A few improvements we're working on...

(Kurushi) #61

I love the way people think patches come out of thin air

(CoFran) #62

dont hold your breath for a SDK they have to sell future DLCs after all.

(DonkeyDong) #63

i love it when people try to justify no patch for a game that is incomplete and missing anything that resembles past games…

lets not think of it as a patch. Lets think of it as completing the game,. IT WAS MEANT TO BE. because to be honest, if they intended it to goes this way, they should have told us. And guess what, we wouldn’t have baught it. So that’s why we feel like we’re robbed and now being hung out to dry like the stink sock you’re response is. Noob

(Crytiqal) #64

[QUOTE=coolstory;353921]

Originally Posted by Crytiqal
One small note about the spread in this game.

I have a feeling they made the spread so big because the hitboxes are ***** with SMART and all, and therefor they made the spread so big and random so that you’d hit the enemy player no matter how ***ed up the hitbox is.

Just my thoughts on why they made such random spread.

Aren’t there any cmds to see hitboxes?[/QUOTE]

I am not sure, but I would be interested in seeing this to either confirm my thoughts or not.

(coolstory) #65

I think they increased spread so it’ll give bad players a chance to get kills. Killing becomes more about luck than skill.

High spread and low damage…I dont know what they were thinking.

(BMXer) #66

Unless they added something for brink, rofl, you can’t show the hitboxes. Only way even close was in ETQW:PRO you could turn on the head hit box when cheats where enabled.

Regardless, what you said makes perfect sense.

(Je T´aime) #67

Just not a big fan of the defense respaw timer up to 30 seconds, I think it would make more sense decrease attackers respaw timer to 10 seconds instead, 30 seconds waiting is really boring.

(Thundermuffin) #68

If you just reduce the attackers time, the defense would still have 2 or 3 (depending on how the respawn timer falls at the start) chances to defuse a plant. The defense would come in stocked up on buffs and ammo, while the offense would be sitting there with low pips, buffs worn off and possibly little ammo. That’s not even accounting for any offensive player who might’ve died, since the offense’s walk to the objective is way longer than that of the defense.

I can’t believe people think half a minute is too long; it’s like they’ve never played any game where it’s 1 life and you’re done.

(Kurushi) #69

[QUOTE=DonkeyDong;354629]i love it when people try to justify no patch for a game that is incomplete and missing anything that resembles past games…

lets not think of it as a patch. Lets think of it as completing the game,. IT WAS MEANT TO BE. because to be honest, if they intended it to goes this way, they should have told us. And guess what, we wouldn’t have baught it. So that’s why we feel like we’re robbed and now being hung out to dry like the stink sock you’re response is. Noob[/QUOTE]

Sigh. Completely besides the point. We all know it should have been in from the start, but it wasn’t so deal with it. It doesn’t stop them having to make sure it’s right for release

(Impulse_) #70

Your posts are fairly annoying to read… You think it’s ok to release a broken game out of the box with glitches and bugs that games 10 years ago never had? How is that fair to the CONSUMERS who buy the game only to have to wait several months before the game is even playable!!! I have watched it over and over again where companies rush games out unfinished and it’s happening so much more with next generation technology when none of that crap happened 10 years ago as often as it happens now. Sorry dude… I won’t settle and “deal” with a game that’s broken that I PAID FOR.

(Verticae) #71

A great justification for the lack of SDK/patch/promod would be that they’re too busy working on Wolfentein: Enemy Territory 2.

(BMXer) #72

TBH, its kinda scary to think about a game made for consoles called W:ET2. Sad even.

And one thing I think is a huge problem overall is the lack of recourse we have as consumers. There is literally no way for us to get our money back if we are not happy with the product.
If you are unhappy with a purchase of just about anything on this planet, you can get your money back. That is not the case with video games. Once you pay for it, your money is gone regardless of what the situation.
Developers hype up these unfinished, half cooked games before the release but they don’t let anyone actually play it and they don’t answer any real questions about what the game will be like. Brink has proven developers can basically trick consumers into thinking a game is one thing when really its just plain broken. And the worst part, there is no way to really know what you are paying for until after you payed for it and you can’t get your money back.

If we could return games, tons and tons and tons of people would have returned Brink and gotten their money back. Money talks and when you can’t make your money talk by asking for a refund, developers get away with whatever they want…

(hly) #73

It wouldn’t make a difference because the offense still needs to walk pretty far to get back to the objective. While the defense spawns right on top of the objective. I suggest making defense 30 seconds and offense 20 seconds. The point for this is to make the rounds shorter for both parties.

(DonkeyDong) #74

And you’re tell me besides the point?!??!

It wasn’t right for release so you’re invalid. Patches are required 2 months ago to fix the reasons why NO ONE IS PLAYING IT…

how is NO ONE IS PLAYING IT… even right for release?

/facepalm
/le sigh
/whatever

(Kurushi) #75

I don’t know what game you’re playing but mine’s not broken

(Kurushi) #76

[QUOTE=DonkeyDong;355982]And you’re tell me besides the point?!??!

It wasn’t right for release so you’re invalid. Patches are required 2 months ago to fix the reasons why NO ONE IS PLAYING IT…

how is NO ONE IS PLAYING IT… even right for release?

/facepalm
/le sigh
/whatever[/QUOTE]

It should have been in from the start but it wasn’t, I don’t disagree with that but… the game is still playable. Late is late, so let em fix it properly instead of rushing out more problems

(Thundermuffin) #77

Everyone with ATI cards still have horrible frame rates that make the game unenjoyable and not working as intended. Well, that is if they intended the game to give you more than 25FPS. That sounds pretty broken to me, don’t you think?

(Seiniyta) #78

You’re lying so hard here, ‘everyone with a ATI’ pardon me? I’m getting a solid 60 frames (except sec tower) on everything maxed except ambient occlusion wiht my 4870

(Thundermuffin) #79

Well congratulations, you’re one of the very, very few people (I’ve read of like maybe 5 other people not having issues) who aren’t having massive frame rate problems. Go look at the bug report forum and notice how almost every other topic (or at least it use to be, everyone else probably quit trying to get a working game) is about ATI cards and their horrible performance on only this 1 game. 60FPS isn’t anything to brag about either, lol, when you other games are pushing out 100+ FPS on that same 4870.

(INF3RN0) #80

My brother has an extremely powerful gaming PC with an ATI 5880 and Brink is the only game that lags. Most people just gave up on asking for performance support since this game was obviously only tested on consoles. My nVidia 8800 barely runs the game and loses nearly 100 fps from the post process “glow” that they refuse to unlock… saying Brink is an optimized PC game is a LIE.