting for this game for years now.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a console as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
Did you just kind of skip over my post and go "It's still a console port" essentially in differnet words?
Two. Separate. Development. Teams.
They have the same basic engine, but how they balance the game otherwise (IE: Overall gunplay, SMART and parkour physics, class balance, etc.) is up to the separate dev teams.
You see, that's what it means when someone says two different development teams. The two won't be DRASTICALLY different, but you can tell one will be a console port and one will not.
And yes, I do expect you to research it because there is a little link to fragworld out there that has about 20 pages worth of information on the game that is freaking astoundingly in depth.
You expect people to read 20 pages of information just to satisfy you for doing "research"? No thanks. You still make it sound like they're making 2 separate games. I'm not sure you know how porting and development works.
I'm glad you're super stoked about the game, but just because I think it looks like a console port, you get really defensive about it. It's as if I told you it was delayed another 2 months or something, calm down.
Besides, it was already delayed for what, a year or two now? I dont think another two months would piss me off THAT much. Don't take it personally, it is just I see and hear people saying the same inane shit (LOL CALL OF DUTY CLONE, CONSOLE PORT, TF2 CLONE, etc.) so I get defensive about it, considering I have been waiting for this game for years now.
Don't take it out on me. My comparison is still valid. It seems you got to the word 'port' and flew off the handle. Sorry you waited so long for this game, might have saved you some time and just played borderlands, crysis 2, tf2, and global agenda at the same time.
On May 03 2011 05:55 Playguuu wrote: Has console port written all over it. It's like global agenda had a baby with borderlands and tf2 had a baby with crysis 2 then those two had a baby.
The "acrobatics" look really generic. I hope there's more to it than sliding and vaulting over things.
There were two separate dev teams, one for consoles and one for PC
Please don't spout out mindless crap before you at least try to research it.
They aren't two separate games. It doesn't mean they won't skew design decisions because it has to go on a console as well. Didn't know I had to "research" something to form an overall impression from PROMOTIONAL material.
Did you just kind of skip over my post and go "It's still a console port" essentially in differnet words?
Two. Separate. Development. Teams.
They have the same basic engine, but how they balance the game otherwise (IE: Overall gunplay, SMART and parkour physics, class balance, etc.) is up to the separate dev teams.
You see, that's what it means when someone says two different development teams. The two won't be DRASTICALLY different, but you can tell one will be a console port and one will not.
And yes, I do expect you to research it because there is a little link to fragworld out there that has about 20 pages worth of information on the game that is freaking astoundingly in depth.
You expect people to read 20 pages of information just to satisfy you for doing "research"? No thanks. You still make it sound like they're making 2 separate games. I'm not sure you know how porting and development works.
I'm glad you're super stoked about the game, but just because I think it looks like a console port, you get really defensive about it. It's as if I told you it was delayed another 2 months or something, calm down.
Besides, it was already delayed for what, a year or two now? I dont think another two months would piss me off THAT much. Don't take it personally, it is just I see and hear people saying the same inane shit (LOL CALL OF DUTY CLONE, CONSOLE PORT, TF2 CLONE, etc.) so I get defensive about it, considering I have been waiting for this game for years now.
Don't take it out on me. My comparison is still valid. It seems you got to the word 'port' and flew off the handle. Sorry you waited so long for this game, might have saved you some time and just played borderlands, crysis 2, tf2, and global agenda at the same time.
+ another about 90 hours on Borderlands
I think I got my fair bit of those games.
And your comparison is just as valid as me saying Battlefield 3 is a Call of Duty clone since it involves realistic graphics, real life guns and conflicts in the middle east and it is also a TF2 clone since it is class based.
On April 12 2011 22:27 ambientmf wrote: Is the developer the same Splash Damage who made Wolf ET? That game consumed a lot of my teenage life, and if its half as good, I'll definitely be looking to pick up Brink. Oh, and I loved Mirror's Edge a lot so I hope the platforming is similar in Brink.
Yes. They did Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory and then did Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Both are games that apparently focused on team-based play as opposed to CoD's (and most fps games, for that matter) empowerment of the lone wolf playstyle.
The movement system doesn't look super "awmahgawd" amazing - but sometimes things don't need to. Sometimes it just needs to work better than it used to and not get in your way.
If it turns out to be fun - fantastic. If not, tough shit.
Hope it rocks, but still remaining cautious. Also have to decide between PC (dedicated servers, likely modable for more levels, but also more likely to run into hackers and also have to worry about all the annoying computer shit like appropriate drivers and other annoyances) or PS3 (where my friends mostly game/we've played COD, Borderlands, etc.).
The Light/Medium/Heavy body types are an interesting mechanic/concept, at the very least. Light guys are faster, but have less health and less "mana" (class ability points - used on stuff like healing for medics, giving out ammo for soldiers, etc.) and are independent of class. So you could make a Light engineer that can sprint way the hell out in front, climb up a wall and set up a turret in a good spot, or you can make a heavy engineer that can drop mines and buff teammates ammo (aka, bullet damage) for extended periods of time. Heavier body types can hold heavier weapons, so the dude sprinting out front probably only has a SMG. The big heavy dude (even if it's a role typically more fragile in other games, like a Medic) could be plodding a long a little slower, but while wielding a minigun. With weapons tied to body type and not character class, the Medic (healer) is suddenly less of a free kill when you only have a SMG and he has a 100+ round bullet hose to point in your general direction, as well has having a lot more health than you do.
Uhh that is basically TeamFortress gameplay from 1996.. just dumbed down for the masses by removing mechanically difficult concepts like quake 1 air acceleration physics, grenade jumping, rocket jumping
The common thing about this new gameplay is that it has the same kind of results as the classic features of old games, aka turrets, advanced movement techniques, healing etc. BUT instead of requiring high learning curve acrobatic actions, it is achieved by single button easy-mode options, ready for consumption by the masses.
If I spend hours in Q3 or TF2 on jump maps practicing strafe jumping/air strafing
Air strafing was removed after quake 1 to simplify movement.. so your example is kind of contradicting the premise of the argument..
There is, however, air strafing in TF2. I guess I should have seperated Q3 and TF2 with a / rather than "or" so "strafe jumping/air strafing" was more clearly linked to each game. I meant strafe jumping quake and air strafing in TF2.
I've got my eye on this game, but I'm going to wait for the reviews before I purchase. I like a lot of what I've seen in the promotional material so far, but it's almost impossible to judge quality of a game without playing it first, and so I'll just be waiting to hear what other people say and think about this game.
I hope its good though, I'd like a new team-based FPS to play on my 360. CoD has grown stale.
They released some pretty awesome numbers on the stats of Brink today check these out xD
With a week to go until Brinks release, Bethesda are moving on from tutorials to stats as they announce interesting stats about the game. The first statistic to be released is that Brink allows for the creation of over 100 quadrillion (100,000,000,000,000,000) unique characters! Check the stats out below:
On May 07 2011 00:27 Bio0rMech wrote: i feel this games gonna be very glitchy, because theres so much things to do around i bet theres gonna be alot of patching
At the same time, I wonder if there'll be potential for some nice trick moves, ie. an equivalent to strafe jumping, or something like that.
I have no idea why, but I am more amped for this game than any other game this year; aside from the potential Diablo 3. This game looks sweet and I am so excited to pick it up on Tuesday.
Why this game will flop according to a very popular thread on Gamefaq's
1. There is no KD/stat tracking so no one will take this game seriously.
2. The game is going to be a clunky 30fps nightmare. Skill isn't a factor if the game aims and controls like crap, hence the exclusion of stat tracking.
3. Characters are different sizes which kills the balanced competitive aspect of an FPS
4. No one will pay attention to the objectives
5. It's rated T so there will either be less of a community since most people think they're cool buying M rated games, or it will be filled with tons of little kids. Either way this game loses.
6. Snipers are a two shot kill so they're worthless and AR's/SMG's will dominate
7. Too many customization options. If I wanted to dress up my character to certain exact specifications I'd play The Sims. It took away precious development time that could have been used to make this game actually good.
8. Level system will fracture the playerbase and make this game even more dead. Brb waiting 30 minutes to get into a lobby with 3 other people.
9. It's a new IP that most people don't even know about, so it will die really fast.
10. Splash Damage made Enemy Terriroty: Quake Wars, which also failed.
10/10
Raged so hard. I'm still mad about this, because I can take a joke and a troll -- but these guys are serious.
1. There is no KD/stat tracking so no one will take this game seriously.
2. The game is going to be a clunky 30fps nightmare. Skill isn't a factor if the game aims and controls like crap, hence the exclusion of stat tracking.
3. Characters are different sizes which kills the balanced competitive aspect of an FPS
4. No one will pay attention to the objectives
5. It's rated T so there will either be less of a community since most people think they're cool buying M rated games, or it will be filled with tons of little kids. Either way this game loses.
6. Snipers are a two shot kill so they're worthless and AR's/SMG's will dominate
7. Too many customization options. If I wanted to dress up my character to certain exact specifications I'd play The Sims. It took away precious development time that could have been used to make this game actually good.
8. Level system will fracture the playerbase and make this game even more dead. Brb waiting 30 minutes to get into a lobby with 3 other people.
9. It's a new IP that most people don't even know about, so it will die really fast.
10. Splash Damage made Enemy Terriroty: Quake Wars, which also failed.
10/10
Raged so hard. I'm still mad about this, because I can take a joke and a troll -- but these guys are serious.
Seems like a cool mixture of Borderlands art style, Battlefield game play crossed with Mirrors edge. The free running is a neat concept I'll need to see it full scale before I'm convinced on this game. If the free running is as good as seems, this game will be montage heaven.
I have to say I watched a couple game play videos including: + Show Spoiler +
and I gotta say: I am not impressed at all. To be honest the more videos I watch of this game, the worse it looks.
I'm going to go ahead and call it: this will be another one of those hyped up FPS that does not deliver. Customization don't mean shit if the game play sucks.
To the above poster, I felt the same way for a while. First.. most gameplay is shown off on Xbox 360 which is capped at 30 fps. Second it's usually featuring someone not that good, resulting in what looks like sluggish play.
Here is a vid that I thought show cased a little more skill.. and might be a small taste of what we'll see from PC gamers in Brink.
1. There is no KD/stat tracking so no one will take this game seriously.
2. The game is going to be a clunky 30fps nightmare. Skill isn't a factor if the game aims and controls like crap, hence the exclusion of stat tracking.
3. Characters are different sizes which kills the balanced competitive aspect of an FPS
4. No one will pay attention to the objectives
5. It's rated T so there will either be less of a community since most people think they're cool buying M rated games, or it will be filled with tons of little kids. Either way this game loses.
6. Snipers are a two shot kill so they're worthless and AR's/SMG's will dominate
7. Too many customization options. If I wanted to dress up my character to certain exact specifications I'd play The Sims. It took away precious development time that could have been used to make this game actually good.
8. Level system will fracture the playerbase and make this game even more dead. Brb waiting 30 minutes to get into a lobby with 3 other people.
9. It's a new IP that most people don't even know about, so it will die really fast.
10. Splash Damage made Enemy Terriroty: Quake Wars, which also failed.
10/10
Raged so hard. I'm still mad about this, because I can take a joke and a troll -- but these guys are serious.
in response to the points. 1. I actually like that, prestige and leveling up is pretty lame imo. 2. The gameplay videos looked fine to me. 3. Timesplitters had the most rediculous sizes of charachters and that game kicked ass. 4. Thats based on assumptions 5. Not every shooter has to be mature^ 6. Having guns that take 1 shot to kill is worthless 7. Im not a huge fan of the customizing, but it could be really cool and you could make a name for yourself visually 8. no comment idk the details. 9. Ever hear of Modern Warfare? hell, every great game series started off as a new IP, thats a terrible argument. 10. no comment idk the details.
On May 09 2011 00:46 anilusion wrote: Modern Warfare was not a new IP.
I think the general point still stands, though. Just saying that a game will fail because it's not a sequel or part of an existing IP displays a terribly depressing outlook on the game's industry.
Actually, more than just being a horribly cynical viewpoint, it's also incorrect.
(I should point out that I'm not suggesting that this is your opinion, just continuing the discussion regarding that Gamefaqs list )
and I gotta say: I am not impressed at all. To be honest the more videos I watch of this game, the worse it looks.
I'm going to go ahead and call it: this will be another one of those hyped up FPS that does not deliver. Customization don't mean shit if the game play sucks.
You may be right but I wouldn't base my opinion on what the console version looks like with people playing against bots
and I gotta say: I am not impressed at all. To be honest the more videos I watch of this game, the worse it looks.
I'm going to go ahead and call it: this will be another one of those hyped up FPS that does not deliver. Customization don't mean shit if the game play sucks.
You may be right but I wouldn't base my opinion on what the console version looks like with people playing against bots
From what I read the PC version has some differences and even has faster movement. I wasn't impressed with the console footage from game leaks but then again console FPS never really did it to me since I started in the genre back with Doom and have always done most of my gaming on PC.
Just to let people know, it uses the same graphics engine as DoomIII, that's 6 years old. Seriously game developers, pick your shit up, and start using new graphics engine.
Also, Brink has a bulletstorm look to it, w/ a tf2 gameplay, and mirror's edge movement.
Although I can't help but feel that I wish the smart system was more interactive, rather than just holding a button and running towards an obstacle.
On May 09 2011 00:46 anilusion wrote: Modern Warfare was not a new IP.
I think the general point still stands, though. Just saying that a game will fail because it's not a sequel or part of an existing IP displays a terribly depressing outlook on the game's industry.
Actually, more than just being a horribly cynical viewpoint, it's also incorrect.
(I should point out that I'm not suggesting that this is your opinion, just continuing the discussion regarding that Gamefaqs list )
Honestly it's not even a new IP. The base game is the same as the Enemy Territory series that Splash damage has been a part since 2003. The publisher changed so since Activision owns the rights to Enemy Territory the game could not be legally called Brink:Enemy Territory.
I dearly hope this game delivers. If anything, it deserves praise for its aesthetic. Not just another brown FPS. And it doesn't look half bad either. In fact, it looks rather nice to me. Honestly, I won't be sitting around checking out the textures when I'm duking it out online.
On May 09 2011 01:40 wei2coolman wrote: Although I can't help but feel that I wish the smart system was more interactive, rather than just holding a button and running towards an obstacle.
It is. The smart button is essentially pressing the jump or crouch button for you, in conjunction with sprinting or not. You can still do everything manually without touching the smart button, which can often be just a tad faster.
One of the devs explained it in one of their videos that using the smart button while running towards a wall, for example, it waits until you're at the wall, sees it, and then climbs over it. If you do it manually you could jump before you even get to the wall, which means you may be further up and get a shorter climb animation (or just jump over it entirely if it's small enough). Seems like a reasonable compromise.
Here's a short diagram from a link earlier in the thread showing a couple of ways to get over an obstacle. Gonna guess using the smart button makes some of them a little more likely to be used than others.
Essentially, the smart button will get the job done, but it usually won't be the most efficient method.
The graphics and animations look pretty good for a fuckaround fps, I preordered this some time ago and it's shaping up more and more like the kind of game I would play when LoL servers are down and I don't feel like playing SMB.
On May 09 2011 01:40 wei2coolman wrote: Just to let people know, it uses the same graphics engine as DoomIII, that's 6 years old. Seriously game developers, pick your shit up, and start using new graphics engine.
From the programmer:
Its a heavily modified Quake Wars engine (idTech 4), its got a completely new renderer, new multi-core architecture (a job system for NUMA (PS3) and SMP systems), a new tools framework and lots more.
We think its the best of both worlds, get tried and tested Quake Wars tech (its often underestimated how much time it takes to get shipping tech) but with new shiny bits where required.
We hope the screen shots, show shiny new renderer is doing okay Source
Quake Wars is 3 1/2 years old, Brink was probably in production for a good span of that period. What do you expect, that they switch over to the latest Crytek engine when it comes out? The games graphics are stylized and it clearly doesn't aim for realism, so why waste time on using another engine? Not even to get started on the huge amount of work it takes to create all the in-game assets for the more realistic engines. Take a look at WoW for example. The graphics are far from what could be done, but that doesn't matter, as the gameplay is solid (at least, enough people enjoy it :p). Borderlands is another good example here. The graphics were nothing spectacular in terms of technology, but it was still an amazing game. Brink is clearly a run and gun type of game...are you really going to have time to inspect skin pores on the characters?
And then we also have the implications graphics bring to game design. UT3 has loads and loads of detail, but to me that means that sometimes I'm shooting at a simple particle effect, where I thought I saw a player moving. Lower amounts of detail facilitate players in recognizing game elements better. Take a look at TF2 for example or Quake, where players prefer to disable as much detail as possible.
Furthermore, you need to keep in mind that the consoles are not as powerful as the current wave of PC setups. Even looking at the PC platform only, it is only logical that you would want to enable as many people as possible to play your game. With SC2, players that have an older system are still able to play.
The only other option I see would be viable here is if they would have went with UDK/Unreal 3, but that wouldn't make much difference, I guess (Borderlands was Unreal 3), as they are going with a stylistic art style over realism.
In the end, you are taking stabs at something that was carefully thought through. Take a look at any of the games that you feel have better graphics and then think about their budgets and how they spent it. A good example here is Modern Warfare 2. The budget was huge, but the game was only 4~5 hours long. I'd much rather have a longer game and sacrifice some detail for that, than to have a short game which I blow through in two days.
To disregard games due to their graphics is just ignorant. Portal 2 uses an even older engine, but that doesn't mean it's not a good game.
On May 09 2011 01:40 wei2coolman wrote: Just to let people know, it uses the same graphics engine as DoomIII, that's 6 years old. Seriously game developers, pick your shit up, and start using new graphics engine.
Its a heavily modified Quake Wars engine (idTech 4), its got a completely new renderer, new multi-core architecture (a job system for NUMA (PS3) and SMP systems), a new tools framework and lots more.
We think its the best of both worlds, get tried and tested Quake Wars tech (its often underestimated how much time it takes to get shipping tech) but with new shiny bits where required.
We hope the screen shots, show shiny new renderer is doing okay Source
Quake Wars is 3 1/2 years old, Brink was probably in production for a good span of that period. What do you expect, that they switch over to the latest Crytek engine when it comes out? The games graphics are stylized and it clearly doesn't aim for realism, so why waste time on using another engine? Not even to get started on the huge amount of work it takes to create all the in-game assets for the more realistic engines. Take a look at WoW for example. The graphics are far from what could be done, but that doesn't matter, as the gameplay is solid (at least, enough people enjoy it :p). Borderlands is another good example here. The graphics were nothing spectacular in terms of technology, but it was still an amazing game. Brink is clearly a run and gun type of game...are you really going to have time to inspect skin pores on the characters?
And then we also have the implications graphics bring to game design. UT3 has loads and loads of detail, but to me that means that sometimes I'm shooting at a simple particle effect, where I thought I saw a player moving. Lower amounts of detail facilitate players in recognizing game elements better. Take a look at TF2 for example or Quake, where players prefer to disable as much detail as possible.
Furthermore, you need to keep in mind that the consoles are not as powerful as the current wave of PC setups. Even looking at the PC platform only, it is only logical that you would want to enable as many people as possible to play your game. With SC2, players that have an older system are still able to play.
The only other option I see would be viable here is if they would have went with UDK/Unreal 3, but that wouldn't make much difference, I guess (Borderlands was Unreal 3), as they are going with a stylistic art style over realism.
In the end, you are taking stabs at something that was carefully thought through. Take a look at any of the games that you feel have better graphics and then think about their budgets and how they spent it. A good example here is Modern Warfare 2. The budget was huge, but the game was only 4~5 hours long. I'd much rather have a longer game and sacrifice some detail for that, than to have a short game which I blow through in two days.
To disregard games due to their graphics is just ignorant. Portal 2 uses an even older engine, but that doesn't mean it's not a good game.
To further the OP's point John D.Carmack has said that the current hardware that consumers have cannot even run ID Tech 6 and Tim Sweeney has has also said that the unreal engine 4 will not run on the underpowered 360 or PS3. It's basically a case of the software being more advanced than what is available to the general public. Your not going to see new amazing engines until the 360 and PS3 are replaced. Also there are no ID tech 5 games out on the market yet so ID 4 is still a relevant engine. Most of the ID tech 5 stuff is about making the engine developer friendly although you can use 20 gig textures in it apparently.
Ive preorded the game and will be playing at 12 to night so if anyone is interestd in joining me m Skype or vent pm me, cause im looking forward to really getting into this game.
I heard from folks that got to play it very recently that it's basically a slower-paced Wolfenstein : Enemy Territory. Gunplay and unlocks are allegedly solid.
On May 10 2011 06:17 DreamScaR wrote: Sigh, just went to go buy this as it's 49.99 on steam right now.. Visa doesn't like me today and my bills are paid
Go to Direct2Drive and pre-order it.
Use the promo code "sizzle" (no quotes) to get like 15% off or something. It ends up coming out to around $37.
On May 10 2011 06:17 DreamScaR wrote: Sigh, just went to go buy this as it's 49.99 on steam right now.. Visa doesn't like me today and my bills are paid
Go to Direct2Drive and pre-order it.
Use the promo code "sizzle" (no quotes) to get like 15% off or something. It ends up coming out to around $37.
Wow I actually just might do that. I was going to wait for a couple of weeks to see what players think of it but I'm sure I can squeeze $37 worth of entertainment out of it even if it is terrible.
Although, $37 would buy me a case of nice microbrew. Decisions, decisions.
Well I played like 15 minutes and it looks like total dogshit. Turning on AA doesn't save it at all, it looks fucking broken and runs at about 20 fps for some reason. I don't think it even works at all on ATI cards even though I have the 11.5a drivers that came out today for Brink.
Apparently a bunch of reviews came out giving it horrible scores. I can't even play so I don't know but they are probably right. Fucking nostalgia for ET screws me again
Both TLers and reviews seem to be more negative than positive about this game, makes me glad I canceled pre-order. Even if it was worth playing I doubt my computer could run it at a respectable framerate. Game looked like it had potential but so far I'm sticking with TF2.
There seems to only be 1 spawn point... is that foreal? Have they not learned from previous shooting games, I don't see how that can possibly be a good thing. Even if there's an invulnerable turret guarding spawns, that just means a team losing can be backed up and camped coming around the first turn.
On May 10 2011 15:45 Pufftrees wrote: There seems to only be 1 spawn point... is that foreal? Have they not learned from previous shooting games, I don't see how that can possibly be a good thing. Even if there's an invulnerable turret guarding spawns, that just means a team losing can be backed up and camped coming around the first turn.
It's based on team spawn on a timer. How is this an issue?
I actually pre ordered this game on accident. I was messing around with my new Amazon App on my phone. The one-click ordering, is in fact one click, go figure. Anyways, I've learned since then that the game looks pretty bad ass and I'm really feeling all of the customization. I also got some extra DLC for pre ordering through Amazon, as well as a $10 credit.
I'll be playing on xbox live, if anybody is interested in playing, let me know as it seems like a game with a heavy emphasis on team play.
Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
This game from the start was meant to be a pure, 100% team based FPS. So much that KD wasn't even recorded, and still isn't. A main criticism of IGN is that the game is "too focused on teamwork for its own good."
I think I'll wait to play it myself. If IGN and other reviewers give Metro and Stalker a 6/10, and then this game gets a 6/10, that just means good for me.
It really doesn't look that good IMO; it's a bit too hardcore to casually pick up and play and lacks the depth for an intense FPS that I'd want to play every night.
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
Watching JP's stream and the game looks fine to me. Then again I loved quake wars. Just looks like the guns need some serious patching but really I don't understand the criticism at all.
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
The game is getting KILLED in reviews. In this day and age of reviewers giving crazy high scores for any derp; this is very alarming.
This is a day in age where, as I said earlier, glorious games like Stalker gets a 4 and Metro 2033 gets a 6. And CoD and Homefront get 10/10's. What the hell do you expect? Do people honestly look at reviews still?
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
The game is getting KILLED in reviews. In this day and age of reviewers giving crazy high scores for any derp; this is very alarming.
This is a day in age where, as I said earlier, glorious games like Stalker gets a 4 and Metro 2033 gets a 6. And CoD and Homefront get 10/10's. What the hell do you expect? Do people honestly look at reviews still?
Enforcing team play is not always a good thing. In Wolfeinstein ET you could go own your own and be a real pain for the other team if you were good enough. One sniper was able to keep a team from advancing if he was good enough..
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
I haven't really paid any attention to this game or even know if this is the case but FPS games are not usually very fun if there can be no aspect of 'clutch' or being able to make a large impact on a game by yourself. If the game is just solely based around who's team is more coordinated or whatever then I don't see the game being fun to play in pubs or without friends. Plus I don't really play FPS games to 'win', I just play for a bit to get some frags and have fun (I mostly play Quake and TF2) & I think it's a bad idea for games to not let you play it how you want.
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
The game is getting KILLED in reviews. In this day and age of reviewers giving crazy high scores for any derp; this is very alarming.
This is a day in age where, as I said earlier, glorious games like Stalker gets a 4 and Metro 2033 gets a 6. And CoD and Homefront get 10/10's. What the hell do you expect? Do people honestly look at reviews still?
Neither Stalker and Metro were highly anticipated games. When a highly anticipated game like Brink gets panned by reviewers (when they all have early copies from the publisher) it's never a good sign. You just said it yourself. CoD and Homefront got 10's.
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
The game is getting KILLED in reviews. In this day and age of reviewers giving crazy high scores for any derp; this is very alarming.
This is a day in age where, as I said earlier, glorious games like Stalker gets a 4 and Metro 2033 gets a 6. And CoD and Homefront get 10/10's. What the hell do you expect? Do people honestly look at reviews still?
are you watching jp stream? im not impress. it doesnt look like there would be any impressive kills you can have. and there are no stats wtf? there's some weird crap that show XP. i wanna feel like i accomplish something if i get a head shot or like they explode or something. but they lay on the ground waiting to get revive just looks so lacklustered.
On May 10 2011 13:27 floor exercise wrote: Well I played like 15 minutes and it looks like total dogshit. Turning on AA doesn't save it at all, it looks fucking broken and runs at about 20 fps for some reason. I don't think it even works at all on ATI cards even though I have the 11.5a drivers that came out today for Brink.
Apparently a bunch of reviews came out giving it horrible scores. I can't even play so I don't know but they are probably right. Fucking nostalgia for ET screws me again
I run on an ati card an no problem with me. The game looks great, it's like borderlands and the cut scenes are actually incredible. No idea why you're getting 20 fps =(
On May 10 2011 13:27 floor exercise wrote: Well I played like 15 minutes and it looks like total dogshit. Turning on AA doesn't save it at all, it looks fucking broken and runs at about 20 fps for some reason. I don't think it even works at all on ATI cards even though I have the 11.5a drivers that came out today for Brink.
Apparently a bunch of reviews came out giving it horrible scores. I can't even play so I don't know but they are probably right. Fucking nostalgia for ET screws me again
I run on an ati card an no problem with me. The game looks great, it's like borderlands and the cut scenes are actually incredible. No idea why you're getting 20 fps =(
Ati cards have the fantastic feature where if your drivers are too new your card starts to fail. I think that's the issue here. Try downgrading your driver version to 7 or so, that'll usually fix it.
After playing Brink for a little while, I can definitely get on board with that review. The mechanics are brilliant -- the parkour, the class design, the way objectives and teamwork are emphasized, the art style, even the shooting. It's just brought down by horrid map design, the questionable unlock system (get all the guns in 45 minutes! get all the clothing in a day!), and other bits and pieces that leave me scratching my head.
And for god's sake don't even bother trying to play the "single player".
Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS.
I guess, enjoy it while it lasts, I wouldn't buy it unless you have money to throw away. Perfect game to rent it seems, which is the exact opposite of how they were hyping it.
On May 10 2011 17:24 Pufftrees wrote: Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS.
I guess, enjoy it while it lasts, I wouldn't buy it unless you have money to throw away. Perfect game to rent it seems, which is the exact opposite of how they were hyping it.
Not that I think this game is actually good, it looks really generic and boring, but why are people so obsessed with XP/unlocking/stats and stuff like that? Do people not remember when you could play a multiplayer FPS and use any gun you want if it was in the level or available for your class? A game should expect to remain popular by the fact that it is fun to play, not how long it takes to unlock all the guns... I wish FPS games hadn't tried to add all this RPG grinding stuff to pretend like the game is worth playing.
On May 10 2011 17:24 Pufftrees wrote: Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS.
I guess, enjoy it while it lasts, I wouldn't buy it unless you have money to throw away. Perfect game to rent it seems, which is the exact opposite of how they were hyping it.
Not that I think this game is actually good, it looks really generic and boring, but why are people so obsessed with XP/unlocking/stats and stuff like that?
That's just how it is now a days. StarCraft 2 would probably have half the people playing it if there wasn't icons to unlock. Not to mention the lack of statistics in Brink, I mean seriously how can they not at least record kills and deaths.
On May 10 2011 16:15 maartendq wrote: Gametrailer summary about the console version: "If you're looking for a team-based game that isn't Team Fortress 2, Brink might be the right game for you."
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
"WAAAAAAAAAH I CANT RUN OFF AND KILL THE ENTIRE TEAM BY MYSELF IN A GAME MADE SPECIFICALLY TO ENFORCE TEAMWORK"
The game is getting KILLED in reviews. In this day and age of reviewers giving crazy high scores for any derp; this is very alarming.
This is a day in age where, as I said earlier, glorious games like Stalker gets a 4 and Metro 2033 gets a 6. And CoD and Homefront get 10/10's. What the hell do you expect? Do people honestly look at reviews still?
are you watching jp stream? im not impress. it doesnt look like there would be any impressive kills you can have. and there are no stats wtf? there's some weird crap that show XP. i wanna feel like i accomplish something if i get a head shot or like they explode or something. but they lay on the ground waiting to get revive just looks so lacklustered.
Yea I was watching jps stream as well and frankly my opinion of the game right now is that it's pretty garbage for a variety of reasons. Lots of ideas but the overall game just doesn't seem very well polished at all.
On May 10 2011 17:24 Pufftrees wrote: Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS..
lol, complaints like this...
Can't you just play the game for fun and not for unlocking shit and getting XP? I mean, great MP titles like Quake, CS, Starcraft, Warcraft,.. never had stuff to unlock. Splash Damage just doesn't want this to be WoW.
On May 10 2011 17:24 Pufftrees wrote: Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS.
I guess, enjoy it while it lasts, I wouldn't buy it unless you have money to throw away. Perfect game to rent it seems, which is the exact opposite of how they were hyping it.
Not that I think this game is actually good, it looks really generic and boring, but why are people so obsessed with XP/unlocking/stats and stuff like that? Do people not remember when you could play a multiplayer FPS and use any gun you want if it was in the level or available for your class? A game should expect to remain popular by the fact that it is fun to play, not how long it takes to unlock all the guns... I wish FPS games hadn't tried to add all this RPG grinding stuff to pretend like the game is worth playing.
back when tf2 had one set of weapons for each class and no stupid hats... those were the days
I'm loving the game so far. I guess if you think FPS games should be RPGS you wouldn't like it but I'm in the camp that hates everything COD4 did to the genre.
I'm sad to see that in less than 3 hours after launch everyone has their incredibly well thought out opinions on the game figured out and posted on TeamLiquid.
This game is a bit more team oriented and in some ways more complex and difficult to get used to because there are somewhat unique systems involved.
Gone are the days where the strategy guide you'd get from a pro player starts with 'avoid your teammates, they are a liability, find a corner somewhere and bunnyhop...' and I say good riddance.
I've only played about 3 hours, and it is really growing on me. Once yo start to get used to the SMART system, and working as a team to focus on and accomplish objectives, it can be very fun.
The sound quality is amazing, the art style is cool, but it is too early to make a call on gun/map balance.
The customization is surprisingly in-depth. Very quickly I was able to get my character looking and feeling the way I wanted it to. The gun customization is similarly impressive and rewards players for completing the 'challenge missions' which are a lot more like a tutorial, which I would suggest to new players anyways. (Grab some friends though, the friendly AI will do you very few if any favors.)
Is the game perfect? Of course not. One of the maps has a massive sound issue, valid complaints can probably be made about some of the weapon balance etc. but as a whole I would say it makes for a pretty fun game, and while I don't feel like I've played enough to really recommend it to anyone, I've played it enough to know I wouldn't condemn it.
you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
This game just looks like a Team FOrtress 2 rip off but trying to be serious.
And as usual is just a terrible Console port. Last good competitive FPS on a PC was CS, and it looks like i will continue to wait for another FPS to come along....
It's a joke how they havent been able to make a good cooperative FPS for PC since Counter-strike and that's over 10 years old by now. Also, games that let you sprint/prone are automatically bad.
On May 10 2011 21:25 kalleralle wrote: It's a joke how they havent been able to make a good cooperative FPS for PC since Counter-strike and that's over 10 years old by now. Also, games that let you sprint/prone are automatically bad.
Not sure I agree with that. The real problem is that either the coding usually is messed up and you get stuff like dolphin diving, or the majority of players dont know how to use the options tactically and just continue to go about running and gunning.
On May 10 2011 21:25 kalleralle wrote: It's a joke how they havent been able to make a good cooperative FPS for PC since Counter-strike and that's over 10 years old by now. Also, games that let you sprint/prone are automatically bad.
Dystopia (a HL2 mod) is definately one of the best team games out there, but hardly anyone plays that game.
yeah... but atleast in tf2 you can go off by yourself and be fine. this game looks like if you run off alone you would just die. from what i seen its doesnt look great at all
Is there any specific reason to why you can't roam alone? I watched some of JPs stream this morning and I couldn't see anything that would break that.
Watched JP play and I gotta say im underwhelmed, its just another generic console to PC port and it reminds me too much of TF2.
Sure, you can jump over fences and slide on the ground, but thats not really a selling point for me, like at all. I want a good netcode and just allround solid and skill-based gameplay, this game doesn't seem to have it.
On May 10 2011 23:06 Senx wrote: Watched JP play and I gotta say im underwhelmed, its just another generic console to PC port and it reminds me too much of TF2.
Sure, you can jump over fences and slide on the ground, but thats not really a selling point for me, like at all. I want a good netcode and just allround solid and skill-based gameplay, this game doesn't seem to have it.
Indeed, as soon as i saw almost no weapon recoil i decided i wasnt going to buy the game.
On May 10 2011 17:24 Pufftrees wrote: Not sure how the game expects to remain popular if you can full unlock everything within a couple days and reach the level cap. Seems like it will appeal to a niche crowd at best, but that crowd is probably more satisfied with other FPS.
I guess, enjoy it while it lasts, I wouldn't buy it unless you have money to throw away. Perfect game to rent it seems, which is the exact opposite of how they were hyping it.
Not that I think this game is actually good, it looks really generic and boring, but why are people so obsessed with XP/unlocking/stats and stuff like that? Do people not remember when you could play a multiplayer FPS and use any gun you want if it was in the level or available for your class? A game should expect to remain popular by the fact that it is fun to play, not how long it takes to unlock all the guns... I wish FPS games hadn't tried to add all this RPG grinding stuff to pretend like the game is worth playing.
The vanilla versions of Wolf: ET had an XP system in pubs and I generally found that fine, it didn't really tilt the balance of the game but it certainly rewarded players who performed well through the campaign. Think of it as teching up, you start a new campaign and everything goes back to zero again.
Anyway more importantly, how well does this game live up to RTCW and ET?
I can't even play it to chime in on the gameplay because there are serious ATI problems with this game across like every series of cards. I know ATI has never had the greatest opengl support but this goes beyond that.
The server browser is the worst I have ever seen in a pc multiplayer game. It's like these companies are all vying to make the absolute worst browser. Remember BC2 and how shitty its browser was? This is about ten thousand times worse. I mean this is something we could do perfectly fine 10-15 years ago. Any steam game can populate a list of 3000+ servers, and this thing reduces your PC to a crawl trying to list 300 servers. And it doesn't even stop once the list is populated, it still lags your PC until you join a server.
It frightens me that they don't even care enough to make a decent server browser for the PC version
On May 10 2011 21:25 kalleralle wrote: It's a joke how they havent been able to make a good cooperative FPS for PC since Counter-strike and that's over 10 years old by now. Also, games that let you sprint/prone are automatically bad.
Not sure I agree with that. The real problem is that either the coding usually is messed up and you get stuff like dolphin diving, or the majority of players dont know how to use the options tactically and just continue to go about running and gunning.
I disagree as well. ET had a sprinting system and I found that it enhanced the gameplay. Sprinting didn't let you lose accuracy like in Q3 but it made it harder for the other player to hit you. The key was to know when to conserve and spend the sprinting bar.
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
ye cant understand that. i never understood the unlocking stuff. i get it from a design pov since it keeps people playing but for the wrong reasons.
dunno what happened to " lets play cause playing it is fun!". now evry FPS apparently needs a mmo like "keep playing else you got no equipment and be shit yo. also pretty pixels await you!"
On May 10 2011 23:41 divinesage wrote: Anyway more importantly, how well does this game live up to RTCW and ET?
It's a helluva lot better than Quake:ET. Seems like a good game from what I've played off it. The maps seem to want to funnel you into choke points but it looks like every objective has an alternative route to compensate for this. I know the guy who did De_Dust2 was a mapper for the game. Anyways I really haven't had anything to complain about and my initial impressions of the game is that the developers know what they were doing. The gameplay is a bit confusing at first because there is so much going on with all the objectives and such. I guess ATI users are having trouble, I use Nvidia and the game is running smoothly much better than Black ops and BFBC2 did when they launched.
Anyways I got my brother playing this and he normally hates FPS games, the last FPS I got him to play that he didn't hate was BF2 so that's a miracle in itself.
I personally love that i don't have to spend weeks playing to use some of the cool things, and I'm pretty impartial to keeping stats. Looks like a game ill be able to play casually, finally.
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
ye cant understand that. i never understood the unlocking stuff. i get it from a design pov since it keeps people playing but for the wrong reasons.
dunno what happened to " lets play cause playing it is fun!". now evry FPS apparently needs a mmo like "keep playing else you got no equipment and be shit yo. also pretty pixels await you!"
I generally agree with this, but TF2 nailed it perfectly. Almost every weapon is balanced. New weaps change how you play but don't throw it out of whack. You gain a perk and loose some advantages with each.
Make sure to update you drivers. The problem (or the common one I've heard about) is for the ATI cards, which have post-launch received a 'hotfix' type of update that seems to have done the trick for the people I play with on ATI cards.
I haven't played this yet, but from looking at the videos...
What the hell happened to the old style of FPS that used elements within the game to add funky movement tricks? I'm mostly thinking about the Quake series here... It didn't need ridiculous "SMART" buttons to move you around. It had an insane skill ceiling in just WASD, mouse movements, and weapons that kicked you around.
It even had a mod, "defrag" where players decided that it was more fun to time themselves moving through amazing community-made maps, than playing yet another FFA/TDM/CTF/whatever match.
I know that these mechanics aren't very transparent or clear to the player (i.e Q3 strafejumping), but nowadays every bloody newbie can go to YouTube and find hundreds of instructional videos and learn how to do this stuff.
Learning these little intentional "bugs" or "exploits" in the Quake games was a million times more satisfying to me than I imagine pressing a SMART button to be.
Then again, haven't tried this yet, so I may have to revise this position later on.
Is anyone else crashing as soon as they enter the weapon attachment loadout or missions? I can get through character creation/the opening cutscenes just fine, but as soon as I'm about to load in to a game(multiplayer or singleplayer) or go to select weapon attachments, the game just closes.
On May 11 2011 01:23 beef42 wrote: I haven't played this yet, but from looking at the videos...
What the hell happened to the old style of FPS that used elements within the game to add funky movement tricks? I'm mostly thinking about the Quake series here... It didn't need ridiculous "SMART" buttons to move you around. It had an insane skill ceiling in just WASD, mouse movements, and weapons that kicked you around.
It even had a mod, "defrag" where players decided that it was more fun to time themselves moving through amazing community-made maps, than playing yet another FFA/TDM/CTF/whatever match.
I know that these mechanics aren't very transparent or clear to the player (i.e Q3 strafejumping), but nowadays every bloody newbie can go to YouTube and find hundreds of instructional videos and learn how to do this stuff.
Learning these little intentional "bugs" or "exploits" in the Quake games was a million times more satisfying to me than I imagine pressing a SMART button to be.
Then again, haven't tried this yet, so I may have to revise this position later on.
Kind of like BW ---> SC2 you mean? Units with big flashing signs that say "micro me!!"
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
ye cant understand that. i never understood the unlocking stuff. i get it from a design pov since it keeps people playing but for the wrong reasons.
dunno what happened to " lets play cause playing it is fun!". now evry FPS apparently needs a mmo like "keep playing else you got no equipment and be shit yo. also pretty pixels await you!"
I generally agree with this, but TF2 nailed it perfectly. Almost every weapon is balanced. New weaps change how you play but don't throw it out of whack. You gain a perk and loose some advantages with each.
tf2 was hands down better before they introduced the variety of weapons, and everything they have done since has rolled it further downhill
On May 11 2011 01:23 beef42 wrote: I haven't played this yet, but from looking at the videos...
What the hell happened to the old style of FPS that used elements within the game to add funky movement tricks? I'm mostly thinking about the Quake series here... It didn't need ridiculous "SMART" buttons to move you around. It had an insane skill ceiling in just WASD, mouse movements, and weapons that kicked you around.
It even had a mod, "defrag" where players decided that it was more fun to time themselves moving through amazing community-made maps, than playing yet another FFA/TDM/CTF/whatever match.
I know that these mechanics aren't very transparent or clear to the player (i.e Q3 strafejumping), but nowadays every bloody newbie can go to YouTube and find hundreds of instructional videos and learn how to do this stuff.
Learning these little intentional "bugs" or "exploits" in the Quake games was a million times more satisfying to me than I imagine pressing a SMART button to be.
Then again, haven't tried this yet, so I may have to revise this position later on.
Kind of like BW ---> SC2 you mean? Units with big flashing signs that say "micro me!!"
not entirely sure about that comparison, you still have to learn where to use the smart button or you'll end up doing something stupid, but it's a good approximation
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
ye cant understand that. i never understood the unlocking stuff. i get it from a design pov since it keeps people playing but for the wrong reasons.
dunno what happened to " lets play cause playing it is fun!". now evry FPS apparently needs a mmo like "keep playing else you got no equipment and be shit yo. also pretty pixels await you!"
It's a major pillar in game design is that a game should make you feel like you are achieving something. In FPS games it's interesting when done right because even if you are being crushed all night, you'll still later on noticed you've unlocked something. It keeps players playing which means you have more opportunities to play with other players.
It's only really done wrong if you feel like you can't win till you have unlocked certain stuff.
On May 10 2011 20:33 mcht wrote: you're complaining that you're unlocking everything too fast ? oh jeez those lol players :D but seriously i think thats a good thing, its a fps for god's sake
Yep FPS games should be about skill not who plays the most like a MMO.
ye cant understand that. i never understood the unlocking stuff. i get it from a design pov since it keeps people playing but for the wrong reasons.
dunno what happened to " lets play cause playing it is fun!". now evry FPS apparently needs a mmo like "keep playing else you got no equipment and be shit yo. also pretty pixels await you!"
I generally agree with this, but TF2 nailed it perfectly. Almost every weapon is balanced. New weaps change how you play but don't throw it out of whack. You gain a perk and loose some advantages with each.
tf2 was hands down better before they introduced the variety of weapons, and everything they have done since has rolled it further downhill
Oh no way. It's like the guy said above me, they add depth and variety but you certainly don't need the new weapons to win.
On May 11 2011 00:39 kalleralle wrote: I really feel like they need to focus more on netcode and feel when coding multiplayer fps, the feel just isn't there in Brink it would seem.
unfortunately that's true for 95% of the FPSs released
There is actually a huge amount of skill in scaling/wall running ect that is almost impossible to do in smart, i've been able to reach a ton of places very rapidly from a bit of practice, though i'm far from consistant yet.
I'm having a lot of fun so far with it. Game runs a bit choppy on my computer but I'm trying to find the right settings for it still. I'm up to par on everything except my processor (2.33 Core2Duo) so I'm not sure if that's affecting it.
Otherwise, a lot of fun abilities and maps so far. Once I beat single player completely and unlock most things I'm going to start practicing online in a few days. Hopefully there will be people playing for a while, it's a lot of fun.
Its a game thats worth playing, but not obsessing over. LOTS of stuff to do offline though. I think the DLC will also help expand the game more, like Mass Effect. Story mode is a little weird because it plays like its a server with map rotations instead of an actual campaign, but it really helps you learn the ropes in a BC2 style.
There's a million and one bugs that are stopping me from truly playing right now, but the little I've played with the horrible performance I get on my ATI card I am not really enjoying.
The game doesn't seem very fun at its core. They tried really hard to promote the teamwork angle but forgot to make the most important parts satisfying. I loved wolf et and I played the hell out of Natural Selection so I am really on board the whole team based FPS thing. But your FPS still has to have fun combat at the end of the day, and this game seems to play like a total clusterfuck.
I am trying to wrap my head around the point of having 2 guns and fast switching if we pretty much have to use both of them to ever get a kill. Why not just re tune things until you can actually get the gameplay to a decent level. It doesn't add any extra skill to the game it's just really stupid. Can anyone explain how it makes the game better? I guess you need soldiers more often this way or something.
The guns themselves all kind of feel the same, and that feeling isn't a good one. I'm not sure how much of it is in the netcode but I don't feel like I am playing a solid game, it feels like a budget title.
I thought the whole parkour thing would be neat, but not only does it serve very little function it's also kind of poorly implemented and gives me the same cheap feeling the guns do. And sometimes I'll be sprinting (is there another button for sprint without SMART?) up stairs or something and the SMART thing will think I want to climb the railing, etc. It just gets in the way and feels like a total gimmick.
The objective system is weak too. It just results in your team switching to whatever is needed right as you complete the last step. Not sure why, maybe it's the low player count, but it doesn't have the same feeling as wolf et as you struggle to repair a bridge or blow something up. The side objectives seem pretty awful too. It feels like I am constantly funneled into a choke point with the rest of my team and we need a certain class to get past it, no class feels like it is serving to fill a specific gap in your team. I suppose medic is, but even medic just kinda plays like anything else. They somehow managed to make reviving not even as fun as it was in Wolf.
No part of this feels like a game I'd want to play for hours on end. It feels like some casual gameplay style budget version of Wolf ET. I expected it to be something closer to a competitive game, but I am pretty sure it's going to turn out awful for that, even if my performance gets fixed and the game gets patched up. The core gameplay just seems atrocious to me.
Pretty much I hate Brink and Splash Damage is trying to destroy my teenhood
So disappointed. I wasn't even going to buy this, but read a review from a top Et and decided too. What a waste of 50$. If you want to play this game competitively. You might want to rethink buying. I can see this game being a fun casual game with friends, but nothing more.
Reasons - it's extremely easy. I mean really easy if you have any fps exp. - it's repetitive and you just spray for the most part. There is recoil, but it doesn't really kick in until you've almost killed someone. So, spray your main, switch and finish the job easily. - I don't find any unique skills which give the game a high skill cap. Too me the skill cap o this game for individuals is going to be weak. You can say but thats where healing and ammo comes in. Give me a break. That's the easiest part of the game healing and dumping ammo.
I run the game perfectly. I had no problems with anything and I know so many do. However, their developers promised a competitive game and I just don't see it. It may have leagues and whateve for a few months, but they will only last until a new flavor of the month arrives.
Back to sudden attack the best competitive team fps since cs.
You can say but you only played it a day. Yea and I dominated every match I was in. Its easy as I said in the beginning. So very very easy.
Its amazing how quickly people are writing this game off.
Its not COD, get over it.
It was made by the same people who made RTCW: ET which was a really big team based game. That's exactly what Brink is. It's a game that requires you to stick together. Some say it's very easier. You obviously haven't played it that long. The bots get rather tough when you start to level up. I will admit that the game does have it's bugs, but to give it a 6/7 out of 10 is a bit absurd. Give it a chance.
Edit: I bought it for the 360, which does not seem to suffer the same frame rate issues as the PC
Yeah I don't see it becoming a good competitive game. Frankly we'll be lucky if it ever achieves the status of just being an all around fun if not highly competitive game like TF2. It's a shitty game built on a foundation that is proven can be great (objective team based fps) which overall can only make it a shallow imitator of those great games.
My prediction is it gets brushed under the rug after it bombs on consoles and there's no future in selling DLC (which it seems like this game was designed to prioritize over actually being a good game)
My main disappointment with the game is how their big selling point, the movement system, seems to be completely detached from the actual combat. If they're going to make a game based on fancy moves, why couldn't they integrate some of them into combat.
The point I'm trying to make here is that an old, small, free, independent mod for Half-Life 1 (The Specialists) has much more satisfying combat than a modern, triple-A, constantly delayed, full price game.
On May 11 2011 01:23 beef42 wrote: I haven't played this yet, but from looking at the videos...
What the hell happened to the old style of FPS that used elements within the game to add funky movement tricks? I'm mostly thinking about the Quake series here... It didn't need ridiculous "SMART" buttons to move you around. It had an insane skill ceiling in just WASD, mouse movements, and weapons that kicked you around.
It even had a mod, "defrag" where players decided that it was more fun to time themselves moving through amazing community-made maps, than playing yet another FFA/TDM/CTF/whatever match.
I know that these mechanics aren't very transparent or clear to the player (i.e Q3 strafejumping), but nowadays every bloody newbie can go to YouTube and find hundreds of instructional videos and learn how to do this stuff.
Learning these little intentional "bugs" or "exploits" in the Quake games was a million times more satisfying to me than I imagine pressing a SMART button to be.
Then again, haven't tried this yet, so I may have to revise this position later on.
Kind of like BW ---> SC2 you mean? Units with big flashing signs that say "micro me!!"
I'm sure the devs are sorry that they could not introduce a bug with a fun quirk that is discovered in 3 hours of release.
Consider that there might be some other bugs with the smart system open to abuse. But hey thats ok, all the feedback of "BUT ITS NOT ET/COD/CS/TF2" is sure to result in a more diverse market.
Fine the game may actually be shit, but it feel's a bit overblown.
These two articles pretty much explain why Brink is getting so much hate from early reviews and console players. Basically the review demo was buggy and the console version isn't on par with the PC version.
On May 11 2011 15:46 sleeepy wrote: My main disappointment with the game is how their big selling point, the movement system, seems to be completely detached from the actual combat. If they're going to make a game based on fancy moves, why couldn't they integrate some of them into combat.
The point I'm trying to make here is that an old, small, free, independent mod for Half-Life 1 (The Specialists) has much more satisfying combat than a modern, triple-A, constantly delayed, full price game.
I knew this game would flop (360 version rated D on 1up). In the intro videos for brink they kept touting the movement system as something "revolutionary". I didn't see anything special to it, just some automated vaulting and climbing system.
I was more of an action-half life guy, but I can see your point. This game does nothing that previous (and even free mods) have done a long time ago.
On May 11 2011 01:23 beef42 wrote: I haven't played this yet, but from looking at the videos...
What the hell happened to the old style of FPS that used elements within the game to add funky movement tricks? I'm mostly thinking about the Quake series here... It didn't need ridiculous "SMART" buttons to move you around. It had an insane skill ceiling in just WASD, mouse movements, and weapons that kicked you around.
It even had a mod, "defrag" where players decided that it was more fun to time themselves moving through amazing community-made maps, than playing yet another FFA/TDM/CTF/whatever match.
I know that these mechanics aren't very transparent or clear to the player (i.e Q3 strafejumping), but nowadays every bloody newbie can go to YouTube and find hundreds of instructional videos and learn how to do this stuff.
Learning these little intentional "bugs" or "exploits" in the Quake games was a million times more satisfying to me than I imagine pressing a SMART button to be.
Then again, haven't tried this yet, so I may have to revise this position later on.
Kind of like BW ---> SC2 you mean? Units with big flashing signs that say "micro me!!"
I'm sure the devs are sorry that they could not introduce a bug with a fun quirk that is discovered in 3 hours of release.
Consider that there might be some other bugs with the smart system open to abuse. But hey thats ok, all the feedback of "BUT ITS NOT ET/COD/CS/TF2" is sure to result in a more diverse market.
Fine the game may actually be shit, but it feel's a bit overblown.
I think you should go to YouTube and search for defrag to see what it is I mean. Hell, I got time, I'll do it for you:
I personally like the game very much (playing on PC). It's nearly everything I wanted from SD. Sure it has some problems (unplayable for some owners of ATI graphic cards and on xbox) and it needs some tweaks to work better competitively but I'm sure SD/Bethesda will fix this and once the SDK is out everything will be fine
Most negative complaints are either about the performance problems right now, lack of Singleplayer or just because of very very wrong expectations about the game.
If you play this game on PC and only care for a good multiplayer and know what to expect from an Enemy Territory game, this game rocks!
On May 12 2011 04:23 Ragoo wrote: I personally like the game very much (playing on PC). It's nearly everything I wanted from SD. Sure it has some problems (unplayable for some owners of ATI graphic cards and on xbox) and it needs some tweaks to work better competitively but I'm sure SD/Bethesda will fix this and once the SDK is out everything will be fine
Most negative complaints are either about the performance problems right now, lack of Singleplayer or just because of very very wrong expectations about the game.
If you play this game on PC and only care for a good multiplayer and know what to expect from an Enemy Territory game, this game rocks!
Having played ET for years I can't disagree more with this statement. Mapdesign is beyond horrible. Sometimes you are forced to fight in some really small and narrow passages. Weapons are boring and most of the time it's spray and pray. Movement feels clumsy (I'd rather have no SMART at all), also what kind of bullshit is this with the new gamedesign where literally EVERYTHING (shooting, jumping, reloading, etc.) makes you move slower. In my opinion FPS games should stop trying to be realistic and focus more on awesome gameplay with solid movement, high skill ceiling, great mapdesign and diversity. So ... everything that Brink does not have, lol 8-[
Also I kinda dislike that you can't win 1vsX if your oponents are at least somewhat decent, since the only thing you really can do in fights is stand there and spray. Movement only matters if you try to get to where the action is but is almost impossible to pull of IN FIGHTS because ... well, you are slow as hell while shooting and you die really fast.
Only thing I really like about this game are the fun classes and the body type system, which is something I'd like to see in future games. Also I like how your health regenerates over time if you're out of fight, which adds at least a little bit of tactical decision making.
If you're looking for a competetive game than Brink will not satisfy you, though. If you just want to kill some time and you enjoy casual gaming than Brink might be fun. At least up to level 20 (which is like 10 hours of play)
Wish they just gave ET a graphical update. I'd even play the same maps all over again. I'll take gold rush over any of these maps. And does every class have a buff to hand out? Am I playing an fps or world or warcraft? it seems the most important skill toi have in this game is the ability to press your F key
It's just.. ugh. Like ET has been boiled down to a primitive state where we all grunt and spray our weapons while holding F on various objects
So, I bought it despite some of the terrible reviews. I just spent the last five hours going hard. I can see how there are concerns about it being competitive... but damn it is pretty fun.
I also disagree about 1v2+ being totally impossible... although it is possible that I have been playing with five yearolds all day, I suppose.
On May 12 2011 16:24 iCanada wrote: So, I bought it despite some of the terrible reviews. I just spent the last five hours going hard. I can see how there are concerns about it being competitive... but damn it is pretty fun.
I also disagree about 1v2+ being totally impossible... although it is possible that I have been playing with five yearolds all day, I suppose.
Yeah I think that is exactly how I would describe it, the game is so amazingly fucking fun to play lol, but the competitive aspects were overhyped obviously, but we can't judge that until it is somewhat more "solved". Whether it becomse a competitive game or not it is stupidly fun, like TF2, its just fun to play regardless of whether it can spawn to being an esport or not.
I think the producers of Brink have too much money... I can't throw a rock into a wood (or open any website that is even a bit PC/Xbox/... games related) and I will hit (read) "Brink"! Can't you people hype about something that is worth hyping about? Like DNF? *duck*
Splash Damage are the worst game developers of all time.
They took a masterpiece MP FPS that was RtCW and proceeded to take everything good about the game out and produced the steaming pile of of dung that was enemy territory.
Just seeing that they are still in business makes me angry.
On May 12 2011 04:23 Ragoo wrote: I personally like the game very much (playing on PC). It's nearly everything I wanted from SD. Sure it has some problems (unplayable for some owners of ATI graphic cards and on xbox) and it needs some tweaks to work better competitively but I'm sure SD/Bethesda will fix this and once the SDK is out everything will be fine
Most negative complaints are either about the performance problems right now, lack of Singleplayer or just because of very very wrong expectations about the game.
If you play this game on PC and only care for a good multiplayer and know what to expect from an Enemy Territory game, this game rocks!
Having played ET for years I can't disagree more with this statement. Mapdesign is beyond horrible. Sometimes you are forced to fight in some really small and narrow passages. Weapons are boring and most of the time it's spray and pray. Movement feels clumsy (I'd rather have no SMART at all), also what kind of bullshit is this with the new gamedesign where literally EVERYTHING (shooting, jumping, reloading, etc.) makes you move slower. In my opinion FPS games should stop trying to be realistic and focus more on awesome gameplay with solid movement, high skill ceiling, great mapdesign and diversity. So ... everything that Brink does not have, lol 8-[
Also I kinda dislike that you can't win 1vsX if your oponents are at least somewhat decent, since the only thing you really can do in fights is stand there and spray. Movement only matters if you try to get to where the action is but is almost impossible to pull of IN FIGHTS because ... well, you are slow as hell while shooting and you die really fast.
Only thing I really like about this game are the fun classes and the body type system, which is something I'd like to see in future games. Also I like how your health regenerates over time if you're out of fight, which adds at least a little bit of tactical decision making.
If you're looking for a competetive game than Brink will not satisfy you, though. If you just want to kill some time and you enjoy casual gaming than Brink might be fun. At least up to level 20 (which is like 10 hours of play)
Game is definitely overhyped.
Well if you compare it to ET or ET:QW (the infantry part) than yeah, it could be better and I dislike how movement isn't that important in firefights and that it's generally slower. I disagree about the weapons tho, I think they all feel very different and are well designed and if you don't want high recoil and use Ironsight there are still the SMGs which fortunately can be used as the fast light bodytype.
But what other new game with a decently sized community is there (or will come out) that is following in the footsteps of W:ET? If there was a graphically updated new version of W:ET with a big (not dying) community I would no doubt prefer to play that. But since there isn't we have to deal with what we get, and BRINK is simply the best game you can get if you are into Enemy Territory style of games right now
If the SDK comes out things will get even better. I bet promod can fix most of the concerns I have regarding competitive 5v5 right now.
did they beta test this game at all (I dont remember ever hearing of one)? I just dont understand how a company could spend years developing an online multiplayer game and never even bother to beta test....
On May 13 2011 04:51 Ideas wrote: did they beta test this game at all (I dont remember ever hearing of one)? I just dont understand how a company could spend years developing an online multiplayer game and never even bother to beta test....
The game launched much smoother than battlefield bad company 2 and Black Ops for PC both those games took a week to even be playable. The 360 version has issues but honestly if your playing objective based games on consoles xbox live is not the way to go.
On May 13 2011 04:51 Ideas wrote: did they beta test this game at all (I dont remember ever hearing of one)? I just dont understand how a company could spend years developing an online multiplayer game and never even bother to beta test....
It's been in development a long time, I think they just got fed up and rushed it out. Trying to make a multiplatform game just stretched them too thin I think. if they had just focused on PC they could have had a devoted fanbase the way TF2 does who will buy any frivolous items you throw at them. Instead they made half a game for every platform that no one really wants to play.
They knew they were releasing an unfinished game, I don't know how much incentive there is to go back and patch up a game after you've made the decision as publisher to botch the launch by releasing it unfinished.
I hope I'm wrong and one day I'll actually be able to play the game reliably but I imagine they are just going to try to keep up appearances while there's still a few people on the fence about buying it, maybe release a real patch or two and then drop support for the game
Was watching JP play on his stream for a bit, the only thing that I can see that would set it apart from other shooters is that you can do a lot of fun parkour. I feal like this game would get really old really fast.
On May 13 2011 04:51 Ideas wrote: did they beta test this game at all (I dont remember ever hearing of one)? I just dont understand how a company could spend years developing an online multiplayer game and never even bother to beta test....
The game launched much smoother than battlefield bad company 2 and Black Ops for PC both those games took a week to even be playable. The 360 version has issues but honestly if your playing objective based games on consoles xbox live is not the way to go.
im talking more about design decisions/balance than just making multiplayer smooth.
Games fun, but needs a bit of tinkering to be competitive. People need to stop believing the hype and determining whether it lives up to what people tell you it's SUPPOSED TO BE (hey, that's called marketing. oh jeebus.) and make their own goddamn decisions. It's a fun game, and with communication i can see it being highly competitive. Just needs a few changes.
On May 13 2011 04:51 Ideas wrote: did they beta test this game at all (I dont remember ever hearing of one)? I just dont understand how a company could spend years developing an online multiplayer game and never even bother to beta test....
The game launched much smoother than battlefield bad company 2 and Black Ops for PC both those games took a week to even be playable. The 360 version has issues but honestly if your playing objective based games on consoles xbox live is not the way to go.
im talking more about design decisions/balance than just making multiplayer smooth.
I think the verdict is still out on balance. http://thebrink.tv/videos.php did a round table with various community members from other games like quake and tf2 and it seems like the game is going to do allot better competitively then black ops and BFBC2. Much of the balance is just tweaking timings and settings. Your not going to have people running around knifing everyone or spamming kill streaks and mortars.
Edit:To the OP, I don't know Hack objectives are near impossible if the defense is halfway decent. But I've only done one scrim with some Quake live clans. The game 5v5 is much different thought then normal pubs. It seems like 5v5 favors the offense and pubs favors the defenses because of the larger numbers of revives.
Anyone who doesn't think this map is a huge step in the right direction for FPS games in general doesn't know much about the golden-age of FPS games (Quake/UT/CS etc.) Because Brink is a great strategy and team based FPS that may have some faults but is at least not the mindless drone that games like Call of Duty and Halo (only the newer Halo games) have encouraged
On May 13 2011 05:39 Macabre wrote: I've been having a blast with this game. It's almost too easy with a solid team. Medic/Op/Soldier and we just carry teams so easily. PC version.
Funny. I think that the Engineer is the best class by far. Damage Buff, Armor Buff, Auto Turrets, and Land Mines? Aside from the medic's heal/health regen I'd take all of those over any other classes skills.
I find the operative to be very niche-y. Disguising is fairly useless, aside from maybe hacking objectives... but the mere fact that the top right is telling you the objective is changing is a dead give away.
The Medic is obviously boss, and the Soldier's abilities are mostly self serving. Ammo is a need though, so I guess they fit well in group play.
On May 13 2011 05:39 Macabre wrote: I've been having a blast with this game. It's almost too easy with a solid team. Medic/Op/Soldier and we just carry teams so easily. PC version.
Funny. I think that the Engineer is the best class by far. Damage Buff, Armor Buff, Auto Turrets, and Land Mines? Aside from the medic's heal/health regen I'd take all of those over any other classes skills.
I find the operative to be very niche-y. Disguising is fairly useless, aside from maybe hacking objectives... but the mere fact that the top right is telling you the objective is changing is a dead give away.
The Medic is obviously boss, and the Soldier's abilities are mostly self serving. Ammo is a need though, so I guess they fit well in group play.
/shrug
Operative is very niche-y but that doesn't mean they aren't good, you just have to be behind enemy lines picking off reinforcements, try disguising yourself then knocking down an enemy and just spraying a clip into him then disguising as him. Rinse & Repeat!
Haha, wow, I can't believe I didn't think about that. Although.... why would you throw a clip into him? couldn't you just melee him again and save your ammo?
On May 13 2011 13:51 iCanada wrote: Haha, wow, I can't believe I didn't think about that. Although.... why would you throw a clip into him? couldn't you just melee him again and save your ammo?
It wouldn't kill him with two melee hits, I always just hit him a few times with my pistol then proceed with the knife melee
On May 13 2011 13:51 iCanada wrote: Haha, wow, I can't believe I didn't think about that. Although.... why would you throw a clip into him? couldn't you just melee him again and save your ammo?
It wouldn't kill him with two melee hits, I always just hit him a few times with my pistol then proceed with the knife melee
Knife is severely underrated, especially since you can Knife+Sprint as light-weight you can parkour around and shank people
On May 13 2011 13:51 iCanada wrote: Haha, wow, I can't believe I didn't think about that. Although.... why would you throw a clip into him? couldn't you just melee him again and save your ammo?
It wouldn't kill him with two melee hits, I always just hit him a few times with my pistol then proceed with the knife melee
Isn't it a kill to melee someone who is already on their butt?
I don't understand the hate this game is receiving, on the PC version there are a few bugs but after those are fixed the game is pretty much golden.
Then again all these reviewing websites base it on the console versions which are going to be shit since Splash Damage is a PC developer lmao. Now they know how it feels.
Its basically a really solid teambased FPS that has tons of mechanics that aid strangers in helping each other, making pub games much more satisfying. It also looks like they took mechanics from other games and basically removed all the problems those games had (grenade spam, overpowered snipers, 1hitkill melee, etc).
Tried it out at a friends the other day, it was fun enough, but it feels like the actual content is pretty small. I was a little shocked that there is like...8? maps for each of the sides, so 16 total. And thats Single, Coop and Multiplayer in one. Kinda expected more from the campaign to be honest.
The classes feel a little too similar for my taste (honestly, you get one buff and like 2 or 3 skills and thats it). It's fun, but I could see it get boring rather fast. Feels like TF2 with WAY more character customization, more movement possibilities, and less specialized characters (to the point where it really doesn't make that much of a difference what class you are playing) . Oh yeah, and TF2 just feels like a way better game.
Tried it today, it seems fun. It's a fuckaround game, but so is tf2 and people who play tf2 consider it the one true gift from god to man so I'm more than willing to give brink a chance if let into the hands of the players and mapmakers.
On May 13 2011 05:39 Macabre wrote: I've been having a blast with this game. It's almost too easy with a solid team. Medic/Op/Soldier and we just carry teams so easily. PC version.
Funny. I think that the Engineer is the best class by far. Damage Buff, Armor Buff, Auto Turrets, and Land Mines? Aside from the medic's heal/health regen I'd take all of those over any other classes skills.
I find the operative to be very niche-y. Disguising is fairly useless, aside from maybe hacking objectives... but the mere fact that the top right is telling you the objective is changing is a dead give away.
The Medic is obviously boss, and the Soldier's abilities are mostly self serving. Ammo is a need though, so I guess they fit well in group play.
/shrug
Operative is very niche-y but that doesn't mean they aren't good, you just have to be behind enemy lines picking off reinforcements, try disguising yourself then knocking down an enemy and just spraying a clip into him then disguising as him. Rinse & Repeat!
don't forget sticky bombs. mayhem :D also the future best skill in competitive brink, comm hack. kill someone, leave them alive enough to get the location of everyone else. now no longer be snuck up on and have your whole team prepared. this and the targetting thing for operatives make them an amazing support class, more of a support than medic/engineer for sure (since those two are up close killing) as operative i sit back and identify enemies with a scope allowing allies to see everyone, with a wep buff from engineer you can 1 shot pretty much anyone from afar. and light body type allows you tto scale walls easily for getaways,
since the game's optic is to become competitively viable, they're actually holding discussions with community members from other well known FPSes and just talk about the flaws of the games and their impressions so far. I still have hope for this game, but I'm not sure I'm going to drop 60$ any time soon...
since the game's optic is to become competitively viable, they're actually holding discussions with community members from other well known FPSes and just talk about the flaws of the games and their impressions so far. I still have hope for this game, but I'm not sure I'm going to drop 60$ any time soon...
And that's why I got it for PC $50 or $42 if you shop around.
Got in on PS3 (I know, I know), so haven't been able to try it with humans, but based on what I've seen on sigle-player alone, here's what I've got to say about Brink:
The AI is borderline retarded... too many times I've seen my guys literally spinning in circles over and over while standing right next to an enemy mowing down my teamates. And don't get me started on their ability to handle objectives. The only marginally competent AI function are medic revives, but even they will just run all the way to me when I'm down, ignoring obstacles they really ought to deal with.
The parkour movement is a cool novelty, but grows old fast. Unless you're playing a skinny-build character, it amounts to just being able to climb and slide, not really "amazing" movement considering you can do that in almost all shooters these days.
The customization is cool as shit. Just wish you could put customized colors/skins on the guns. But the character customization is way cool. The gun selection is also cool, though I wish the names and designs weren't parodies of exisiting weapons... it makes the game seem goofy. How hard is it to build a set of gun designs from scratch?
Class balance is at a weird place. Engineers are pretty much my class unless I need an objective that my AI team is obviously too incompetent to capture. Turrets, mines, armor and damage boosts... too easy a choice. They ought to vary each class slightly better (for example, soldiers use the big guns, operatives have less health but move faster, etc.), as it stand the only thing keeping them different are the abilities you equip, and all classes other than engineer have pretty stupid abilities IMO.
The campaign is literally nothing but multiplayer stuff strung together with some non-sensical story and uninspired cutscenes. There's no cohesion in the story, nothing to draw you in, and the characters aren't relateable or likeable.
The challenges are, as reviewers have made mention already, just glorified tutorials. and they are frustrating as hell (2 stars or above on the objective challenge at the hacking part? How do you fight a giant clump of guys who respawn constantly and die one at a time only to be revived by a medic? Took me at least 5 tries, and a lot of angry shouting.) At the end, all the guns/attachements are unlocked. Some people hate this, but I actually like not having to worry about unlocking extra guns.
The graphics on PS3 are great, and there's pretty much no lag or delay loading textures. That was one complaint I saw a lot from the PC/Xbox reviews, but you should know it's pretty much a non-issue on PS3.
As for gameplay mechanics - I get that it's meant to be a different game than the standard BF/MW/MoH FPS games, and it really feels like it is different. The games are fast-paced and sometimes poor level design is really frustrating, but all in all a good way to kill some time. I'm eager to see what patches/updates would be issued for fixes at this point, because with some tweaking I know it could be really good. Then again, still haven't played it online, and that may change my whole perspective on it.
On May 14 2011 01:36 Rob28 wrote: Got in on PS3 (I know, I know), so haven't been able to try it with humans, but based on what I've seen on sigle-player alone, here's what I've got to say about Brink:
The AI is borderline retarded... too many times I've seen my guys literally spinning in circles over and over while standing right next to an enemy mowing down my teamates. And don't get me started on their ability to handle objectives. The only marginally competent AI function are medic revives, but even they will just run all the way to me when I'm down, ignoring obstacles they really ought to deal with.
The parkour movement is a cool novelty, but grows old fast. Unless you're playing a skinny-build character, it amounts to just being able to climb and slide, not really "amazing" movement considering you can do that in almost all shooters these days.
The customization is cool as shit. Just wish you could put customized colors/skins on the guns. But the character customization is way cool. The gun selection is also cool, though I wish the names and designs weren't parodies of exisiting weapons... it makes the game seem goofy. How hard is it to build a set of gun designs from scratch?
Class balance is at a weird place. Engineers are pretty much my class unless I need an objective that my AI team is obviously too incompetent to capture. Turrets, mines, armor and damage boosts... too easy a choice. They ought to vary each class slightly better (for example, soldiers use the big guns, operatives have less health but move faster, etc.), as it stand the only thing keeping them different are the abilities you equip, and all classes other than engineer have pretty stupid abilities IMO.
The campaign is literally nothing but multiplayer stuff strung together with some non-sensical story and uninspired cutscenes. There's no cohesion in the story, nothing to draw you in, and the characters aren't relateable or likeable.
The challenges are, as reviewers have made mention already, just glorified tutorials. and they are frustrating as hell (2 stars or above on the objective challenge at the hacking part? How do you fight a giant clump of guys who respawn constantly and die one at a time only to be revived by a medic? Took me at least 5 tries, and a lot of angry shouting.) At the end, all the guns/attachements are unlocked. Some people hate this, but I actually like not having to worry about unlocking extra guns.
The graphics on PS3 are great, and there's pretty much no lag or delay loading textures. That was one complaint I saw a lot from the PC/Xbox reviews, but you should know it's pretty much a non-issue on PS3.
As for gameplay mechanics - I get that it's meant to be a different game than the standard BF/MW/MoH FPS games, and it really feels like it is different. The games are fast-paced and sometimes poor level design is really frustrating, but all in all a good way to kill some time. I'm eager to see what patches/updates would be issued for fixes at this point, because with some tweaking I know it could be really good. Then again, still haven't played it online, and that may change my whole perspective on it.
I'm surprised you typed all that out when the first sentence makes your opinion void.
On May 13 2011 19:48 Enox wrote: hmpf.. steam meta score of 72/100. i never pay full price for games below 80
this is why u should not follow the early reviews: + Show Spoiler +
I think I will wait DNF and chose between Brink and Duke. Both sounds cool but need to see more about the King.
edit: resized
to be fair about that picture, the wii game and brink are being reviewed to completely different standards. the wii game just has to compete with other mini-game collections on the wii meant for a younger audience, and brink has to compete with every other modern FPS (pretty much the biggest most competitive genre in the market right now). it'd be dumb to review the games on the same scale because theyre completely different games and meant for completely different audiences.
I'll have to take back my positive post from earlier.
I can not even play this game anymore. Literally. I load it up and it's lagging so bad even in the lobby, the character animation looks like someone took still shots of it and it's unplayable. I have tried to put every single option to the lowest, turned off any optional stuff...nope, no fix. I looked online for the new ATI drivers that are supposed to fix it, no go either. It makes no sense. I played the first 2 days without much problems, even if it was a bit choppy, it was playable.
Sad to say I wasted money on a game that is unplayable.
On May 14 2011 09:22 Kurr wrote: I'll have to take back my positive post from earlier.
I can not even play this game anymore. Literally. I load it up and it's lagging so bad even in the lobby, the character animation looks like someone took still shots of it and it's unplayable. I have tried to put every single option to the lowest, turned off any optional stuff...nope, no fix. I looked online for the new ATI drivers that are supposed to fix it, no go either. It makes no sense. I played the first 2 days without much problems, even if it was a bit choppy, it was playable.
Sad to say I wasted money on a game that is unplayable.
Try turning off shadows and ambient occlusion. I got 50 more FPS just by doing those two things.
If you have fps issues with ATI cards, downgrade to 11.2 drivers and type r_shadows 0 in the console (ctrl+alt+tilde). That seems to have mostly fixed them for me.
The game just kinda spits in the eye of everything that made ET so memorable for me. Me and a friend backdooring as covert ops and engi on Fuel Dump to win a game before a pub knew what was going on, fun situations that you just can't do in this. A skill game that actually requires aim where the best headshotter wins fights. The xp system, the interesting and incredibly fun maps like dump, radio, goldrush. Hell even getting smashed on the bad maps like Battery is better than the choke fests in Brink. The non consolized controls (I Press F and it magically targets and sprints me towards a teammate? What the fuck)
When a free game does literally everything better than your full priced product there's a serious problem. It's just such a shallow copy of an excellent. It makes me kind of sad/nostalgic to play it because I can't shake how much better it was in ET.
Although I pine for the days of playing TMA and BGH with my friends as well, SC2 never really made me feel the way Brink does. It's just not good enough in its own right.
On May 14 2011 09:22 Kurr wrote: I'll have to take back my positive post from earlier.
I can not even play this game anymore. Literally. I load it up and it's lagging so bad even in the lobby, the character animation looks like someone took still shots of it and it's unplayable. I have tried to put every single option to the lowest, turned off any optional stuff...nope, no fix. I looked online for the new ATI drivers that are supposed to fix it, no go either. It makes no sense. I played the first 2 days without much problems, even if it was a bit choppy, it was playable.
Sad to say I wasted money on a game that is unplayable.
Try turning off shadows and ambient occlusion. I got 50 more FPS just by doing those two things.
I have every option turned off and the graphics to low. Didn't help.
On May 14 2011 09:55 Teddyman wrote: If you have fps issues with ATI cards, downgrade to 11.2 drivers and type r_shadows 0 in the console (ctrl+alt+tilde). That seems to have mostly fixed them for me.
Tried this as well, didn't do anything either.
I'll put it on the shelf until there's an official fix. I know a lot of people have the problem. It's just ridiculous that one day it works decently (a little choppy but OK overall) and that 2 days later just being in the lobby makes it seem like my computer is about to die.
I own an aging laptop, so purchasing it for the PC is probably not the smartest choice, and I love the online experience of Xbox Live, but I was curious if anyone had experience on XBL playing Brink?
I read the Gamespot review (here) and it sounds like most of the major issues (lag and AI behavior) could be fixed with some DL updates.
Can anyone sell me on buying it now? I am a huge fan of Bethesda's games--like ES4: Oblivion--and I love FPS, but I don't know anyone who is playing it on Xbox.
On May 15 2011 02:57 Rain.cz wrote: hmm i played it but my pc cant handle it :/
If you have an ATI card you might need to change something in your .cfg file. If not then I'd just turn everything on low, unless your computer is actually that bad :x
I really wish the game was more successful in what it's trying to do. I just find it unfun to play. It's weird, I can pepper enemy players with headshots all day, and they don' die, while I get one-shotted.
I also dislike how it's impossible to tell each of the classes apart at a glance - they really didn't learn anything from TF2 there... The game basically suffers from way too much visual detail in general, and it gets fatiguing after a while.
And the reptition of the game really kills it for me when none of the other parts of the game works.
After 25 hours of active playing in it, i can say the game is just so fucking great.
The only big problem it have is the people playing it, the ones that don't get a damn clue about what kind of game this is :d I've seen people complaining about the lack of TDM on various forums, laughed so hard, this is an objective team based game, not a spray n pray casual fps for people with no brain that can push +forward and +fire all day, it take skills, à shit ton of teamplay, as much as an heavy knowing of the maps.
This game possibilities are definetly pretty big, just looking at ESL, the 1st tourney will have a cash prize of 15 000€, there are already a ton of teams playing around ( i should say, learning around since at that point in time, no one on hearth know how to play the game at it's max possibilities).
ps : < This is what is missing on every single "top review site" around, someone on their team that have figured out how to use the smart/jumps system/environnements so they can play the game the way it's designed and stop rating it 5/10 because it's not as good as cod series when it has NOTHING TO DO along with cod of bf games :d
The game grows on you, I've got 40 hours logged and I've just scratched the surface of this game. My first impression was good but the more I play it the more I love the game. It has allot of depth to it. My first character was an engineer who I respeced to soldier at lvl10 and I loved that class. No one can hold a chokepoint or area like the soldier. They can push areas and hold objectives better than any class. Then recently I started leveling up a light type operative and now I have to play the game entirely different. I'm going in disguised uprooting entrenched enemies so my team can move forward and doing hit and runs on the enemy while firewalling consoles making them impossible for the enemy to take without them getting shot up. I can understand why someone who plays TF or ET can hate the game mainly because they have expectations that the game will play differently then it does instead of enjoying the game for what it is a fresh gameplay experience. I can also understand the people who hate it because of the bugs on 360 or ATI cards but for ATI I kinda blame the user on that one because that company has had problems with open gl. What I don't understand is how deathmatch players who don't know jack about teamwork would even think they would like the game in the first place. Did they think the game was going to be a spam feast? From what I've seen skill comes out on top in this game not camping, random shots, or knifing. Even with a light body type I'm able to win fire fights by aiming for headshots and positioning myself along with some tackles and melee knockdowns even though I have allot less health. I honestly was tired of FPS games until this game had come out and had stopped playing them.
On May 16 2011 02:16 BentoBox wrote: Heard I would have to turn down my gfx settings to shit to be able to play on my ATI...
even turning down the graphics all the way and tweaking it with external tools (no shadows etc) its running bad on my ati. the forums are bursting with anger from ati-users. i get like 15 fps in battles with a hd5700 and the game looks like utter garbage with all the graphic tweaks having said that, the game itself has quite some potential imo...some patching and community-inputs and we have a fun shooter!
1xxxxx different customisations and heavies get generic shotgun, machinegun and a grenade lobbing piece of crap. Wheres mah rockit launcha or maybe a flack cannon. ;/
I love the mirrors edge like movement in an rts but sadly the maps dont fully exploit the Light vs heavy concepts.
if the developers are listening though then those maps will be subject to change right?
Starting about 36 minutes in (queued it up) Hutch does an interview with Richard Ham, from Splash Damage, about various things in Brink. I found it mildly interesting while trying to decide one way or the other on the game.
Of note is that Splash Damage specifically designed tons of things to be tuneable without needing an actual patch (heard of a few other games starting to do that), to let them tweak things as needed in real time. One thing he mentioned was that if they find that offense or defense is having a hard time on a particular objective in a level, they can do something like change the respawn timer of one or both teams for that section of the level so that one of them has maybe a 12 second respawn and the other maybe 25 seconds.
They also actually designed their bots to basically ignore the objective (aka, not plant the charge/hack/etc.) most of the time to let players "get the glory" so to speak, figuring that many players would rather do that than having a bot more or less beat the level for them. They do start trying when the timer starts ticking down (think 2 minutes or so was the example given) if the players haven't managed to get it done yet. That's tweakable as well and if feedback from the community says "make the bots try right from the beginning" then Splash Damage can make that change rather easily.
He also mentioned something about the bot's relative "skill" related to how many humans are in the match, I think. I'd assume rank is another factor (go easy on the level 1 people that just got the game, essentially).
The inclusion of bots (along with the limited number of maps) is one of my main concerns. Bots are great and all to have as an available option, but I'm not sure I'd want them in my online multiplayer. It sounds like you don't really get a choice, though. If there aren't enough human players/people drop out - welcome to playing with/against some bots.
Since I heard this game was running so badly on ATI's I couldn't wait any longer and I picked it up for my 360, my room mate has an Nvidia blessed rig and Brink looks sexy as hell on there
On my 360? it looks like the game is capped at 480p or something.. it looks horrific
gonna trade it in as soon as this things playable on ATI's .. it's a great game, just had a rough start it seems.. steer clear of the 360 version, honestly it looks terrible
On May 16 2011 09:16 Auru wrote: Since I heard this game was running so badly on ATI's I couldn't wait any longer and I picked it up for my 360, my room mate has an Nvidia blessed rig and Brink looks sexy as hell on there
On my 360? it looks like the game is capped at 480p or something.. it looks horrific
gonna trade it in as soon as this things playable on ATI's .. it's a great game, just had a rough start it seems.. steer clear of the 360 version, honestly it looks terrible
I would go trade it in now. Personally, I have an ATI Radeon HD 6870 and have had absolutely no problems running Brink.
I don't think people are giving the game a chance, and may have gotten the wrong impression from it at first glance. The game is still new, but there's a lot of potential here for a level of gaming that standard FPSes can't give atm. I would encourage anyone who brushed it aside to give it another look, either now or maybe after some more patching.
The lagginess of it will be fixed, eventually. I have it on a PC with a 5770, and it just took me a bit of tweaking to get it to run smoothly.
On May 16 2011 02:08 sHt_ wrote: After 25 hours of active playing in it, i can say the game is just so fucking great.
The only big problem it have is the people playing it, the ones that don't get a damn clue about what kind of game this is :d I've seen people complaining about the lack of TDM on various forums, laughed so hard, this is an objective team based game, not a spray n pray casual fps for people with no brain that can push +forward and +fire all day, it take skills, à shit ton of teamplay, as much as an heavy knowing of the maps.
This game possibilities are definetly pretty big, just looking at ESL, the 1st tourney will have a cash prize of 15 000€, there are already a ton of teams playing around ( i should say, learning around since at that point in time, no one on hearth know how to play the game at it's max possibilities).
ps : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTnKurQea3Y < This is what is missing on every single "top review site" around, someone on their team that have figured out how to use the smart/jumps system/environnements so they can play the game the way it's designed and stop rating it 5/10 because it's not as good as cod series when it has NOTHING TO DO along with cod of bf games :d
There is a small but extremely vocal contingent of gamers who will never be happy with any FPS unless it's exactly like Q3 CPMA or ET. I say F*** THAT. Watching the video you posted got me pumped up and I immediately booted up steam and bought Brink. It may have its issues, but if the community is there to support it then this game looks like it could be incredible with just a few patches. I'm giving it a shot.
I've played about 15 hours so far, and it's a pretty damn fun game. It's really fun when you have that 'immortal team' thing going, when everyone dispenses their buffs correctly to all the members, people stay with a nice spread. A couple kevlar, health buffed, metabolism, AP round heavies in front tanking like crazy and you can mount an inexorable advance...I prefer being the immortal medic who slides and wall runs everywhere keeping the entire team alive, while getting kills along the way. Depending on the map, keeping the entire team alive can be the main factor in deciding who wins, being that the reinforcement distance is so long. For maps with a short respawn distance, medic is not so important, and sometimes dying can even be better because you get full supplies, imo.
My only complaint is the brutal chokes on some maps. On aquarium(i think it is) one of teams can set up camp in the large room, and the only way to attack is through long, narrow corridors. With everyone buffed up, gatling guns, and snipers it's too hard to get through.
Overall fun game though :3 If you don't want to get it now, consider it once the patches come out and the price drops.
On May 16 2011 14:41 Fontong wrote: I've played about 15 hours so far, and it's a pretty damn fun game. It's really fun when you have that 'immortal team' thing going, when everyone dispenses their buffs correctly to all the members, people stay with a nice spread. A couple kevlar, health buffed, metabolism, AP round heavies in front tanking like crazy and you can mount an inexorable advance...I prefer being the immortal medic who slides and wall runs everywhere keeping the entire team alive, while getting kills along the way. Depending on the map, keeping the entire team alive can be the main factor in deciding who wins, being that the reinforcement distance is so long. For maps with a short respawn distance, medic is not so important, and sometimes dying can even be better because you get full supplies, imo.
My only complaint is the brutal chokes on some maps. On aquarium(i think it is) one of teams can set up camp in the large room, and the only way to attack is through long, narrow corridors. With everyone buffed up, gatling guns, and snipers it's too hard to get through.
Overall fun game though :3 If you don't want to get it now, consider it once the patches come out and the price drops.
Operatives are pretty good at breaking choke point sieges. You don't see them to often because the game is new and everyone is still learning how to play. I have one I'm working on, already have a lvl 20 soldier, and what I do is spend the whole game pretending I'm the Thing and sneaking behind everyone on the enemy time and then when they are all lined up in front of me I open fire, slide tackle into them and cortex bomb the remaining guys if they manage to down me which is easy for them considering I'm a light body type. The only problem with this your team has to be on the ball and realize that you've distracted the siege. I would recommend hiding behind a wall when you do this because you don't want an enemy operative spotting you or the guy you body snatched realizes he has a twin.
On May 16 2011 14:41 Fontong wrote: I've played about 15 hours so far, and it's a pretty damn fun game. It's really fun when you have that 'immortal team' thing going, when everyone dispenses their buffs correctly to all the members, people stay with a nice spread. A couple kevlar, health buffed, metabolism, AP round heavies in front tanking like crazy and you can mount an inexorable advance...I prefer being the immortal medic who slides and wall runs everywhere keeping the entire team alive, while getting kills along the way. Depending on the map, keeping the entire team alive can be the main factor in deciding who wins, being that the reinforcement distance is so long. For maps with a short respawn distance, medic is not so important, and sometimes dying can even be better because you get full supplies, imo.
My only complaint is the brutal chokes on some maps. On aquarium(i think it is) one of teams can set up camp in the large room, and the only way to attack is through long, narrow corridors. With everyone buffed up, gatling guns, and snipers it's too hard to get through.
Overall fun game though :3 If you don't want to get it now, consider it once the patches come out and the price drops.
Operatives are pretty good at breaking choke point sieges. You don't see them to often because the game is new and everyone is still learning how to play. I have one I'm working on, already have a lvl 20 soldier, and what I do is spend the whole game pretending I'm the Thing and sneaking behind everyone on the enemy time and then when they are all lined up in front of me I open fire, slide tackle into them and cortex bomb the remaining guys if they manage to down me which is easy for them considering I'm a light body type. The only problem with this your team has to be on the ball and realize that you've distracted the siege. I would recommend hiding behind a wall when you do this because you don't want an enemy operative spotting you or the guy you body snatched realizes he has a twin.
Sounds nice -- I'll do an operative right after I finish my medic. I've been playing medics since BF2, since I like the style a lot. Level 19 right now.
I'm really loving the light type medic with sniper rifle and MP. The 1 shot power is enough to bring any light body type to very low health, and with the MP you are practically assured you'll finish them. Not only that, the rifles are pretty much the only thing a light body type has to take on a heavy at long range. It lets me offer a lot of supporting kills on top of reviving everyone.
btw, any idea how much a muzzle brake affects rifle accuracy at long range? the range meter significantly goes down which I put one on, but I'm not sure what is considered long range in this game.
Edit: gahh if only the game would stop being so unstable. It CTDs at least once an hour for me. Well, I'm getting the parts for my new rig tomorrow, so maybe that'll be better. I'm pretty much double the stats in every catagory :3 Q6600 --> i5 2500k, 4gb DDR2 --> 8gb DDR3, HD 4870 --> HD6850. Soooo pumped, and all because someone offered to buy my old comp at a good price and there was a good newegg sale.
It just feels way to sporadic in hit ratio/hitboxes. It isn't rock solid in the feeling... not sure when you hit someone or when you click shit...
I blame the asshole console market for making big companies turn to shit and dumb everything down fps/lag wise to suit console gaming... Because this game feels like a console shooter even if you play it on PC just like Dead Space 2 felt like a console game multiplayer.
This is not a good thing because the controls, UI and interface are all worse thus and the end experience feels like a worse version than TF2 on PC and Modern Warefare games on consoles.
The customization is pretty badass though,
EDIT: The parkour hardly adds anything. The levels are not designed to be a parkour park but rather just a classic fps map with some extra ledges and edges to climb. It's not that special sadly. I wish it did but all it does is bug peoples characters when they try to climb shit and it has no value in combat other than glide-tackeling your opponent but the hit boxes are fucked up so it's a dice roll on who parkours who.
On May 16 2011 14:41 Fontong wrote: I've played about 15 hours so far, and it's a pretty damn fun game. It's really fun when you have that 'immortal team' thing going, when everyone dispenses their buffs correctly to all the members, people stay with a nice spread. A couple kevlar, health buffed, metabolism, AP round heavies in front tanking like crazy and you can mount an inexorable advance...I prefer being the immortal medic who slides and wall runs everywhere keeping the entire team alive, while getting kills along the way. Depending on the map, keeping the entire team alive can be the main factor in deciding who wins, being that the reinforcement distance is so long. For maps with a short respawn distance, medic is not so important, and sometimes dying can even be better because you get full supplies, imo.
My only complaint is the brutal chokes on some maps. On aquarium(i think it is) one of teams can set up camp in the large room, and the only way to attack is through long, narrow corridors. With everyone buffed up, gatling guns, and snipers it's too hard to get through.
Overall fun game though :3 If you don't want to get it now, consider it once the patches come out and the price drops.
Operatives are pretty good at breaking choke point sieges. You don't see them to often because the game is new and everyone is still learning how to play. I have one I'm working on, already have a lvl 20 soldier, and what I do is spend the whole game pretending I'm the Thing and sneaking behind everyone on the enemy time and then when they are all lined up in front of me I open fire, slide tackle into them and cortex bomb the remaining guys if they manage to down me which is easy for them considering I'm a light body type. The only problem with this your team has to be on the ball and realize that you've distracted the siege. I would recommend hiding behind a wall when you do this because you don't want an enemy operative spotting you or the guy you body snatched realizes he has a twin.
Sounds nice -- I'll do an operative right after I finish my medic. I've been playing medics since BF2, since I like the style a lot. Level 19 right now.
I'm really loving the light type medic with sniper rifle and MP. The 1 shot power is enough to bring any light body type to very low health, and with the MP you are practically assured you'll finish them. Not only that, the rifles are pretty much the only thing a light body type has to take on a heavy at long range. It lets me offer a lot of supporting kills on top of reviving everyone.
btw, any idea how much a muzzle brake affects rifle accuracy at long range? the range meter significantly goes down which I put one on, but I'm not sure what is considered long range in this game.
i've been playing around with the game mechanics for a long time.
Stability = affects your aiming the most (more stable, less spread and easier to aim for headshots)
accuracy = affects how far from the center of redicule the first bullet is.
Damage = DPS, so it is pretty irrelevent to deciding which weapon packs the biggest heat per bullet
so you really want the most stable weapon under all circumstances possible with accuracy only important for snipe rifles (to get headshots from far away)
also i practiced alot with the parkour, and man you move at speeds that remind me of Halflife stafe speedruns, that is if you are good at consistantly wall jumping and sliding. you actually can get through the aquarium without touching the ground if you do it right.
On May 16 2011 14:41 Fontong wrote: I've played about 15 hours so far, and it's a pretty damn fun game. It's really fun when you have that 'immortal team' thing going, when everyone dispenses their buffs correctly to all the members, people stay with a nice spread. A couple kevlar, health buffed, metabolism, AP round heavies in front tanking like crazy and you can mount an inexorable advance...I prefer being the immortal medic who slides and wall runs everywhere keeping the entire team alive, while getting kills along the way. Depending on the map, keeping the entire team alive can be the main factor in deciding who wins, being that the reinforcement distance is so long. For maps with a short respawn distance, medic is not so important, and sometimes dying can even be better because you get full supplies, imo.
My only complaint is the brutal chokes on some maps. On aquarium(i think it is) one of teams can set up camp in the large room, and the only way to attack is through long, narrow corridors. With everyone buffed up, gatling guns, and snipers it's too hard to get through.
Overall fun game though :3 If you don't want to get it now, consider it once the patches come out and the price drops.
Operatives are pretty good at breaking choke point sieges. You don't see them to often because the game is new and everyone is still learning how to play. I have one I'm working on, already have a lvl 20 soldier, and what I do is spend the whole game pretending I'm the Thing and sneaking behind everyone on the enemy time and then when they are all lined up in front of me I open fire, slide tackle into them and cortex bomb the remaining guys if they manage to down me which is easy for them considering I'm a light body type. The only problem with this your team has to be on the ball and realize that you've distracted the siege. I would recommend hiding behind a wall when you do this because you don't want an enemy operative spotting you or the guy you body snatched realizes he has a twin.
Sounds nice -- I'll do an operative right after I finish my medic. I've been playing medics since BF2, since I like the style a lot. Level 19 right now.
I'm really loving the light type medic with sniper rifle and MP. The 1 shot power is enough to bring any light body type to very low health, and with the MP you are practically assured you'll finish them. Not only that, the rifles are pretty much the only thing a light body type has to take on a heavy at long range. It lets me offer a lot of supporting kills on top of reviving everyone.
btw, any idea how much a muzzle brake affects rifle accuracy at long range? the range meter significantly goes down which I put one on, but I'm not sure what is considered long range in this game.
Muzzle Flashes reduce spread so you can hipfire more accurately. I wouldn't put one on something that your going to be Aiming down sights with. On the Carb 9 it seems to make ADS obsolete for all but the longest of ranges.
Has anyone figured out how to mitigate what I can only describe as a low refresh rate that makes the game appear choppy even at 200+ fps? The way I best test it is to stand in front of a command station and strafe back and forth, when you do this the text that prompts you to push your Use key to use the station is completely unreadable as the frames aren't smooth enough. It looks the same whether you're at 60 fps or over 150 fps. I run at 60 Hz but I can't pin that as the problem as if I figure up QL it looks silky smooth as ever. Any advice appreciated, I'm pretty sure it's not my hardware but I'd like to know if it's just "how it is" or not.
On May 16 2011 17:38 okuraku wrote: Has anyone figured out how to mitigate what I can only describe as a low refresh rate that makes the game appear choppy even at 200+ fps? The way I best test it is to stand in front of a command station and strafe back and forth, when you do this the text that prompts you to push your Use key to use the station is completely unreadable as the frames aren't smooth enough. It looks the same whether you're at 60 fps or over 150 fps. I run at 60 Hz but I can't pin that as the problem as if I figure up QL it looks silky smooth as ever. Any advice appreciated, I'm pretty sure it's not my hardware but I'd like to know if it's just "how it is" or not.
I've never experienced that. Could be just poor netcode that should be expected from, does it happen in single player mode too?
On May 16 2011 18:03 Encrypto wrote: I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but it got a pretty poor review on IGN.
It actually would have been a better review if he just left it at the numbers.
The guy reviewing it seems to be purposefully obstinate. Some of his main complaints are "I can't tell whether I'm light, medium, or heavy body type" and "All the classes are the same." I don't you about you guys, but these things are pretty obvious to me when I'm playing. He slams the storyline, but honestly, who gives a shit about it? No MP focused game is judged on the quality of its storyline. I haven't found a huge need to change classes at all times to match the objective -- a well balanced team already covers this while becoming more powerful due to its diversity.
I can see why someone wouldn't like the game, but his reasons are really quite strange. Please read this review before just going off 'IGN said it's bad'
It actually would have been a better review if he just left it at the numbers.
The guy reviewing it seems to be purposefully obstinate. Some of his main complaints are "I can't tell whether I'm light, medium, or heavy body type" and "All the classes are the same." I don't you about you guys, but these things are pretty obvious to me when I'm playing. He slams the storyline, but honestly, who gives a shit about it? No MP focused game is judged on the quality of its storyline. I haven't found a huge need to change classes at all times to match the objective -- a well balanced team already covers this while becoming more powerful due to its diversity.
I can see why someone wouldn't like the game, but his reasons are really quite strange. Please read this review before just going off 'IGN said it's bad'
I feel like he played it by himself... the AI doesn't go for objectives because they want the players to cap em. Why else would he feel the need to always change class?
On May 16 2011 17:17 TheLotion wrote: I already own TF2.
I already own Command and Conquer, guess I don't need Starcraft. See how your logic doesn't work? Brink doesn't play like TF2, if it did I would hate it because TF2 is to stylized for me. The only thing Brink plays like is ET and even that is a stretch.
On May 16 2011 17:17 TheLotion wrote: I already own TF2.
I already own Command and Conquer, guess I don't need Starcraft. See how your logic doesn't works? Brink doesn't play like TF2, if it did I would hate it because TF2 is to stylized for me. The only thing Brink plays like is ET and even it's a stretch.
I don't like TF2 and have never been able to get into it, despite owning it for a long time. I've already gotten in about the same playtime in Brink as I have over the course of my TF2 ownership and I much prefer it. It's personal which one you like more, but I agree that you can't say they are the same.
Also, you don't need to put youtube links inside image tags? I'm surprised it works anyway.
I stream a ton at www.justin.tv/mojo_ca ... if you want a break from watching SC2 streams come watch mine, I stream high level scrims and practice and stuff :D
No one really knows why since no one will tell us, but I think it has something to do with how D2D was selling keys. I think they were selling UK keys to all of Europe and we know how Steam loves its region based pricing
On May 16 2011 22:16 The Chief wrote: Is it just me or is the AI bots in this absolutely retarded? like moreso than they should be.
From what I understand, the AI scales it's intelligence based on your characters level, and the friendly AI have inhibitors on them to encourage you to play with humans.
Splash Damage announced they would be removing this behavior soon, if I recall. So that may be your problem.
I know there have been lots of complaints of performance issues, but the only real issue I have had that is anywhere near is that the client crashes if you alt tab for more than thirty seconds of so.
I was worried about picking it up on the PC as theres been some news that it runs really bad on ATI's.. so I got the 360 version, I traded that in and picked up the PC version anyway and believe me they are like two different games.. the PC version runs flawlessly for me.. the 360 version looks AWFUL
On May 16 2011 22:16 The Chief wrote: Is it just me or is the AI bots in this absolutely retarded? like moreso than they should be.
From what I understand, the AI scales it's intelligence based on your characters level, and the friendly AI have inhibitors on them to encourage you to play with humans.
Splash Damage announced they would be removing this behavior soon, if I recall. So that may be your problem.
They changed it already. I played through the entire campaign on hard as a light operative and I didn't have to switch classes but once or twice the AI will do the objectives if your not going for them on the wheel (you can still guard).
For those with problems on ATI HD 5700 or similiar cards:
Roll back to Catalyst 10.11 !
I know it sounds like standard driver magic but it really did work for me. I get 50-60 FPS now on open maps and it actually feels like those FPS. Think thats a common problem at the moment - the perceived FPS-feeling is really bad on ATI cards somehow...
Im so much into the medic at the moment, level 20 with lots of unlocked stuffs for it with a light body type, going crazy on reviving peeps, up to 10/11k xp per matchs atm, and ofc à good feeling of being usefull :p
So I got the game today, and while really fun, I'm having a major problem graphics wise. Now I'm pretty much a total nub at everything computer related that isnt PLAYING a game, or just using the internet.
The problem. Black boxes where I shoot, grenades are massive black squaring doom clouds, lots and lots of black rotating boxes........
My card. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285M
And the solution....I have no clue. Turned off all the fancy graphics options, and set everything to the lowest I could. Nothing.
Things like the run around checkpoint map works just fine if I dont shoot at all, but the first level of the game is filled with black boxes.
Brink TV is having a tourney I think they have some top teams from other games like CS,Quake live and ET playing in it. Its going for 9-12 with more tomorrow.
On May 17 2011 14:45 N3rV[Green] wrote: So I got the game today, and while really fun, I'm having a major problem graphics wise. Now I'm pretty much a total nub at everything computer related that isnt PLAYING a game, or just using the internet.
The problem. Black boxes where I shoot, grenades are massive black squaring doom clouds, lots and lots of black rotating boxes........
My card. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285M
And the solution....I have no clue. Turned off all the fancy graphics options, and set everything to the lowest I could. Nothing.
Things like the run around checkpoint map works just fine if I dont shoot at all, but the first level of the game is filled with black boxes.
Are your drivers up to date? Have to tried using older drivers?
On May 19 2011 10:22 astroorion wrote: I want this game, but am on the fence between buying this or just waiting for that next game of the year, what do you think TeamLiquid?
Watch the Brink Tv stream http://thebrink.tv/index.php?show=2 then decide its a niche game and better on PC. I love it but it's not for everyone. It also needs some patches.
Anyone have experience with this game on PC and 360? Is PC version really THAT much better? I want to get this game but am leaning towards 360 version to play with my friends.
On May 20 2011 10:48 DEN1ED wrote: Anyone have experience with this game on PC and 360? Is PC version really THAT much better? I want to get this game but am leaning towards 360 version to play with my friends.
It's a diffrence between 1000+ servers (PC) versus hardly anyone playing online on 360 due to lag. You won't find full servers on 360.
So has anyone else watched the brink.tv tournament these last 2 days? I missed most of day 2, but from what I've seen the commentators pointed out all of the key points needed to get the game going, and it's less than I expected.
So far the 2 "big" things are that defensive positions in the first part of most maps are at too big of an advantage, and operatives are terrible outside of pubs, and whenever they are needed you are basically down one person. Comms hack is impossible to perform in competitive play and outside of caltrops they have nothing. But the game is fun so far.
On May 20 2011 16:21 r33k wrote: So has anyone else watched the brink.tv tournament these last 2 days? I missed most of day 2, but from what I've seen the commentators pointed out all of the key points needed to get the game going, and it's less than I expected.
So far the 2 "big" things are that defensive positions in the first part of most maps are at too big of an advantage, and operatives are terrible outside of pubs, and whenever they are needed you are basically down one person. Comms hack is impossible to perform in competitive play and outside of caltrops they have nothing. But the game is fun so far.
sticky bombs are definitely useful, although not an every day use.
On May 20 2011 16:21 r33k wrote: So has anyone else watched the brink.tv tournament these last 2 days? I missed most of day 2, but from what I've seen the commentators pointed out all of the key points needed to get the game going, and it's less than I expected.
So far the 2 "big" things are that defensive positions in the first part of most maps are at too big of an advantage, and operatives are terrible outside of pubs, and whenever they are needed you are basically down one person. Comms hack is impossible to perform in competitive play and outside of caltrops they have nothing. But the game is fun so far.
sticky bombs are definitely useful, although not an every day use.
I think they are an every day use thing. Even if they don't stick they are pretty effective at clearing an area.
I do agree that comm hacks is hard to get down against competent opponents, though they can still work if you as a team just killed off a whole wave. More of a prepare for the next fire fight than a use for the current one kind of thing.
On May 20 2011 10:48 DEN1ED wrote: Anyone have experience with this game on PC and 360? Is PC version really THAT much better? I want to get this game but am leaning towards 360 version to play with my friends.
360 multiplayer FPS and PC multiplayer FPS are not comparable, even if it's the exact same game. If you want the 360 game, buy it. The PC game won't be the same thing.
On May 20 2011 10:48 DEN1ED wrote: Anyone have experience with this game on PC and 360? Is PC version really THAT much better? I want to get this game but am leaning towards 360 version to play with my friends.
I bought this for the 360 and have some issues with it (aside from the lag). I got it for the 360 instead of the PC for the same reason you state, to play with my friends.
The main issue I see is that this game was not built for the console player's "mentality". There is no partying up before a game (you can make a xbox live party, but it doesn't matter ingame). One person needs to join a game and then everyone needs to join that game (and hope there is enough space for everyone). There is also a chance inbetween each game that you will lose members to another "server".
To make matters more annoying you cannot level up your character, or change your body size, while playing. So if you want to add any new abilities/change your appearance/body size you need to exit the game and hope you can join back up again.
For some reason this ability to group up is not an expectation when playing on the PC. If I want to play with 4 friends in a game with dedicated servers I pretty much expect some of them to be opposite team, and I'm fine with that.
I have some hope that they fix these issues for the console, but it requires rewrites as opposed to small tweaks.
On May 20 2011 16:21 r33k wrote: So has anyone else watched the brink.tv tournament these last 2 days? I missed most of day 2, but from what I've seen the commentators pointed out all of the key points needed to get the game going, and it's less than I expected.
So far the 2 "big" things are that defensive positions in the first part of most maps are at too big of an advantage, and operatives are terrible outside of pubs, and whenever they are needed you are basically down one person. Comms hack is impossible to perform in competitive play and outside of caltrops they have nothing. But the game is fun so far.
sticky bombs are definitely useful, although not an every day use.
I think they are an every day use thing. Even if they don't stick they are pretty effective at clearing an area.
I do agree that comm hacks is hard to get down against competent opponents, though they can still work if you as a team just killed off a whole wave. More of a prepare for the next fire fight than a use for the current one kind of thing.
Competent opponents are even more likely to clear sticky bombs tbh. The activation time for stickies is way too long for them to be of any use outside of pubs.
Friends showed no interest in PC version, and as it's likely the only fps to deviate from the standard COD-ish formula I picked it up for PS3.
It's fun.
It'd be more fun if I was able to play with all humans, though. The game's bots aren't -super- terrible, though their decision making in regards to objectives is a little one dimensional (generally, shoot at enemies until it's clear and then start attempting the objective - so not gonna clutch it out when a hack is at 97% with 2 minutes to go -.-). Unfortunately the game seems very willing to replace humans with those bots. I think the highest number of players I saw in an online match so far (not spent a ton of online time in freeplay yet) was 8, and they were all on the same team smashing bots in the face. Think I saw a guy on the other team once (9 people, could it be?), but that didn't last long.
Console doesn't really have a way for you to tell who's playing where that I've found, and since there's a decent number of options to set for your match it feels like it's easy to miss other players because of the game not finding the "perfect fit" or something like that.
I don't really buy the whole "shooters are terrible on consoles" just because you're using a controller. Regardless of controller vs. mouse precision (and that changing how good some gun types are based on the control scheme you're using), everyone's on an even playing field. That said, the PC version lets you look through servers so that you can actually find other humans to play with/against (though I saw someone say on a forum that you can't tell how many are humans before joining the server). For a multiplayer game, it shouldn't be difficult to locate others to play with. Thus far the console version has failed to deliver (their attempt at a different party system is confusing, to say the least) on having other players to go up against regularly.
So yeah. It's fun, but definitely has some issues. It is by no means a bad rental even if you don't play online much, but unless a patch fixes a lot of things you should be able to blow through the campaign + play some more random rounds (playing different classes, etc.) and get tired of the bots single minded nature quickly enough.
On May 22 2011 21:16 Vortok wrote: Friends showed no interest in PC version, and as it's likely the only fps to deviate from the standard COD-ish formula I picked it up for PS3.
It's fun.
It'd be more fun if I was able to play with all humans, though. The game's bots aren't -super- terrible, though their decision making in regards to objectives is a little one dimensional (generally, shoot at enemies until it's clear and then start attempting the objective - so not gonna clutch it out when a hack is at 97% with 2 minutes to go -.-). Unfortunately the game seems very willing to replace humans with those bots. I think the highest number of players I saw in an online match so far (not spent a ton of online time in freeplay yet) was 8, and they were all on the same team smashing bots in the face. Think I saw a guy on the other team once (9 people, could it be?), but that didn't last long.
Console doesn't really have a way for you to tell who's playing where that I've found, and since there's a decent number of options to set for your match it feels like it's easy to miss other players because of the game not finding the "perfect fit" or something like that.
I don't really buy the whole "shooters are terrible on consoles" just because you're using a controller. Regardless of controller vs. mouse precision (and that changing how good some gun types are based on the control scheme you're using), everyone's on an even playing field. That said, the PC version lets you look through servers so that you can actually find other humans to play with/against (though I saw someone say on a forum that you can't tell how many are humans before joining the server). For a multiplayer game, it shouldn't be difficult to locate others to play with. Thus far the console version has failed to deliver (their attempt at a different party system is confusing, to say the least) on having other players to go up against regularly.
So yeah. It's fun, but definitely has some issues. It is by no means a bad rental even if you don't play online much, but unless a patch fixes a lot of things you should be able to blow through the campaign + play some more random rounds (playing different classes, etc.) and get tired of the bots single minded nature quickly enough.
When people are saying it is garbage on the consoles, for this game in particular it isn't because they are biased PC gamers... it is just much less polished and fun on the 360/PS3 than on the PC. It also suffers from an extreme difference in number of people available to play etc.
Having played a solid 50 hours since the game was released (what can I say, it is fun...) I don't see the draw in the heavy body type. The Extra mobility is worth much more than the extra health and bigger weapons, imo.
it is definately not just pc/console bias when people are saying the console versions are bad
I had the xbox 360 version, was totally content with that purchase.. but having my room mate sat behind me on his PC version just totally blew the console version out of the water
traded in, got it on PC.. it is just better .. and that is sad
On May 24 2011 02:54 iCanada wrote: Having played a solid 50 hours since the game was released (what can I say, it is fun...) I don't see the draw in the heavy body type. The Extra mobility is worth much more than the extra health and bigger weapons, imo.
Me and a friend went around as heavies with the Chintor (something like that) heavy gun, racking up something crazy like 37-5 on public servers, you just have to play more defensive and guard objectives, most people run straight into you and they die. I find the extra mobility is worthless alot of the time because you still need your team to help you out, and if you rush ahead you still die. However it is fun to be light and go sniper.
I have put about 12.5 hours into this game so far on the PC, and I am liking it. I just have to learn how to play a little bit better, and use the parkour a little more to my advantage.
I am also having a hard time deciding between the body types, so I have just been sticking with the medium so far.
Anyway, loving it so far, and I am sure I will like it even more when they fix the ATI card FPS issues, and my 5870 actually runs the game like it is supposed to.
Patch seemed to fix all the dumb sound bugs and now that the browser shows full games it doesn't make it look like no one is playing. Anyways this game needs better players. It's a fun game but it suffers sometimes from the same problem that BFBC2 had of "troll" teams. How they manage to focus on kills in a game with no KDR is beyond me. The wheel tells you were to be and what to do even what classes are needed but even then.
On May 24 2011 13:01 Jswizzy wrote: Patch seemed to fix all the dumb sound bugs and now that the browser shows full games it doesn't make it look like no one is playing. Anyways this game needs better players. It's a fun game but it suffers sometimes from the same problem that BFBC2 had of "troll" teams. How they manage to focus on kills in a game with no KDR is beyond me. The wheel tells you were to be and what to do even what classes are needed but even then.
I have about 20 hrs (+ a bit on another copy I got to test), and am thoroughly enjoying myself. Light Engi w/ a light rifle and a rapid fire pistol... Brink lets me play exactly how I want. The pace is good, focus on objectives is cool, and the classes (save the Op) all work together nicely. I say "save the Op" because they don't buff and they spend a lot of time behind enemy lines screwing stuff up. Not a lot of time for interaction, at least in pub matches. Now a coordinated team with an Op...
Re: sound bug-- I just got out of a game an hour or so ago where a teammate allegedly had his sound die. Pub game, but I dunno why he'd claim it died on him if it didn't. Still can't confirm it tho.
And I get what you mean about people being less-than-intelligent re: objectives. The aforementioned game was on Reactor, we were assaulting, and there were zero Operatives on my squad. After a minute or two I switched to one, which was annoying since I main Engi and have zero experience as an Op.
EDIT: I have two tangential observations.
One: no female models. Not something I expected, but it still strikes me as odd that every single character in the game is male. Halo: Reach and Gears had female toons, ne? Maybe they thought "heavy" type female characters would look too odd... I say just make them look like fantasy-style Dwarves.
Two: Some objectives are incredibly difficult to break in pubs. The first objectives for the Security on Aquarium and CC, and the first Resistance Reactor objective immediately come to mind. Typically the smoothest way I've seen them done in pubs is to sprint en masse: first squad to get there tends to get the obj. But a properly bolstered defense is just murder to get thru. As it should be, I suppose.
On May 24 2011 02:54 iCanada wrote: Having played a solid 50 hours since the game was released (what can I say, it is fun...) I don't see the draw in the heavy body type. The Extra mobility is worth much more than the extra health and bigger weapons, imo.
Me and a friend went around as heavies with the Chintor (something like that) heavy gun, racking up something crazy like 37-5 on public servers, you just have to play more defensive and guard objectives, most people run straight into you and they die. I find the extra mobility is worthless alot of the time because you still need your team to help you out, and if you rush ahead you still die. However it is fun to be light and go sniper.
Well, I do that all the time with Medium/Light body types. It is probably a playstyle thing... maybe I'm just always used to having the faster units.
I've really taken a liking to that one sniper rifle, The Dragnov "light" Rifle. I'm running it with the Silencer, Snoop-R Scope, and the rapid fire attachments and it just dominates. A Grenade and a headshot is a kill everytime, and two-three bullets is a kill otherwise.... I'd say you can unload all six rounds in about five seconds. I've been playing a Medium Soldier and I feel like I can pretty well adapt to anything. The Sniper is great for defensive objectives, and the assault rifle of your choice works excellent for everything else. Very good class for Public games, because you can still do well/have fun if your team is terrible.
EDIT: @neohero9 I'd agree with pretty well that whole entire post. I'd add the Airport terminal to the list of public fail maps as the resistance. First you run through one choke, then another, then another, then back through the same one you went through before... Also, the Sectower mission can be brutal for Security, I suppose.
EDIT: @neohero9 I'd agree with pretty well that whole entire post. I'd add the Airport terminal to the list of public fail maps as the resistance. First you run through one choke, then another, then another, then back through the same one you went through before... Also, the Sectower mission can be brutal for Security, I suppose.
I love SecTower on either side. My only beef with it is on the Resistance: the egress with Nechayev (sp?). You spawn at the same place the entire time, so if you die you have to run 100-120 yds back to him just to hope to get him moving again. It's not a balance issue, more of a pacing issue.
Sorry, wrong map. I was thinking of that one bonus map where the Resistance shoot a missle at the tower. I just remember the final objective for Security being impossible to complete. lol.
On May 25 2011 12:39 neohero9 wrote: Shipyard, maybe? Where you have to repair the crane controls and then hack the missile controls or something like that?
Yeah, but it isn't a freeplay map. Only exists in the campaign.
Yeah you're thinking of shipyard. Which isn't even the worst map, it's just that the ending is a clusterfuck.
My most hated map (8v8, pubs) is Airport for the security, first of all operatives suck and are only useful in 2 halfs of 2 maps AND you are forced to play a heavy/medium, and after you crack the safe you have tons of paths to take which all funnel into the huge final room, where unless you have baller engies and the resistance is bad resistance is extremely favored by the map design. If anyone wants to add me on EU I'm reekhadol, I think I'm lvl 17 or 16, I used to be 18 but had to respec twice for pubs... Also shipyard allows for super easy spawn camping if you're on the resistance, since you can hop to their ledge from the barricades at the health command post you have a perfect camping area which blocks 3 out of their 4 starting paths.
Competitive play is what calls for some balance: QW:ET players are desperately calling for competitive teams to be 6v6 like in ET and want the game to be 100% an ET sequel. As of right now only 4 weapons are used consistently in high level play, those are the carb-9(smg), the sea eagle, the revolver and the belgo. Pistols do more damage and are more accurate than smgs, which is pretty funny to me. You rarely see mediums and never see heavies, mediums will usually go for carb-9 and one of the heavier main weapons they can take.
On May 25 2011 12:39 neohero9 wrote: Shipyard, maybe? Where you have to repair the crane controls and then hack the missile controls or something like that?
Yeah, but it isn't a freeplay map. Only exists in the campaign.
The drubbing I gave an opposing Security team on that map says otherwise
played the game a bunch more, started on a second character and all that. I think the problem with the game is that it gives a really bad/complicated first impression. It takes a while to understand all the angles of attack on the maps and most of the time, on pub servers, people are just running around playing TDM and not actually doing what they're supposed to.
But the game is really, really fun when you're playing with a team of people who understand the game, who stick together and keep each other buffed up. A lot of the time, you just become unbreakable - and that is also kind of another problem with the game. Attacking is too hard on almost all of the maps, and seeing holds on the first objective of the map seems to be pretty common.
I really hope they balance the game a little more. As many posters have already stated they need to buff heavy classes, buff other weapons to make them more useful, and most importantly change the defenders HUGE advantage and quick. The tournament BrinkTV ran was a snorefest of constant holds which as a flagship tournament really hurts the games legitimacy.
The problem with the carb-9 is that it's hip fire accuracy is just so much better than rifles. To get non smgs to consistently hit a target you need to aim down sights or stop moving and this just makes you a sitting a duck. Meanwhile the guy with carb 9 is running full sprint pinging you in the head. The only rifle I've even been able to use without thinking the carb 9 would of been better is the gerund and even then it only has sweet spot were it manages to out range smgs. To make mediums and heavies comparable to lights they need to work on making the rifles and heavy weapons better while on the move.
On May 27 2011 13:40 Jswizzy wrote: The problem with the carb-9 is that it's hip fire accuracy is just so much better than rifles. To get non smgs to consistently hit a target you need to aim down sights or stop moving and this just makes you a sitting a duck. Meanwhile the guy with carb 9 is running full sprint pinging you in the head. The only rifle I've even been able to use without thinking the carb 9 would of been better is the gerund and even then it only has sweet spot were it manages to out range smgs. To make mediums and heavies comparable to lights they need to work on making the rifles and heavy weapons better while on the move.
The problem is that the carb 9 with the round magazine upgrade kills anything before you have to reload, and if you run out of ammo you positioned yourself while shooting so that you can switch to your handgun, which is even stronger.
When I used to play a medium I liked the Euston, but in my opinion the problem with medium and heavies is that they die too quickly. They take so much longer to get to their objective, and since brink is based on maneuvering and backstabbing anything who isn't a light gets stomped.
I reformatted my computer and now I can actually download the hotfix driver to play this game.
Just played a few games, despite my rage of not being able to play it that would blot out the sun I'm finally having fun. This game is exactly what I thought it would be, going to love going Light Medic.
Wish this game got more support :O There is barely anyone playing it now, or atleast at the times that I have been playing it. There is like 5-6 servers that are actually playable at most and you have to wait for them to become open for you to join it.
Cmon, an FPS where you run round and jump off walls, go check out Lost Planet 2, the same thing in 3rd person, its a generic one shot FPS game that will (if not already) has died off. Its not a pioneering game of any kind, look at all the talk of imbalance issues, they've clearly failed to implement a good system.
"I can play light w/ an SMG and kill everything" does not make a good game.
Weapon rebalance details just released from Splash Damage. These changes are on the PC for now, but they should be rolling out to 360/PS3 when the respective companies clear them.
I'm pretty excited about the grenade launcher changes. I use it mainly for the knockdown because the damage is terribad, but hopefully it will be a nice room clearing device for offense with the rebalance.
Finally I can use something other than an smg and not go dry after after 2-3 fire fights. Also Carb 9 nerf means other weapons have a chance now. don't know why they nerfed the sea eagle though since the Richie is obviously the pistol of choice esp' if you can get the damage buff.
I use the Sea Eagle in place of the Ritchie because my main is either the Drognav or Barnett, and I want a rapid-fire weap for when I'm running thru possibly-infested hallways. Depending on how much the damage and reload time were adjusted, that might change. And if I keep missing... because I'm bad.
Btw, if you ever see "Swaggy", usually a Light Engi, on PC, that be me.
My apologies for the 1 month necro, but when I tried to play again tonight I thought it was relevant:
PC Version, Freeplay search results at 10:50 CST time: 12/16 8/8 6/16 6/8 4/8 3/8 2/8 11 1/x's and more 0/x's than I care to count.
That's a whole 52 players on PC freeplay mode right now. I'd try to give campaign figures, but it doesn't really list them and I can't get a game to start after 10 mins of waiting. It really sucks. I liked this game when it came out, had a few problems but multiplayer could be fun. I left for a while a now? Single players seems the only option left, ok on some nights as I like the gun mechanics still, but ultimately I'll probably uninstall soon.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/716/tf2.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UCFJm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Hgn3G.png)
![[image loading]](http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6247/brinkdiagram.png)
![[image loading]](http://uppix.net/b/3/8/86cf17509ef3e9d44d78907361a33tt.jpg)
