Are you serious?

(Shotgun Surgeon) #21

[QUOTE=Akkers;310111]You know what I am saying, the game is too short. Yes I completed it. You know, what happens when you finished everything the game has to offer? Pretty common parlance among gamers.

I have played it (and games in general) long enough to know that there are no win formulas like you insinuate with your ‘when is heavy better suited’ kind of jibes. BTW- go read up, the heavy is way underpowered.

Stop embarrassing yourself, Kalbuth. You know what I am saying you are just being difficult because you don’t like it. Grow up, flamefag. And get a dictionary while you are at it.[/QUOTE]

When you finished everything a game has to offer, that’s when you jump on multiplayer and have fun with it. What is it with you people nowadays and your need for more things to do? You go around shooting other people and completing objectives… is that not fun enough? God I miss the CS days…

You told him to grow up but then called him a “flamefag.” Internet tough guy, huh?

(Bakercompany) #22

Ooo base capture. Now thats a great idea that would work in Brink very well, at least I think.

Would be perfect for stop watch mode. Each team takes a turn holding/defending a base. Or each could have a base at the same time but I’d hate for people to cry that its not the single objective focus of Brink, but I think it would be fun.

A map like that could incorporate every classes objectives. Hacking the base as operatives, building walls as engineers (not to mention the infinite usefulness of mines and turrets), blowing down the walls as soldiers. And as medics, your only objective is to keep being awesome.

Would be easy to have several MG nests as well, lots of possibilities there. And its none of the generic game modes people are afraid of.

Maybe this is a good compromise?

(Litego) #23

You’re talking about completing a MP game? There is no completion, the fun is not in progression, but in the gameplay itself, interacting with other people, not bots. Who cares about the SP? Seriously, if there were no MP in this game I would have never bought it. In fact I never buy a game which doesnt have MP. If it doesnt have SP I couldnt care less.

(Shotgun Surgeon) #24

Support what statement? That you’re ignorant. Everything that you have posted so far screams ignorance. And you’re ugly.

(dazman76) #25

There is depth available in the maps, which is why many players of previous SD games are quite content - and will be for some time. I guess if people can’t see this depth, Brink isn’t really the game for them - and doubling the number of maps doesn’t help in that situation. If you can’t see the depth in the existing maps, how does having more maps provide more “depth”? :confused:

(Bakercompany) #26

Brink is only a multiplayer game. Especially considering the current bot status.

I’m thankful they changed the matchmaking to 4v4 for now (even though that is a cheap hack fix) but at least non-laggy matches can be found. I have high hopes for their ultimate lag fix so we can have 8v8 player on player matches with no lag.

As mentioned several other places, I think a lot (including myself) were disappointed at how shallow the campaign is. Taking very little use of SMART and the amazing backstory they created. I could have easily come up with that campaign structure myself and i’m not very creative.

Borderlands had a garbage story with a garbage ending too. But I expected more out of Brink, especially for how much I hyped this game up to hundreds of people (i’m responsible for at least 50 pre-orders by myself). I boosted this game so much, and I hate that it let a lot of people down. It is fun though let me at least make that clear. Its like having a high-power V8 engine in a Ford Pinto. The gameplay of Brink is brilliant and fun, but the rest of the game doesn’t really take advantage of it.

EDIT: As far as the map depth goes, theres about 3 of them that are decent. The rest are simplistic garbage really. Each having like 2 SMART areas, and one or two objectives. So much more could have been done with how long they developed this game. I think they spent all their time on look/gameplay/sound. And god bless them they did a bang up job, but the campaign and map design looks like it received very little attention.

(Akkers) #27

[QUOTE=Shotgun Surgeon;310116]When you finished everything a game has to offer, that’s when you jump on multiplayer and have fun with it. What is it with you people nowadays and your need for more things to do? You go around shooting other people and completing objectives… is that not fun enough? God I miss the CS days…

You told him to grow up but then called him a “flamefag.” Internet tough guy, huh?[/QUOTE]

Think about what you are saying, how many games expect you play through the SP campaign online? Not asking for the moon on a stick here, just the same as all other FPS’s. A campaign and SEPARATE multiplayer.

As for the internet tough guy thing, you are on pretty thin ice yourself there!

Litego - read the post. That is not what I said, though to be fair to you, i didnt specify what I meant by completion because I thought it was obvious. You can’t strictly complete MP but when you are top rank and have all unlocks, there is not much left to do. To clarify, what I meant was the following;

I finished the SP campagin with 3 characters, medium, heavy then light. I played the challenges, which werent remotely challenging both with friends and alone. I played the campaign through in online coop with some friends and with some randoms. I then played online with and against people in the campaign and in freeplay and played the meagre map list through multiple times.

That is what led me to my conclusions. I have done nothing but play this game since I finished work on Friday, I am not basing my opinion on some knee-jerk rubbish like most of the responders in here.

Yes shotgun surgeon, obviously I am asking you to explain how I am ignorant. A simple request that you clearly cannot fulfill. You are just throwing buzzwords around like some South Park Michael Jackson. I’ll up the offer to $60 to make up for you being ripped off by this game. Go one, one valid reason for $60. If you are so right, it’ll be the easiest money you ever make, right?

+1 to Bakercompany. Well put. Better than me!

(Kendle) #28

qftw

Whether you’re disappointed with the game I guess depends on what you expected. As a former RTCW / ET / ET:QW player I expected a half dozen multiplayer maps, and that’s what I got. Bots, AI, SP, don’t give a **** how good those things are, or even that they exist, I bought this game to play online with real people, with all that that entails.

(Bakercompany) #29

I like the idea of blending the single and multi-player together. Thats actually really neat. Very flexible.

Where I was disappointed, is the campaign didn’t even seem worthy of something to be released way down the road in a 10$ dlc. Its very poorly done I think. I don’t think anyone can argue with the backstory they created, which is amazing and so in depth, that the campaign takes little to no advantage of this. With the abilities to destroy, hack, repair, rebuild, and revive, so much more could have been done…

“Escort the hostage” mission over Now the epic fight and constant struggle to keep the hostage up is awesome. Don’t get me wrong, but thats all Brinks gameplay taking center stage and at that point it wouldn’t matter if you were pushing a cart full of groceries to the objective.

I bet if the community was given a map editor they’d come up with a far better campaign using SD’s own story.

I think all time was spent making gameplay (which is awesome IMO). But the little polish on the campaign shows. Not only is it short, but very simple.

EDIT: Also, after watching the movie 2012 and playing through Brink, i’m thoroughly creeped out about next year, tyvm.

(dommafia) #30

[QUOTE=Akkers;310114]Lol wut? I dare you to support that statement. In fact I will paypal you $10 and post you a cookie if you can back that up with stuff from what I have posted and not your own self-aggrandising b/s.

+1 to Diablo as well. This full-price, full-release game is a shoddy version of one that was in a bundle and cost less than a third of the money. Unacceptable.[/QUOTE]

Exibit A - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJEYXGy0Uco&hd=1

Watch it, the whole thing. Maybe you’ll learn a bit more about the game’s depth. I’m not exactly sure what you took away from the hundreds of interviews but it was very clear this wasnt a “regular” ol’ campaign mode. It was going to meld single and multiplayer. It was clear that you’d be repeating maps, that’s the whole thing about objective based fps. You don’t mind playing a map again after playing all the other ones.

You play it for all the depth that the gameplay offers to make each time you play the map a rewarding experience. There will obviously times where you just have a crap team that will make the experience a lot more sour and “boring” but that’s besides the point.

All I read here is someone that didn’t do their research before buying the game and wants to shout that he’s not happy buying a game that didnt suit him, even though it was NEVER a hidden fact.

(DemiGod) #31

I’d really like to see king of the hill…

(Akkers) #32

All I see here are people who love SD coming out and accusing me of not seeing the depth. I say the onus is on the supporters to spread the good word, so tell me where to find this depth, not to tell people who disagree how dumb they are. Also, if the game is not making it clear how to get the most out of it, then it cannot be very well put together. Games aren’t meant to be secret codes that only super secret squirrel forum ninjas can crack.

As I said, I followed the dev of this game through and was excited about it. I did my research and the hype sold me on it so I bought the SE on release day. I am disappointed with how it turned out in reality, which is about 10% as good as they made it out to be in their advertising. Simple point clearly put. The fact that you fanboy fags can’t see past then end of your hard on for SD doesn’t undermine what I am saying, which is that this game is not ****, but severely short on content or actual depth. And by depth, I don’t mean climbing some box. I mean something that draws you in, like the story they didnt use. Or the objective driven play that only had the most unimaginitive objectives ever.

It was clear you would be repeating maps, but from the backstory, it sounded like they would be many and varied and that the objectives would be more than just ‘hold X on this for 10 seconds’ or ‘carry that here’. At least some tweaks compared to SP. Like I have said the whole time, it doesn’t live up to the hype. What is there is good, but the problem is with what is missing.

Be a reasonable human being, don’t talk to me like I am dumb, patronise me and tell me to watch something all the way though when you cannot follow a perfectly simple thread through. I mean pot, kettle, black.

(H0RSE) #33

I’m so sick of hearing “the maps don’t have enough SMART areas” - “the maps aren’t made for SMART,” etc.

Brink is not a parkour obstacle course game. I’m pretty sure the devs designed maps, added alternate routes and objects to interact with, and left it to the player’s creativity to figure out how to best utilize the environment with SMART, so anyone who was expecting to jump, slide or climb every 5 seconds - sucks for you.

SMART was designed to smooth out movement in FPS games - which it does well. It just seems ludicrous that players think they would design maps around SMART, rather than design them around balanced gameplay and the objective, since that’s what Brink is - a team objective game.

Just like in real life, the world isn’t designed for parkour - parkour enthusiasts make it work for them.

(Akkers) #34

[QUOTE=H0RSE;310250]I’m so sick of hearing “the maps don’t have enough SMART areas” - “the maps aren’t made for SMART,” etc.

Brink is not a parkour obstacle course game. I’m pretty sure devs simply designed maps, added some alternate routes and objects to interact with, and left it to the player to figure out how to best utilize the environment with SMART, so anyone who was expecting to jump, slide or climb every 5 seconds - sucks for you.

SMART was designed to smooth out movement in FPS games - which it does well. It just seems ludicrous that players think they would design maps around SMART, rather than design them around balanced gameplay and the objective, since that’s what Brink is - a team objective game.

Just like in real life, the world isn’t designed for parkour - parkour enthusiasts make it work for them.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm… Someone buys something because the manufacturer promises them something they like but when they get it home, they find out that it isn’t really like they were promised. You wonder why people are annoyed?

They pitched SMART as the thing that would seal the deal on Brink’s uniqueness. It didn’t. What isn’t to get about that?

BTW, it’s not real life, it’s a video game and if the dev’s didn’t put in enough areas, well then you can’t make it work for you.

(H0RSE) #35

[QUOTE=Akkers;310259]Hmmm… Someone buys something because the manufacturer promises them something they like but when they get it home, they find out that it isn’t really like they were promised. You wonder why people are annoyed?

They pitched SMART as the thing that would seal the deal on Brink’s uniqueness. It didn’t. What isn’t to get about that?

BTW, it’s not real life, it’s a video game and if the dev’s didn’t put in enough areas, well then you can’t make it work for you.[/QUOTE]

You clearly missed the point of what SD was saying. …

They have stated numerous times that Brink is not a parkour simulator.
Richard Ham in an interview even compared it to Mirror’s Edge and said, “Mirror’s Edge has a lot of parkour, with a little bit of shooting. We have a lot of shooting, with a little bit of parkour.”

I have been trying to get this peoples head’s since before the game released.

SMART WAS DESIGNED TO SMOOTH OUT MOVEMENT ACROSS OBSTACLES AND THE TERRAIN.

Since it does just that, I don’t see how the devs lied about anything. Perhaps you were just expecting something that it never was meant to be. I have researched a lot on this game and am an active member in the community. I was pretty hyped for this game, and when I bought it and experimented with SMART, it works around 97% the way they described. To me, you just sound bitter, because you were expecting to bounce around like an acrobat from Cirque du Soleil.

As for people being annoyed because something was promised to them - from what I have gathered form reading all the hateful posts (not only on this forum) is hat people were expecting the sun and the moon for everything Brink had to offer. For customization, they were expecting APB, for SMART, they were expecting Mirror’s Edge and Assassin’s Creed mixed together, for abilities and leveling up, they were expecting an MMO. For the most part, people got themselves mad, because they never once were realistic in any of their expectations. They were never level-headed or down to earth in what to expect from Brink, and instead, expected he next messiah of gaming, in everything the game had to offer. There’s no one to blame but yourselves - and this is coming from someone who was just as knowledgeable and hyped (if not more) than all of you.

(Akkers) #36

I clearly have the wrong impression if I think it turned out nothing like I expected after watching all of their ‘dev diaries’ etc. That or they hyped it beyond their means like all small games companies. That goes for everyone with a problem with it. It doesn’t matter now precisely what wording they used or whatever nit-picking you care to doi, only one fact stands out; If a lot of people are disappointed about it, then that is because it is not what people expected it is because it is the impression they got from the insane hype that the dev’s put out. i.e. the dev’s created these impressions by claiming more than they can back up.

I’m sorry, but to my eyes you are just blindly defending it like most people who don’t want to admit they have bought just another $60 shelf accessory. Moreover, I think you are lying if you say this has been everything you expected because it does not live up to the hype in any quarter.

Incidentally, I have never accused the dev’s of lying, rather over hyping it. They are your words, not mine.

(Kalbuth) #37

Well, that’s what irks me. No, this game absolutely not about your rank and your unlocks. That’s why they are so easy and so fast to get. When you have them all, *** yeah, there’s still smtg to do : play it :slight_smile: I don’t play the game to beat its ranking and unlocks, but to beat the human opposition by helping my human teamates. And this is where the game should shine : in the numerous way you have to go at it

(deusex2) #38

More maps=DLC=more money. Why lay out all the good stuff, if you can sell just the basic for the price of the full piece and then rip some additional 5-10 bucks for every new map?!

Don’t we all love DLC’s?

(Sind) #39

More maps=DLC=more money

=Time

Yeah, it’s not that easy to make a DLC…

(aedi) #40

Fully agree to thread starter.

the games price of 50€… not the right value… maybe 15€ max! u failed splashdamage.