Brink 2

(ArchdemonXIII) #61

I have mixed feelings about asymmetrical teams. Done right, you get 2 different playstyles to choose from. Done wrong you end up only liking one of those teams, and if the majority likes one side over the other you end up with unbalanced teams. If you force balance teams, someone who keeps getting shut out of their preferred team is going to be de-incentivized to play.

I don’t think it would work in a game like brink though. If you only have fun playing one side, in a stopwatch game when it switches you to the side you don’t like, its likely you’ll find another game.

(zenstar) #62

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385106]I have mixed feelings about asymmetrical teams. Done right, you get 2 different playstyles to choose from. Done wrong you end up only liking one of those teams, and if the majority likes one side over the other you end up with unbalanced teams. If you force balance teams, someone who keeps getting shut out of their preferred team is going to be de-incentivized to play.

I don’t think it would work in a game like brink though. If you only have fun playing one side, in a stopwatch game when it switches you to the side you don’t like, its likely you’ll find another game.[/QUOTE]

It seemed to work well in ET:QW. Both sides were fun to play. I preffered Stroggs but would happily play whatever side I was on.
Asymmetric teams must be done well, as you say. It all comes down to balance (both numbers and fun) but when it works it amplifies resulting game. Carbon copy teams may be easier to balance and implement, but they provide less variety and depth too.

Admittedly if it’s a choice between a good game with carbon copy teams and an average - bad game with different teams then carbon copy all the way. But if we’re talking “ideal” games then why settle for a lesser game?

(ArchdemonXIII) #63

[QUOTE=zenstar;385115]It seemed to work well in ET:QW. Both sides were fun to play. I preffered Stroggs but would happily play whatever side I was on.
Asymmetric teams must be done well, as you say. It all comes down to balance (both numbers and fun) but when it works it amplifies resulting game. Carbon copy teams may be easier to balance and implement, but they provide less variety and depth too.

Admittedly if it’s a choice between a good game with carbon copy teams and an average - bad game with different teams then carbon copy all the way. But if we’re talking “ideal” games then why settle for a lesser game?[/QUOTE]

Fair enough.

I actually liked Brink’s system. I liked that regardless of class, you could use your preferred kit. In a lot of team games where your kit is decided by class, the end result is that I just don’t play the classes that have gear I don’t like. I think they de-emphasized class a little too heavily, but I’ve got an idea to fix it that’s more suited to a new thread. The impression I got from Brink’s design was that they were trying give you sense of personalization to your character to make up for the team focused gameplay.

(wolfnemesis75) #64

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385139]Fair enough.

I actually liked Brink’s system. I liked that regardless of class, you could use your preferred kit. In a lot of team games where your kit is decided by class, the end result is that I just don’t play the classes that have gear I don’t like. I think they de-emphasized class a little too heavily, but I’ve got an idea to fix it that’s more suited to a new thread. The impression I got from Brink’s design was that they were trying give you sense of personalization to your character to make up for the team focused gameplay.[/QUOTE]I also feel this is a great feature of Brink. I’d not want to be restricted with my look because of the class at all. Also, it’d impose somewhat of a bullseye on you if a Medic had to have certain colors, etc. For each class. I’d expand the customization to make it even more diverse in terms of looks. And have it take longer to unlock some cool clothing or badges. Stuff that shows how much time you’ve spent playing or how good at certain weapons, objectives or classes you are.

(ArchdemonXIII) #65

This the exact opposite of what I want. I think all clothes should be available from the start. The whole idea of customization is to be able to make a unique appearance. When you make clothes an unlock, people will switch to harder to unlock clothes as a prestige item and everyone just ends up looking the same anyway.

EDIT I’m down with the badge idea though.

(wolfnemesis75) #66

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385165]This the exact opposite of what I want. I think all clothes should be available from the start. The whole idea of customization is to be able to make a unique appearance. When you make clothes an unlock, people will switch to harder to unlock clothes as a prestige item and everyone just ends up looking the same anyway.

EDIT I’m down with the badge idea though.[/QUOTE]By clothing, I mean small stuff, like an Eye Patch or something that takes good consistent team play.

(deems) #67

It amazes me how different people’s desires are for games.

I don’t give two toots about a [expletive deleted] eye patch, but obviously some people do.

There do seem to be two crowds here – the Brink supporters and the non-Brink-but-oldskool-SD supporters…so maybe we need two SDs – SD North that can make a thinking-man’s, skill and strategy rewarding first-person team shooter (as were accomplished with the genius ET and ETQW games) and SD South could make the first-person barbie-doll dress-em up shooter or whatever (FPBDDUSOW) that some people seem to desire.

Sorry to be antagonistic…[what I wrote above is meant to be a joke]… I just find it so frustrating that the clothing of the characters could take any energy at all away from my favourite game studio’s efforts to produce richer game play dynamics. You had something beautiful SD, you can still bring it back with your next release! Regain that awesome SD niche (as characterised by my 6 suggestions already listed above)!

  1. The plot basically doesn’t matter.
  2. Customisation of character appearance basically doesn’t matter.
  3. Challenge and long learning curve with rewards for being skilled, and rewards for being strategic are paramount.
  4. Graphics are relatively unimportant (within reason).
  5. User interface is important, with customisation and richness (ie not reduced or limited to be usable with a hand held controller).
  6. Asymmetrical teams, vehicles, and greater variety between class types are missed.

Deems

(PS: Wolfnemesis or anyone else, please do not make an argument about how clothes increase the richness of gameplay. I recognise that they do a tiny amount, but nothing compared to vehicles, in-game comms, asymmetrical teams, etc.)

(Fetter) #68

I don’t think that adding appearance customization really changed their core gameplay plans. Artist time isn’t programmer time.

(zenstar) #69

The ability to customize, the planning on how it would be done, the interfaces and the code required so support it (and display it) all do take away from the core mechanics at every step (planning, coding, testing). The creation of the actual content models don’t take away from the programmer, but theres far more to it than just the model creation.
That being said I don’t think the customization was what caused the core gameplay to be pared down.

(wolfnemesis75) #70

[QUOTE=deems;385225]It amazes me how different people’s desires are for games.

I don’t give two toots about a [expletive deleted] eye patch, but obviously some people do.

There do seem to be two crowds here – the Brink supporters and the non-Brink-but-oldskool-SD supporters…so maybe we need two SDs – SD North that can make a thinking-man’s, skill and strategy rewarding first-person team shooter (as were accomplished with the genius ET and ETQW games) and SD South could make the first-person barbie-doll dress-em up shooter or whatever (FPBDDUSOW) that some people seem to desire.

Sorry to be antagonistic…[what I wrote above is meant to be a joke]… I just find it so frustrating that the clothing of the characters could take any energy at all away from my favourite game studio’s efforts to produce richer game play dynamics. You had something beautiful SD, you can still bring it back with your next release! Regain that awesome SD niche (as characterised by my 6 suggestions already listed above)!

  1. The plot basically doesn’t matter.
  2. Customisation of character appearance basically doesn’t matter.
  3. Challenge and long learning curve with rewards for being skilled, and rewards for being strategic are paramount.
  4. Graphics are relatively unimportant (within reason).
  5. User interface is important, with customisation and richness (ie not reduced or limited to be usable with a hand held controller).
  6. Asymmetrical teams, vehicles, and greater variety between class types are missed.

Deems

(PS: Wolfnemesis or anyone else, please do not make an argument about how clothes increase the richness of gameplay. I recognise that they do a tiny amount, but nothing compared to vehicles, in-game comms, asymmetrical teams, etc.)[/QUOTE]Progressive unlocks and awards is a much more fun concept when implemented properly, then I’d have thought five years ago. And worked really well in Brink to distinguish itself from other shooters. Also, I like how you become not just some non-discript soldier. For me, it adds an element of immersion.

(deems) #71

You’re probably right here… but I couldn’t dare to dream that their next release would be PC only…

Wolf: I think you and I just find different aspects of the games we play important.

(Nightingale_001) #72

what a really old thread,i wonder if brink 2 will actually be coming
i play brink on ps3,and it was quite fun
i believe brink 2 should be a bit more longer in the missions and provide background stories
like how the security guy in the audio logs got to the ark for example
sd could have made a tutorial level featuring him getting to the last ark ship you know,like featuring how he parkour his way to the ship,and fight away securities when he arrived at the ark.
even if its only a cutscene,it would have been a better backstory about the ark.They could also feature cutscenes of how our character got to the ark and his/her(more female characters!) first resistance /security fights.

aaaand better care and campaign and dlcs after release,that’s what keeps the community alive,especially in console,because they will try to get new trophies and more gamer points.

(wolfnemesis75) #73

[QUOTE=Nightingale_001;404249]what a really old thread,i wonder if brink 2 will actually be coming
i play brink on ps3,and it was quite fun
i believe brink 2 should be a bit more longer in the missions and provide background stories
like how the security guy in the audio logs got to the ark for example
sd could have made a tutorial level featuring him getting to the last ark ship you know,like featuring how he parkour his way to the ship,and fight away securities when he arrived at the ark.
even if its only a cutscene,it would have been a better backstory about the ark.They could also feature cutscenes of how our character got to the ark and his/her(more female characters!) first resistance /security fights.

aaaand better care and campaign and dlcs after release,that’s what keeps the community alive,especially in console,because they will try to get new trophies and more gamer points.[/QUOTE]I agree. Yep, you got it covered.

(Capt.ChiefMask) #74

I made this forum when I was much younger. I forgot my log-in information so I made a new account. I have been a Brink fan for several years and have been waiting patiently for something to show itself to those who feel as strongly as I do for the game. To all who have been replying to this forum, I first want to say thank you. Ive read a tad bit and have understood everyone’s opinions. I believe if we work together as a community, we can hopefully voice our opinions enough to see another Brink game. It has been far too long and with the next gen systems that we all use today, I’m more than positive that the developers of Brink can make yet another kickass game. I hope that with a new Brink game, comes a updated and dramatic storyline with character development and more character customizations. With new weapons, single-player gameplay, multiplayer gameplay and other additional factors being put into Brink 2, I have enough faith that it will once again become game of the year. Like I’ve said earlier, I’ve been a huge fan of Brink for several years. I strongly wish the developers could work together once again and create another masterpiece. I will admit, Brink 1 had its faults. But with enough work and effort, I believe that the world will soon see and experience the backbone that made the first Brink game great. Thank you for your time.
:stroggtapir:

(Mustang) #75

Have you tried Dirty Bomb yet, it’s not Brink 2, but does have some common elements.

As for Brink 2, that would be upto [strike]Activision[/strike] Bethesda.

(light_sh4v0r) #76

Not Activision, Bethesda.
Right?

(FireWorks) #77

Right.

Activision is for Enemy Territory: Quake Wars.

(Mustang) #78

Haha, yes true!

(Glottis-3D) #79

ololol, am actually writing a comment in the ‘Brink 2’ thread??? OLOLOLooaaahahahah!!

(AssortedStuff) #80

Well, since I wasn’t the one reviving this thread I’ll participate.

“Brink 2”, a 2 edged sword.
On one hand keeping the name as Brink 2 would (most likely) mean Bethesda control and that would probably ruin the game.
On the other hand there is the need for a big investment for a game like that to see the light of day. Meaning a big company would have to get involved …and potentially ruin it.

“Damned if you do, damned if you don’t”

Dirty Bomb has been pretty fun so far (I’ve even spent money on it, which rarely happens on F2P titles), but it feels it has a lot of potential that probably won’t manifest.