as Angry Joe's Review of Brink states "Brink needs another game mode or two" think DB

(H0RSE) #21

[QUOTE=en2ie;438112]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.[/QUOTE]

I agree. I really don’t see a lack of game modes as a cause of issues for Brink - the game just needed “more time in the oven.” If the game was independently developed and funded, it likely would have had a different end result.

Consider this - in practically any FPS game I play that offers a plethora of gamemodes to choose from, TDM is always the most popular. I am not implying that Brink or DB needs a TDM mode, I am simply pointing out that if many of these games only had TDM, they would likely still flourish, thus a vast variety of gamemodes isn’t necessary. That being said, purely class-based team objective games, like RTCW, W:ET, ETQW, and even TF2, have aged well and are still played today.

As long as a game and the gamemode(s) it offers are well designed and the dev team interacts with the community, there will be people around who appreciate them to play them. The fact that SD games do not offer more “traditional” gamemodes, is one of the facets that originally drew me to them. You could look at this as one the selling points of their games.

(WindKun) #22

The best are the games he loves.

He did his Witcher 2 review and CDProjektRed invited him about 3-4 weeks prior to the Witcher 3 reveal when it was not confirmed as coming out; to make a video flying out to poland and video touring the studio; then go on a “Spree” running thru rooms to find the secret work on Witcher 3 - video ends with him seeing a Top Secret folder and his mind being blown without it showing anything.

Was a great viral way for CDProjektRed to add hype to the witcher 3 after Cyberpunk 2077’s teaser trailer really caught a lot of peoples attention, Angry Joe’s view base aided initially for some people on the fence in 2011 to buy W2 for PC and 2012 to buy it for 360; and perhaps that amusing video they did together aided in the pre-hype knowing it would be announced soon, and when it was it blew me away.

(I am a huge Witcher fan. Witcher 1 was fantastic on release but feels dated; on release it was a complete overhaul of the Bioware 06’ engine with a great plot and fell in love with Geralt as a character… as soon as I saw the trailer for The Witcher 2 called “Disdain” and the equal preview trailer (released same time " Hope" I knew W2 would be something mind blowing. It blew my mind, mission successful. - Ubersampling, amazing brand new in house engine entitled REDEngine; was the most gorgeous game I saw and was Nvidia 3D ready and really utilized it like no other game in 2011.

Witcher 3 looks to be everything I FN loved about The Witcher 2 in my 5 play thru’s expanded and will be a perfect finale.
I went on a rant here but it’s an example of some of his non review videos or his “I dig this game” / “THIS GAME RULES” reviews which to me are more fun than the majority of the games he reviews and rips apart with honesty; he says what most people do not but only think.

Recently his Tomb Raider review was fantastic and in my opinion SPOT. ON.

(HellToupee) #23

[QUOTE=Bloodbite;438263]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)
[/QUOTE]

RTCW and W:Et were not complex games they were actually pretty simple, brink added way more complexity that actually hurt the core gameplay.

(BTMPL) #24

[QUOTE=WindKun;438327]The best are the games he loves.

He did his Witcher 2 review and CDProjektRed invited him about 3-4 weeks prior to the Witcher 3 reveal when it was not confirmed as coming out; to make a video flying out to poland and video touring the studio; then go on a “Spree” running thru rooms to find the secret work on Witcher 3 - video ends with him seeing a Top Secret folder and his mind being blown without it showing anything.[/QUOTE]

Make it months. And also, the whole “Witcher 3 document” was a fake and he thought about all that during breakfast. Source: I was with him eating that breakfast :wink:

But yeah, what you’re saying is true - AJ does A LOT of hype with his videos, so getting him to join the Beta would be a smart move :wink:

(Bloodbite) #25

They weren’t complex back then (or to us), but they are to today’s generation of gamers that think balancing out their perk-vs-killstreak selections is the height of tactical thinking. I used to work with some CoD freaks that really thought that way. They were proud of themselves like as if they were playing one of the early Rainbow Six titles at a masterful level… you know, back when R6 was hardcore.

I don’t think Brink’s problem was added complexity, I don’t think it was at all complex compared to W:ET… but one other key problem with the game was map flow… the sequential phase way of progressing through the map combined with choke points that were brutally in favour of the defending team… it made it difficult to feel like you were truly able to implement many class abilities and perk abilities. I don’t think the perks were at all complex either, they were just different. If anything that simplification of perk influenced class optimisations for your chosen avatar… that was far too restrictive for those of us that like to bounce through every class if the need arises, or if we just feel like it mid battle.

(rookie1) #26

^^ would like that 2

(Nail) #27

[QUOTE=H0RSE;438326]I agree. I really don’t see a lack of game modes as a cause of issues for Brink - the game just needed “more time in the oven.” If the game was independently developed and funded, it likely would have had a different end result.

Consider this - in practically any FPS game I play that offers a plethora of gamemodes to choose from, TDM is always the most popular. I am not implying that Brink or DB needs a TDM mode, am I simply pointing out if many of these games only had TDM, they would likely still flourish, thus a vast variety of gamemodes isn’t necessary. That being said, purely class-based team objective games, like RTCW, W:ET, ETQW, and even TF2, have aged well and are still played today.

As long as a game and the gamemodes it offers are well designed and the dev team interacts with the community, there will people around who appreciate to play them. The fact that SD games do not offer more “traditional” gamemodes, is one of the facets that originally drew me to them. You could look at this as one the selling points of their games.[/QUOTE]

DB has TDM, there’s even a couple TDM servers, have you looked

(H0RSE) #28

Yes, I realize this, I was simply stating that the game does not need them or other “traditional” modes, like CTF or KOTH, since that’s what the OP was about. I also said what I said seeing as DB is still in alpha, and the removal of TDM before launch could be a possibility.

(Protekt1) #29

There are many new possibilities for game modes than CTF or search and destroy. Frankly, I am surprised that gamers actually want to continually play by the same rules over and over again.

One great example of a unique game mode is Elite in shootmania. Its a round based mode that is 1 attack vs 3 defenders. The attacker gets 3 hits to die and defenders get 1 hit to die. The attacker’s mission is to kill all defenders or survive until the flag is capturable, about 45 seconds, and then a 15 second count down starts and the attacker must capture the flag by standing next to it for about 2 seconds or lose. The defenders must kill the attacker or prevent him from capturing the flag.

I am not proposing SD take elite and make it into the game but its just a great example of something unique, balanced, competitive, and compelling. It can be done.

(BTMPL) #30

[QUOTE=H0RSE;438494]Yes, I realize this, I was simply stating that the game does not need them or other “traditional” modes, like CTF or KOTH, since that’s what the OP was about. I also said what I said seeing as DB is still in alpha, and the removal of TDM before launch could be a possibility.[/QUOTE]Oh? Why not? I’d love to see an area controll or KOTH type of map in the game.

(H0RSE) #31

But the discussion is not about what players want, but rather what is or isn’t “needed” since that is what the OP was about. It was argued that one of the big contributors to Brink’s downfall was the lack of gamemodes - I simply do not agree with this. To be more accurate, I’d say it was a lack of overall polish/completeness that created the sense that gamemodes themselves were boring and stale.

And I when I say “needed” I use it in the sense that without them, the game would grow tiring and/or not attract enough active players without them.

Typically when discussing game features, when players say “this game needs X,” it is just a way to enforce an idea that they personally want to see in the game. I would rather focus on what the game actually “needs” from a developer/community aspect, than personal requests.

(BTMPL) #32

I would rather focus on what the game actually “needs” from a developer/community aspect, than personal requests.
And … wasn’t my comment stating what the game “needs” from a “community” viewpoint? Seeing as I’m part of the community? Someone must be the first to suggest a feature so that other can back it or be against it :wink:

(HellToupee) #33

[QUOTE=Bloodbite;438388]They weren’t complex back then (or to us), but they are to today’s generation of gamers that think balancing out their perk-vs-killstreak selections is the height of tactical thinking. I used to work with some CoD freaks that really thought that way. They were proud of themselves like as if they were playing one of the early Rainbow Six titles at a masterful level… you know, back when R6 was hardcore.

I don’t think Brink’s problem was added complexity, I don’t think it was at all complex compared to W:ET… but one other key problem with the game was map flow… the sequential phase way of progressing through the map combined with choke points that were brutally in favour of the defending team… it made it difficult to feel like you were truly able to implement many class abilities and perk abilities. I don’t think the perks were at all complex either, they were just different. If anything that simplification of perk influenced class optimisations for your chosen avatar… that was far too restrictive for those of us that like to bounce through every class if the need arises, or if we just feel like it mid battle.[/QUOTE]

RTCW was the most simple of the series probably the best, each game added more and more stuff ontop, brink had so much complexity in the buffs abilities, weapons, bodies and even the command posts and their various class specific upgrades it was way too much stuff to keep track of or even balance, .

Choke points are always in favour of the defending team, infact brinks choke points were always much easier to breach than RTCWs, there was no support spam, panzers and you had many abilities designed for breaching eg flashes, adren boost etc Problem was in the objective designs, enemies often spawning too close and too frequent, horrible hack objective mechanics with even bomb planting was tied to a long animation, and the awful awful hack objectives. The whole many sequential objectives thing started with W:ET.

(iwound) #34

one game mode i would like to see is Last Man Standing. when i moved to ET from CS, LMS gave that CS feel unfortunately not many played it but then again same goes for any game mode that wasnt obj/sw.

LMS allowed me to play then die then watch and spec a game. it was nice that you are resting as continued full pressure in a game is not good for your body.
if a gametype gives me little breaks along the way i can play for longer. thats why im cutting back on the db at the moment as its giving me chestpains, i dont have a desk.

i remember a great game mode from a ww2 ver of cod called domination i think. worked similar to db cap spawns now. but had 1 in several houses , i think 5. and the team to get all 5 dominated and won. you start out with 2 each and 1 neutral. worked well and was fun.

regarding objectives in obj type. they need to be more varied and some new types. hack,c4,carry,escort are going to get tired very very quickly.
we should be building bridges, destroying targets with rocket launchers. multiplanting c4 to destroy whole buildings. i could go on and on and on with ideas, but you get the idea, fresh objectives. the cart on camden is interesting and could be worked on but its not an obj.

(BTMPL) #35

This sounds similiar to Team Fortress 2 CP (you dirty mind you) maps. There are 5 points to controll. You start by controlling 2 and the middle point is to be capped. Once you cap the mid point, your 2nd is blocked from capturte and the opponent 2nd can now be captured (so that only 2 points are “capturable” at any given time). It works really good in TF2, no idea how would it work in DB settings.

(acQu) #36

As for different game modes: think outside the box here and just introduce a comp mode and a pub mode. I really can not describe how i feel about this. It makes me terrible sad that this development is not seen by anyone else, only because they are not able to think in new ways. And this would not even be something “new”, it is the natural thing about almost every game SD created in the past: there was always a pro mod developed aside from the vanilla game. Take this concept and make something out of it. If you can not think about this possibility and how to make it work properly then you have poor imagination. But then again, this is not something revolutionary, i just can’t describe how it makes me sad to get this possibility refused only because of some old brains.

(BTMPL) #37

Ok, then elighten us, how would pro mode differ from pub mode? No idea how ET “Pro” worked/works as I was never part of the comp. ET crowd.

If it was to be completly different (like Shootmania 3v1) then you will just end up with 2 games, and I bet SD dosen’t want to cater to only one group.

(Bloodbite) #38

By sequential, I meant how the maps were split into sections where you couldn’t revisit any part of the first half of the map. Only Brink did that, and I don’t remember hearing anyone say anything positive about it.l That whole transition cutscene always felt like an interruption. I think that was a great advantage to RTCW/W:ET… having a covie in disguise by pass the first breaching objectives to help get an engie or whoever behind the front line and direct to the final objective. That was truly the magic touch of having/playing a covert ops ontop of the sniping and disguise-oops-insta-backstab… kept everyone on edge about acts of subterfuge.

I didn’t have the same experience with choke points as you though, not amongst people who played properly. The server I was playing on (which was mostly made up of folks from a still active aussie ETQW server, they set up their own Brink server from the get go, so to all of us there Brink was a big step down as far as the complexity aspect goes)… those chokes points were impossible to pass when both teams were well populated and evenly balanced in terms of skill. Like that missile launch mission. It was impossible to hack the launch controls with the defenders spawning too close (like you said), and there being too much cover for defenders and like 5% for the offensive team. It didn’t matter how we mixed it up with players on either team, the defenders always won, and the perks/abilities made no impact when trying to break that choke… or at least not an impact that would last long enough to get the job done.

(acQu) #39

[QUOTE=BTMPL;438558]Ok, then elighten us, how would pro mode differ from pub mode? No idea how ET “Pro” worked/works as I was never part of the comp. ET crowd.

If it was to be completly different (like Shootmania 3v1) then you will just end up with 2 games, and I bet SD dosen’t want to cater to only one group.[/QUOTE]

Speaking only from my point of view. The W:ET community is basically split in two parts: a comp community and a pub community. Both communities basically play two kinds of mods: one comp mode (which is etpro) and many (but very similiar) pub mods. Both modtypes have its place and if you would want to wrap an abstract layer around it, then yes: this would be your comp mode vs pub mode of there. The playerbase is evenly spread around these mods, i would say 50/50 and both modtypes are attractive on their own but yet they are the same game.

The pub mods are basically exactly what SD needs. Currently it is the case and this can be already seen amongs the alpha players, that there is a very polarizing audience and SD is basically split between these two playeraudiences (again, this is just my pov, but i think it is accurate). There are the very serious comp players, who in my eyes basically destroy everything what can be fun about a game to cater it towards their serious bus fragging, and there are the pub players who oppose this view and basically find it a hell of a boring to play like the comps and want possibilites a comp wouldn’t give a sh… about. A good example is skins: mostly these are not liked by comp players, so this gets kind of absurd since you have a core game for comp, but want to lure the pubs in with skins. Doesn’t work. This is exactly that basic conflict i see not solved yet in DB. Another good example are bigger hitboxes for the pubs. This was exactly the case in W:ET. The pro mod had smaller hitboxes and the pub mods (most of them) had bigger ones. So it was more newby friendly and it worked very very very well, believe me. Another example: in nq there was a kick command, do you think the comps would want to use that? I don’t think so. I have more examples, but to break it down: if you have two modes, you can develop two branches in harmony. Of course you could also create two different games, but it worked well in W:ET, so it should also in DB. You just open a big backdoor with this type of move and you are guaranteed to have more freedom in development with these kind of two modes.

Another good thing about it is that you could playtest stuff on pub and if it turns out good for comp then throw it in.

I think i said it also somewhere else: imo you develop a bigger and wider and more optional game first, then you slice it down to make it perfect. What is happening currenlty is the exact other way round: slices after slice is added without the great chaos before. This in my eyes represents exactly that basic conflict aka comp vs pub.

But maybe i am too imaginary.

(BTMPL) #40

I think i said it also somewhere else: imo you develop a bigger and wider and more optional game first, then you slice it down to make it perfect.
I think that this is the right way to do it, and I think that it was posted on the forums here before.

Thing is - do we - community, developers - want to make comp. play part of the game, like in SC2, Dota2, LoL - where you have ranked / unranked IN GAME. Or do we want to make a game that anyone can play and let the community of competetive players find the way they want to play and make their own leagues?

Example - Team Fortress 2. It’s clear that Valve never ment for the game to be played in a competetive setting. But it still is. There are couple of leagues and each has its own rules. You said that comp. players dislike skins - no problem, you can blacklist most of TF2 hats / misc items. Some weapons are found to be too overpowered for comp. play? No problem, blacklisted. In addition various leagues have various rulles - ETF2L (Europe TF2 League) up till Season 14 allowed only the “vanilla” weapons to be used. Now they’re adapting the US rules by allowing more weapons.

A perfect solution, as you said - from my point of view - would be one that would make pub and comp. basicaly the same, but comp. would be more organised. In comp. you have leader of sort for teams, the teams are more organised, use voice com and know their place on the battlefield. And in pub you just kill stuff for fun. Maybe I’m calling it wrong, this might end up looking like ranked vs. unranked rather than comp. vs pub.

Also, I believe we’re sidetracking here, the topic was about adding some new gameplay mode aside from objective / attack+defence. Think we should move to a separate topic to discuss what kind of competetive tools / solutions we would like to see.