We need modes like the CTF suggestion I posted; to avoid things like that video ^
as Angry Joe's Review of Brink states "Brink needs another game mode or two" think DB
en2ie
(en2ie)
#3
Yeah I am a big Angry Joe fan too, although I never saw a lack of modes as an issue for brink - there were so many other much bigger problems.
Other game modes are great but I would rather they spend the time making a few more maps than a few more game modes.
rookie1
(rookie1)
#4
[QUOTE=WindKun;438092]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhrJI1dKtb4
We need modes like the CTF suggestion I posted; to avoid things like that video ^[/QUOTE]
sure is a non pleasant review but its a good review ,worth to listen for not making the same errors
EnderWiggin.DA
(EnderWiggin.DA.)
#6
Dual objective maps please. Not all, just maybe in a 1:10 ratio (dual to single). It’s nice for a change up.
Rex
(Rex)
#7
Easter Bunny Cake
Ingredients
Frosting:
[ul]
[li]
[/li][li]3 sticks (12 ounces) unsalted butter, at room temperature
[/li][li]6 cups confectioners’ sugar
[/li][li]Pinch fine salt
[/li][li]1 tablespoon vanilla extract
[/li][li]2 to 3 tablespoons milk
[/li][/ul]
Bunny:
[ul]
[li]2 baked 9-inch round cake layers (your favorite recipe or a 18.25-ounce boxed cake mix)
[/li][li]1 1/4 cup sweetened flaked coconut
[/li][li]2 store-bought biscotti
[/li][li]1 tube pink decorating icing
[/li][li]2 black jelly beans
[/li][li]2 marshmallows
[/li][li]1 white jelly bean, halved lengthwise
[/li][li]1 pink jelly bean
[/li][li]1 black licorice wheel, such as Haribo
[/li][/ul]
Directions
For the frosting: Combine the butter, sugar and salt in the bowl of a stand mixer fitted with a paddle attachment (or in a large bowl if using a hand-held electric mixer). Mix on low speed until mostly incorporated. Add the vanilla, increase the speed to medium-high and mix until smooth. Adjust the consistency with milk until the frosting is easy to spread.
For the bunny: Spread a thin layer of frosting on the flat side of one cake layer, about 2/3 cup, and top with the flat side of the second cake layer. Measure 5 inches across the top of the cake and cut down through the layers, creating two layered pieces that are slightly different sizes.
Place the larger piece of cake, cut-side down, on a large platter or cake board. If using a rectangular cake board, place the larger piece so that the long edges are parallel with the long edges of the board. This is the body of the bunny. Cut the smaller piece of cake in half crosswise, so you have two layered wedges. Place one wedge in front of the body, with one flat side on the board and the other flat side against the body. The curved side will be on top. Take a serrated knife and round off the sharp edges on top of the head. Cut the tip off (the nose) at a 45-degree angle. Reserve all scraps in a bowl.
Separate the layers of the remaining wedge of cake. These will be the back legs. Round the sharp edges of the cake wedges with your knife, and add to the scrap bowl. Place one piece on each side of the bunny, with one flat side down and the other flat side facing forward (the round side towards the back of the bunny), about 1-inch from the end of the bunny’s body.
Mix the cake scraps in the bowl with a fork until mashed, and then pack into a ball with your hands. Place the ball behind the bunny’s body and adhere with a dab of frosting. This is the bunny’s tail.
Frost the entire bunny, tail and all, using 2 to 3 cups of the frosting, keeping some definition with the bunny parts, and frosting more generously around any sharp edges to give a rounded look to the bunny parts. Sprinkle the bunny with the coconut to fully cover. Gently pat to adhere.
Insert the biscotti between the head and body, pressing into the cake to secure them. These are the ears. Place the base of the ears close together at the center of the head and angle them out. Frost the front of each biscotti with some frosting. Then, using the pink decorating icing, frost a smaller strip in the center of each biscotti, going down to where the ears meet the head but not going all the way to the top.
To make the face, press a black jelly bean into each side of the head for the eyes. Cut one of the marshmallows into 3 circles, discard the middle piece, and press the 2 end circles, cut-sides-in, into the front of the face for the bunny cheeks. Take the white jelly bean halves and push them into face below the cheeks, round-sides-out, for the teeth. Place the pink jelly bean above for the nose.
Unroll the licorice wheel and cut 2 pieces about 1 1/2 inches long each. For each piece, peel the strips apart halfway down, and then cut each separated strip in half lengthwise so you end up with a piece looking a bit like a broom. Repeat with the second piece of licorice. Tuck each piece, with a dab of frosting, behind a marshmallow cheek, with the cut ends facing out, for the whiskers.
Cut the second marshmallow in half lengthwise. Make 3 slits in each half, going about halfway through (these are the toes), and place in front of the legs for the bunny’s feet. Adhere the bottom of the feet with icing if necessary.
Cook’s Note:
Take 2 1/2 sheets of parchment paper and cut in half. Line the edges of your cake board with these parchment rectangles so that they form a rectangle of open space in the middle. Build your cake on the edges of these pieces of parchment. When you are finished you can slide them away along with any excess icing and coconut.
Make sure your cakes are completely cooled before you being to ice and cut them.
Enjoy your meal!
Dthy
(Dthy)
#8
Add strawberry sauce on top afterwards and use dark green/teal food colouring to create a zombie easter bunny.
acQu
(acQu)
#10
Great review, but also sad. I really think SD should listen here. Go back to weekly RTCW or ET sessions to see where you are coming from. Since the expansion of the crew i think especially this part is not there. Also: it is not enough to be a genius in just 1 field, you have to build some bridges.
Especially, and one of the first things i thought about DB and which Joe reminded me off, was the objectives. I thought ok, maybe i am just getting too old and the younger generation might find this refreshing, but i still think the objectives are no fun. They have no boom and are not shiny enough and have been in place one too many times. It needs something more interesting than slow escort missions imo.
EDIT also i had a good reminder of the repetetive command post voices. This is exactly what i thought about them as well.
Dragonji
(Dragonji)
#11
Rex, you became boring. Just don’t post if you don’t have anything constructive to add, mate.
Bloodbite
(Bloodbite)
#13
Seriously, how many times do people have to play CTF in their life? There’s an excess of FPS’ers out there that do the typical Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, CTF, Zone Control, etc.
Perhaps a secondary style of play mode wouldn’t hurt, but it would still have to be objective based… as in class oriented objectives. What that really translates into is a different philosophy on map design. I’m sure those that have their hearts set on mod tools can already imagine multiple ways to achieve that… two come to my mind right off the bat.
Throwing your typical vanilla flavour modes into the mix would just be a cheap attempt to pretend the game has “more” variety… something many FPS’s are guilty of and both the gaming press and gamers constantly complain about… how the multiplay mode of such and such title was just tacked on because eveyrone expects there to be multiplay now.
SD are still on track to achieve their vision. Pandering to the masses in this area will not translate into success, it’ll come across as lacking uniqueness and become utterly forgettable.
Remember DB is not intended, nor will it ever be able to compete with the likes of Battlefield and CoD. Competitively yes, but commercially amongst a pug userbase. It’s too intellectually challenging for a typical brand whore fanboy to switch allegiances. That was one of the real reasons why Brink failed… it was too complex a concept that made the attempt to be accessible to a more mainstream portion of the gamer market. And the mainstream portion of gamers are stoopid, the blind success of CoD 4 Premium Patch <insert faux sequel title here> year in year out is a testament to that fact.
iwound
(iwound)
#14
Great share,. ive spent all morning watching his videos now. he’s accurate and funny.
so today ill will adopt his persona grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
acQu
(acQu)
#15
[QUOTE=Bloodbite;438221]Seriously, how many times do people have to play CTF in their life? There’s an excess of FPS’ers out there that do the typical Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, CTF, Zone Control, etc.
Perhaps a secondary style of play mode wouldn’t hurt, but it would still have to be objective based… as in class oriented objectives. What that really translates into is a different philosophy on map design. I’m sure those that have their hearts set on mod tools can already imagine multiple ways to achieve that… two come to my mind right off the bat.
Throwing your typical vanilla flavour modes into the mix would just be a cheap attempt to pretend the game has “more” variety… something many FPS’s are guilty of and both the gaming press and gamers constantly complain about… how the multiplay mode of such and such title was just tacked on because eveyrone expects there to be multiplay now.
SD are still on track to achieve their vision. Pandering to the masses in this area will not translate into success, it’ll come across as lacking uniqueness and become utterly forgettable.
Remember DB is not intended, nor will it ever be able to compete with the likes of Battlefield and CoD. Competitively yes, but commercially amongst a pug userbase. It’s too intellectually challenging for a typical brand whore fanboy to switch allegiances. That was one of the real reasons why Brink failed… it was too complex a concept that made the attempt to be accessible to a more mainstream portion of the gamer market. And the mainstream portion of gamers are stoopid, the blind success of CoD 4 Premium Patch <insert faux sequel title here> year in year out is a testament to that fact.[/QUOTE]
Would you say that if W:ET was played by one of these guys, that it would be too complex as well ?
Never had my hands on Brink, but watched a ton of material, so i can’t really compare it. But i can’t believe the FPS gamer audience of today is that stoopid (or in other words, just want to have it simple). Yes, simple is a nice word, because it can both describe utter failure on the one hand or total succes on the other. There are different kinds of simplicity, so it depends on if your premises are true and (if yes) what conclusions you draw from it towards the gamedesign. Make it more simpler ? I really can’t believe that, but then again, “simple” is a wide word. For example there is a huge SC2 audience, which shows that there exists an audience strifing for a more intellectual challenge in their games. So either it is the genre which attracts this hardcore stupidity of described “nowadays FPS” gamers or there is a general misconception upon which game design is built upon.
rookie1
(rookie1)
#16
unfortunaly i think the story part he’s talking about in the review is repeating in DB 
Bloodbite
(Bloodbite)
#17
[QUOTE=acQu;438231]Would you say that if W:ET was played by one of these guys, that it would be too complex as well ?
…[/QUOTE]
By today’s standards, yes, I’d say W:ET is too complex for the typical CoD’er, and to a slightly lesser extent, the BF’ers too (I’m painting the ones that know little to nothing about FPS outside of franchise fanboy world, and sadly there seems to be way too many like that)
I think the intelligence level of gamers as a whole was a lot higher back in the W:ET era, particularly for PC. I’m not assuming people were more educated, just had a greater degree of common sense and ability to ‘think’ in regards to choices made towards their gaming, and ‘while’ gaming. Even folks that were considered casual back then had some sort of motivation to feel challenged, or satisfied for achieving something that was skill based. Some people here that played W:ET or ETQW have admitted they were/are generally crap at the twitch side of FPSing, but played so they could contribute to the team dynamic of class support.
Nowadays the griefers and trolls aren’t in the minority. And even many of those that would be classed as hardcore gamers simply because of the hours they commit to the activity… perhaps it’s this new generation of self-entitled brats that think that if something doesn’t cater to their every whim, there always seems to be this attitude that it must be ripped apart and destroyed.
It’s the unfortunate side effect of mass acceptance of an entertainment medium… the mindless zombie consumers that make up the ‘mainstream’ part of sales start becoming vocal about what they want, but what they want has always been dictated by what they were subliminally told through advertising (and they are the reason why shameless advertising still works in this day and age). It’s not necessarily that the stoopid in the world has gotten bigger, it’s just that, like the zombie trend, they’ve breached our gaming perimeter, infected the dopier survivors we had amongst us, which then opened the floodgates to let a swarm of stoopid into the compound, and now we have to realistically count them as inhabitants within our walls.
As for SC2, it doesn’t really count in what I mentioned because the RTS genre in general still manages to uphold that challenge-takes-priority philosophy amongst the majority of RTS developers, and that’s an expectation for the entire RTS player base, casual or serious/pro.
The fundamental thing here is not that the games themselves are too complex… W:ET, Brink, SC2, whatever… that’s what games are meant to be to newcomers, something that looks complex that they WANT to figure out and understand. The problem is that things have been dumbed down so much, in FPSing in particular, that a large portion of the crowd don’t understand that LEARNING something new each time you try a new title, or even continue to play a well designed game, is supposed to be part of the ‘gaming’ experience. That expectation of ‘the usual’ formula… we don’t need to sprinkle salt on everything.
Since you didn’t play it, the simplifying element of Brink was the “F” button way of completing objectives in DB, only it was far more encompassing. It was overly console gamepad friendly. From pressing F to achieve everything to holding down the SMART button to climb over stuff, which also extended in some ways to the persistant leveling/perk system. The simplifying touches did nothing to encourage the newcomers to learn the ET style of tactics, team play, and class implementation necessary to properly enjoy the game (and it was a really good, challenging game if you played with a server 80% made up of former W:ET or ETQW players, balancing/tweak issues aside). I mean, it’s natural for everyone, smart or stoopid, to go for the quickest, most effective option to achieve a goal… but DB is going to be the kind of game that has to make some things difficult for newcomers simply to say “no, you either learn or fail… or you go back to your CoD\BF/WoW era of gameplay where you are mindlessly rewarded for anything you do, even abject failure.”
Brink wasn’t anywhere near as lacking as many reviewers made it out to be, they just couldn’t understand the depth of what you had to be aware of in terms of primary mechanics, all the time. Compare W:ET to any of the last few CoDs… run, shoot. survive… resupply in the case of BF, and then add “game mode” mechanic… cap a flag, plant a bomb, or something… but ONLY 1 more thing. W:ET you had so many other things you had to take into consideration. It really mattered how many of what other class were not only on your team, but the other team… and at what phase during a particular map. BF at its best is never anywhere near that complex, tactically speaking (and don’t get me wrong, I don’t have anything against BF as a game). That’s what Brink was… that depth with people thinking it was as light and shallow as TF2 crossed with CoD.
Man, I’ve rambled on a lot this time. 
acQu
(acQu)
#19
Yeah i mostly agree, but then again not 
I think it all boils down to that special case, because the tendency to make stuff simple is generally good and bad, dependend on the case.
However, i have seen now a couple of thousands of videos about that CoD is actually sh… and the same boring sh… over and over again. I see DB somehow riding on that train, since DB is also in its tendency less complex than what you are used to from SD.
I think to boil it down and make it less and seemingly intellectual: i think SD should just hit that button once and for all and if DB fails, they should do something totally different in the FPS genre. I kinda see this as the last approach to get some money in by copying CoD elements, but i am not having that feeling so far with DB. Fix movement, fix the weapon spread and netcode and maybe this will be a good fragger with a bit of the old objectives. But is this enough for today ? I highly doubt it.
PS2 is a good example. The devs there listened to the criticism of the community, because of lack of story in PS1. Now they made something truly epic with that story. I think it almost can’t get better and for a multiplayer you really don’t need much more. If you really want a huge story, then go play singleplayer, but this does not mean black and white.
Bloodbite
(Bloodbite)
#20
I agree about SD going make or break for this type of game, but we shouldn’t entirely discount anything as a potentially good mechanic. CoD at its core isn’t a bad game, it’s just massively overrated and overhyped, and completely unjustifiable with each overpriced pseudo sequel. BF too, ETQW was the proof that so much more could be done with a large open battlefield, and BF still hasn’t caught up to that level of tactical depth. The only large scale shooter that does successfully go deeper would be the Arma series (can’t say I was impressed with the arcadey feel of the last Operation Flashpoint I tried).
I think there are things that can be taken from the CoD formula as a point of reference (not copied) and innovated upon in ways ‘they’ should have done. I’m not pointing to anything in particular, just that it should be rationally considered, dissected, discussed, then judged if it could work AND would be appropriate to the feel of DB.
I believe the potential is there for DB to be a very strong player in the long term despite being a thinking man’s FPS. The DOTA games out there aren’t for casual gamers if you reference casual as CoD twitching at its hardest and Facebook farming at it’s easiest, DOTA is like masterful levels of chess in that scale of evaluation, partly thanks to the fact that it came from the RTS and RPG genres where people expect to do more than just load>shoot>rage-over-voip>troll about competing titles in the playground.
It won’t ever claim a playerbase like LoL simply because FPS is an oversaturated genre (and dumbed down, I still feel that’s a big handicap to the genre), but I don’t think it’s unrealistic to think it could reclaim the type of enthusiastic numbers that W:ET enjoyed during its glory days. That would count as a small fraction of today’s gaming demographics, but still very respectable for a single title with its almost always populated set of servers in each major region.
But like you say, DB has to stay true to what it is, and not dilute itself for the illusion of variety or accessibility.