[QUOTE=Nexolate;370691]I don’t think so. There are some things that you simply can’t add via updates and DLC, they fundamentally change the game.
Those are the kinds of things I’d like to see a Brink 2 for.[/QUOTE]
Given BRINK’s rough launch and it’s undeniable grim reputation, I find it hard to believe a BRINK 2 would bring in an equal amount of people. Let alone more.
Unless, of course, they update BRINK to an incredible state to clear its name. And I really hope they will. 
[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;370696]Given BRINK’s rough launch and it’s undeniable grim reputation, I find it hard to believe a BRINK 2 would bring in an equal amount of people. Let alone more.
Unless, of course, they update BRINK to an incredible state to clear its name. And I really hope they will. :([/QUOTE]
Well whatever their next game is then. I just really like the Brink universe.
I’m not so sure how grim Brink’s rep is. All the reviews I’ve seen in magazines have been 60% - 75% depending on the magazine. In general they’ve all said it fell short of where it could be but is still a fun game. I’m generalising a lot here ofc.
Online reviews have been a bit harsher and release reviews were obviously rageworthy. But Metacritic has it sitting at 70% (PC) with a user review avg of 63% (6.3/10).
Not great but hardly grim. Games with worse scores have climbed back up into a franchise.
The massive problem with brink is that it’s a game with a lot of potential that performs averagely in most people’s eyes and that’s frustrating. If they can unlock teh potential then it will become something amazing.
But then what do I know? I giggle at Duke Nukem’s jokes (both old and new). [Talking about a game letting down expectations. Fun for the nostalgia value but incredibly clunky and showing that it was in fact made 12 years ago. If I hadn’t been playing Duke since the Apogee platformer days I’d never have touched it.]
i don’t know guys. my magic 8-ball says “outlook not so good” when i asked for any chance of a Brink 2 in the future. they need to do everything they can to fix this first one, and somehow miraculously get a good amount of people back on it. if they can pull that off and keep this game alive and thriving, then i think my 8-ball will have some better replies. but as of now, there are just so few people playing it, and it’s created a really bad reputation that seems to overshadow both the developer and the IP.
[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;370696]Given BRINK’s rough launch and it’s undeniable grim reputation, I find it hard to believe a BRINK 2 would bring in an equal amount of people. Let alone more.
Unless, of course, they update BRINK to an incredible state to clear its name. And I really hope they will. :([/QUOTE]
With some clever marketing and a more open approach during development they should be able to get folk interested in buying a Brink sequel. I think for quite a few it was an almost game and for others it was marred by technically problems (ATI users). If they refined the game more and ironed out any performance issues and made that fact very clear I’m sure people maybe inclined to give SD another chance.
I think they are leading up to this by admitting they were some issues with the Brink launch and making sure everyone knows they’re here for the long run.
[QUOTE=zenstar;370698]Well whatever their next game is then. I just really like the Brink universe.
I’m not so sure how grim Brink’s rep is. All the reviews I’ve seen in magazines have been 60% - 75% depending on the magazine. In general they’ve all said it fell short of where it could be but is still a fun game. I’m generalising a lot here ofc.
Online reviews have been a bit harsher and release reviews were obviously rageworthy. But Metacritic has it sitting at 70% (PC) with a user review avg of 63% (6.3/10).
Not great but hardly grim. Games with worse scores have climbed back up into a franchise.
[/QUOTE]
Oh definitely, I love the BRINK universe as well. Just as much as you do, if not more. Believe me. But I like to stay realistic here and wish the best for all parties.
You shouldn’t base a reputation on game scores. BRINK’s scores at game reviewing sites were very generous. Ranging between the 7 and 9. But since the launch, many forums became very hostile with unsatisfied, angry and even unplayable consumers. A lot of those with very valid reasons. Next to that, the game’s user base decreased drastically at an extraordinary rate. On both Xbox, PS3 and PC. If anything, BRINK has a left a bad taste in a lot of gamers’ mouth.
I think, at this point, these same people are not willing to shell out more money on the BRINK ‘franchise’. It simply had a bad start.
The best SD can do to save the BRINK ‘franchise’ is to improve the current product. And hopefully seduce early quitters to come back and give the game a chance once more. But even then, the question is whether BRINK’s reputation can be saved.
As it stands now, thinking of a BRINK 2 is just silly. Perhaps even ludicrous.
Yes. But making a BRINK 2 is not the most realistic approach to ‘unlock the potential’.
What if the game wasn’t called BRINK though?
Could help in some part and to be honest the ark isn’t on the brink of civil war anymore, it’s already happened.
Expand the game universe come up with a nice reason for a new game/story, wait a couple of years before announcing anything in depth and blow everyone’s minds away, hopefully by then all the commotion from BRINK would have settled down and the wider audience will be more receptive to a new game.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;370710]What if the game wasn’t called BRINK though?
Could help in some part and to be honest the ark isn’t on the brink of civil war anymore, it’s already happened.
Expand the game universe come up with a nice reason for a new game/story, wait a couple of years before announcing anything in depth and blow everyone’s minds away, hopefully by then all the commotion from BRINK would have settled down and the wider audience will be more receptive to a new game.[/QUOTE]
Then it wouldn’t be BRINK 2. It’d be what Portal is to Half-Life 2. A completely new title. Which is exactly what SD’s next retail product should be. 
Of which I expect refreshing gameplay too! Not just BRINK 2 with a different name.
[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;370696]Given BRINK’s rough launch and it’s undeniable grim reputation, I find it hard to believe a BRINK 2 would bring in an equal amount of people. Let alone more.
Unless, of course, they update BRINK to an incredible state to clear its name. And I really hope they will. :([/QUOTE]
Oh yes, of course they’d need to support Brink long enough for its name to become more respectable. But in general, as a fan of the game, I’d just like to see this concept taken further. I’m sure many of the people here would too.
Regards,
Nexo
Not necessarily. You mentioned
Expand the game universe come up with a nice reason for a new game/story,
The game could also happen in parallel with BRINK? Perhaps on land?
[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;370721]Not necessarily. You mentioned
The game could also happen in parallel with BRINK? Perhaps on land?[/QUOTE]
The Ark discovers Atlantis… and it’s full of Strogg!
[QUOTE=Metal-Geo;370721]Not necessarily. You mentioned
The game could also happen in parallel with BRINK? Perhaps on land?[/QUOTE]
Possibly, what I meant was to take story and universe beyond the Ark, there was mention that there is an outside world and such, what would happen if the outsider did indeed find the location of the Ark, who are these people and what would their intentions be.
I’m sure someone with a nice imagination can think up something to continue the story.
A game running parallel with the events in Brink could be interesting, then ending with Chen’s plane turning up out of the blue leading up to a sequel to both games at once.
No, it really did not do that well. It did “OK”
Borderlands did pretty well.
I remember playing that game during the MAG beta thinking, “this is a really fun thing they’ve done here, too bad it’s not more popular”. MW2 and Uncharted 2 had released around the same time or something, and all the bandwagon kiddies were pitching their tents and roasting marshmallows on those two games at the time, but Borderlands exhibited excellent staying power in such an outclassing atmosphere and caught on enough to eventually catch on. It did decent sales for the first month, then about halfway through it’s second month, after seeing sales decrease for each of the previous 6 weeks, Borderlands started to see sales increase more and more every week for a good while.
“Borderlands” did well.
Brink had higher first week sales than Borderlands did, and it also didn’t have to compete with 1st-rate franchises like COD and Uncharted. However, Brink’s sales tanked after the first week and spiraled to under 10k worldwide across all platforms by the 10th week (Borderlands did close to 200k in it’s 10th week I believe).
It was GAMEPLAY that caused Brink to tank in sales. The fault lies with the game itself and it’s developers/publishers, and no one else.
Much like it was the GAMEPLAY that resulted in Borderlands’ success, with the credit going to it’s developers, and no one else. They really worked hard and effectively to improve the game post launch, dropping a FULL expansion pack within a couple of months after release (who does this nowadays? or ever?), that would be followed by other DLC later. They patched bugs and other things. A truly stand up developer that I wish had never gone near that toxic Duke Nukem Forever project… unfairly tarnishing their rep.
Borderlands did well. Brink has done OK, arguably (some would say horrible, terrible, poorly).
A decent sequel could solidify the franchise, but as of now it is in no way an established IP. I wish it well, and the developers clear minds guided by common sense (stop overthinking so much; American cultural psyche, self-absorbed target audience, psychology of blah blah STFU and make a responsible game already THEN release it COMPLETE next time, thanks) in the future.
[QUOTE=General Techniq;370741]No, it really did not do that well. It did “OK”
Borderlands did pretty well. [/QUOTE]
While I don’t specifically disagree with any of your points I think you’re arguing a mismatch in scale.
I’d say Borderlands did fantastically. Compared to Borderlands Brink isn’t doing nearly as well. But then compared to something like Monday Night Combat (I don’t know about the Xbox release) it’s doing better. MNC was so enjoyable but a couple of months after release and after a new content update people just started walking away.
(looking at the steam stats page):
Borderlands is still more played than Brink (perhaps some new DLC / continuing support will change that but by then it’ll be competing with Borderlands 2), but Brink is still doing better than E.Y.E (admittedly a much smaller release that I hope gains a better following), F.E.A.R 3 (a fairly big release) and is currently just outperforming Fallout and Fallout: new vegas (not quite the same category but pretty big and popular titles from established IPs).
I would say that on a ‘doing well for a new IP’ scale of 1-10 where 1 is ‘some forgettable game’ and 10 is ‘Borderlands’ I’d put Brink at about… probably 6. Depends on where we go from here. It’s still in a fragile position but if SD keep it moving from strength to strength it could get a lot better. If they misstep though it could just kill off the game. It’s doing better than a bunch of other forgetten titles, but could be doing a lot better.
That about what you were thinking? That’s about what I was thinking.
Brink is doing pretty well. Because its in its own category right now, it is finding its own way and measure of success. That’s all good. The more support it gets going forward the more fun we get to have. Now, what Brink needs is to keep adding fresh content. It is primed and ready now to advance the current content. And further evolve the battle for the Ark adding layers of intrigue and interest. 10 more maps and some other cool content would be great spiced in over time. Adding a couple clever game modes (not done to death modes) spliced in as well would also be cool. I have posted some suggestions here and there. 
The Polarized reaction to Brink makes it memorable and an automatic cult hit. Cult hits establish a dedicated fanbase that continues to starve for more. Games that fade away, nobody cares much either way, it was a good game, but fades away into obscurity. Brink is a cult hit already.
[QUOTE=zenstar;370747]
That about what you were thinking? That’s about what I was thinking.[/QUOTE]
I think Brink has done worse than Homefront, and I’d describe Homefront as having done decently.
I’m not saying Brink has done terribly. Just that it’s done OK, or “barely” decent.
[QUOTE=General Techniq;370752]I think Brink has done worse than Homefront, and I’d describe Homefront as having done decently.
I’m not saying Brink has done terribly. Just that it’s done OK, or “barely” decent.[/QUOTE]
Not really true. Homefront Studio got closed down. Same with LA. Noire dev Team Bondi. Those people out of a job. That’s no measure of success in my book. Also, in the case of Homefront, when studio costs outweigh any sort of profits (the game failed to get close to expectations i.e the 10-12mil of Cod) that’s very bad.
Measuring success by the amount of money is a common mistake in many parts of the society nowadays
A philosophical debate for another place and time. As an individual, you can measure success by your own standards, not just or exclusively based on monetary rewards. But when running a business, a measure of success is predicated on keeping the workers getting paid on time. Nature of the beast here.
I don’t really grade them on profit made. That’s an entirely seperate argument.
Based purely on establishing a franchise and getting their IP known and remembered they’re doing better than a lot, but not as good as they could / should.
Something like Borderlands is well known now and established itself well. Left 4 Dead came out of nowhere and really gripped people.
Brink has had a big big avertising campaign which helps people remember it. As long as they keep fixing things, adding new content and trying to draw in new players then they could establish themselves enough to warrant a Brink 2.
Profit-wise they’ve made a profit. But then so do most horrid movie exploit games so I don’t really look at that as a indicator of the IP’s health. It helps to keep it profitable of course, but there are many games that went under that are still remembered. LA Noire will probably be one of those (I’ve heard good things. I don’t even play it and I know the basics).
They didn’t get the “instant classic” establishment that L4D did (buggy launch amonst other things). They need to work hard now to keep Brink going and not let it fade completely away. There is the Brink they wanted to make and there is the Brink we have today and they need to keep moving us closer to that ideal they had.
I hope SD can pull it off. I’d love more Brink.