Brink 2?

(ArchdemonXIII) #21

[QUOTE=weeschwee;389337]it was in production for a while i believe. it was even delayed a year. and honestly, it doesn’t seem to have strayed too far from their previous games.

tech problems definitely hurt a game. however, current games are expected to be buggy. great examples are the elder scrolls series and the latest fallout games. they are all hugely popular and quite buggy from what i’ve hear/experienced. i’m not saying it’s right that games release with bugs, but it won’t kill a great game. without all the bugs, brink is still not a great game.[/QUOTE]

TES and Fallout are both single player, and furthermore, RPG’s. Those 2 crowds are more apt to stick with a release if they think it will be fixed since they can aleays come back to it later. Not so with MP gamers. If the game doesn’t work out of the box, they’re going to have something else to jump to, whether it’s an old standby or the new hotness.

@drp: you don’t need to be a fanboy to be interested in Brink 2. The public at large has a rather short memory when it comes to failures. It’s not like Brink was catastrophic on the level of Daikatana, it was just mediocre to most people who aren’t hateboys. That means it’s got the benefit of name recognition. as long as it looks good people will play it.

Street Fighter failed. It didn’t keep people from playing Street Fighter 2.

(Linsolv) #22

[QUOTE=weeschwee;389337]it was in production for a while i believe. it was even delayed a year. and honestly, it doesn’t seem to have strayed too far from their previous games.

tech problems definitely hurt a game. however, current games are expected to be buggy. great examples are the elder scrolls series and the latest fallout games. they are all hugely popular and quite buggy from what i’ve hear/experienced. i’m not saying it’s right that games release with bugs, but it won’t kill a great game. without all the bugs, brink is still not a great game.[/QUOTE]

I would like to point out that both those games are also Bethesda games. I heard somewhere that the publisher does most of the testing, is that right? If so, it suddenly makes a lot of sense that Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Brink, and Rage were all strangely buggy at release. Because it was the same company not giving a **** about testing. :penguin:

(SockDog) #23

[QUOTE=DrpPlates;389338]ID recently bought the rights from them…
its back where it belongs…[/QUOTE]

id (now Zenimax) have always owned the rights (trademarks) to Quake/Quake Wars. I believe Activision just had exclusive publishing rights which have now expired.

(tokamak) #24

I don’t know what the effects are but I hope something beautiful will come out of it.

(Darksider) #25

Who knows If there will be a Brink 2 or not, but if so, they really need to expand on it, fix the issues from Brink 1. Add vehicles, the game is in the middle of the ocean surrounded by a body of water, Have maps that interacts with it to allow for the use of perhaps Jet Skis and or Boats, Environmental destruction in maps. I guess I’ve been playing too much BF3 lately, but a game like BRINK that do some of the same mechanics in Battlefied 3 in a Brink world setting sounds like too much win to me.

(wolfnemesis75) #26

There are a ton of different directions that they could go with Brink, but fleshing out a complex story revolving around the Arc in a more direct way would be cool, as well as incorporating some improvements to the overall balance and gameplay. Perhaps a Brink 2 that’s more of a Prequel and then do a final game (Brink 3) that’s many years after the Arc has really broken down and its clearer what the state of the outside world is. What if the Ark really is the ONLY habitable area in the world? And whoever controls it, rules what’s left of the world? That’d be cool, but put a twist on it. Perhaps the sicknesses that’s spreading, becomes a matter of survival of the fittest.

(sanDIOkan) #27

people argumenting about the story of the game…
a game doesnt need a story, it has to be fun (it means bugfree and smooth)
prolly too many persons forgot it, starting from devs

(Commander_Keen) #28

Then why do the majority of top selling games have a good story line?

(gold163) #29

Brink’s storyline was fine. It’s the execution that was faulty, and the game dropped the ball when they couldn’t work the massive hype train into a decent narrative.

Games don’t need good storylines, but when your game is being advertised as story heavy (which I feel Brink was), then you need to follow up on that. Brink needed to deliver on fan expectations, which in many cases it does not.

(Humate) #30

It delivered on its promise. It blurred the lines.
Just so happens people weren’t thrilled about what that actually meant.

(zenstar) #31

Top selling Multiplayer games do not require much of a storyline.
The most played MP games on steam do not have storylines worth mentioning. If you don’t sell a singleplayer experience then all you need is solid, fun multiplayer with enough background story to set a mood for the game.

Look at things like TF2 and Counter Strike for examples… even MW etc have minimal storylines nowadays. The focus is multiplayer and the singleplayer is a nice extra, but could really be dropped and not many people would notice.

(SockDog) #32

Like additional gameplay modes, I feel a strong single player campaign gives people something to get their teeth into and in the worst case that MP fails, that single player bite tastes nice and people come back for more. It’s spreading your resources but it’s also not betting the whole farm on some crazy game your one eyed ex-navy uncle picked up in Fiji.

Brink tried to lower the barrier to entry by simplifying the game where as they should have been incentivising people to play through other parts of the game. Single player to pump up the hype and experience, sell the story, get people involved. Other MP modes to lend familiarity while introducing other elements of the Objective game type.

Oh and no BS hype this time. Bethesda put a leash on everyone here in the forums and then allowed the PR machine to trot out not only exaggerated* claims but to do so consistently and persistently.

  • I accept that at some point during development ideas originally meant for these features were cut leaving them less than what was being presented in interviews. I still think that at that point the rhetoric should have been changed.
(Stormchild) #33

[QUOTE=zenstar;389753]Top selling Multiplayer games do not require much of a storyline.
The most played MP games on steam do not have storylines worth mentioning. If you don’t sell a singleplayer experience then all you need is solid, fun multiplayer with enough background story to set a mood for the game.

Look at things like TF2 and Counter Strike for examples… even MW etc have minimal storylines nowadays. The focus is multiplayer and the singleplayer is a nice extra, but could really be dropped and not many people would notice.[/QUOTE]

Truthness. I’ve played BF3 since release, and I haven’t touched the solo campaign yet. It is mainly my regular MP FPS fix, since my Brink started to random crash. Since then, I haven’t bothered trying to make Brink work again, although I miss SMART and the more adrenaline-fuelled moves and close combat (I can’t believe I’m saying that about Brink), compared to the sluggishness of Battlefield series.

I like the Battlefield (heck even TF2) but I hope SD sticks to its own style and don’t try to copy things that don’t really fit with their legacy. Mixing solo and multi (basically having no real solo but multi with bots, talk about a giant bluff), adding specialized character dev/unlocks while advocating class-switching in-game, advertising SMART with only 1 body type to fully use it… are some of the inconsistencies that, imo, flawed the game from the very design.

(INF3RN0) #34

CounterStrike had a great story line indeed…

(gooey79) #35

I’m told there’s lots of interesting story in the audio logs. Thing is, I had no interest in listening to them. I wanted to learn the story via playing the game, not having to not play the game to hear them.

And of the story that did make it in, the decision to play cut-scenes at the start of every match was a bad one.

The story was fairly rich (probably richer for those listening to the audio logs) but it was poorly executed.

(wolfnemesis75) #36

Still hoping it happens. Brink was a fun time for me. Delving deeper into the events leading up to the Civil War on the Ark would be Epic. Wish it could be developed more. It got an abbreviated level of support, imo.

(SockDog) #37

[QUOTE=*goo;390385]I’m told there’s lots of interesting story in the audio logs. Thing is, I had no interest in listening to them. I wanted to learn the story via playing the game, not having to not play the game to hear them.

And of the story that did make it in, the decision to play cut-scenes at the start of every match was a bad one.

The story was fairly rich (probably richer for those listening to the audio logs) but it was poorly executed.[/QUOTE]

I was sure they said they were going to make the story stuff optional. Like you’d be able to experience parts of the story during warmup but if you just wanted to go goof off instead you could do that. I’d have taken from that a chance to also introduce NPCs to act some of this out and just make them exit during the countdown. I really thought given how well Valve can tell a story in L4D with barely more than a mumbled sentence, that this was what SD was also aiming for in Brink.

That all said, if they’re not going to do a campaign single player I’d say why bother with an extensive backstory.

(Nail) #38

by id, you of course mean ZeniMax/Bethesda

(light_sh4v0r) #39

Yeah, I really don’t need a story in a MP game. They’re silver while I’m red is more then enough incentive for me to shoot opponents in Tribes :slight_smile:

(DarkangelUK) #40

In the likes of RtCW, W:ET and ET:QW, the maps themselves having their own justifying story were more than enough for me but not entirely necessary.