Community Contribution

(BrigandSk(A)) #1

In Bethesda’s forum I see some players saying they want limited options/settings to tweak their servers, this does not sound correct for me as a PC player, I want as fully customizable settings as I can get within the limits of today’s technology.

While they were thinking about limiting the possible customizable settings a PC player can have while consoles can’t… I was starting to come up with an idea that if it is possible… console players would start to love PC’s community and splash damage would win a special place in every console player.

The concept exists already but it’s not as porting from pc to consoles, it’s the tf2 community maps, weapons and hats, once in awhile they release a community map into an official map and also with hats and weapons.

http://www.teamfortress.com/contribute/

If Splash Damage and Bethesda Software could together with the community elect a map once in awhile and port into the consoles, would be just like marrying single player with multiplayer.
This would make console players enjoy the best maps of community creation, increasing this way the length of the game’s life and creating diversity, this will possible increase player base while joining as close as possible consoles with PCs.

It’s funny that most console players tend to wish the PC players get as limited as they are, they forget that PC players have to update hardware, for example… last time I upgraded my graphics card I could have bought a PS3 or an XBOX instead of just 1 component for my old PC. Splash Damage is doing the right thing by delivering the same gameplay features while offering the most community settings they can while considering today’s average technology each person has.

:stroggtapir:

(Slade05) #2

I doubt anywone would want to win a special place in some console untermensch.

Hats, omg…

(Nail) #3

some of the people on the Bethesda forums seem to think Brink is The Sims with guns, wondering if they can pick different colours for their shoe laces, or if their character can chew gum. The focus there is on the customization rather than the game itself, they forget it’s a shooter not a RPG

(BrigandSk(A)) #4

[QUOTE=Slade05;241837]I doubt anywone would want to win a special place in some console untermensch.

Hats, omg…[/QUOTE]

I meant community map creations, NOT gear, archetypes, cloths or even weapons!

Would be great to have a place where all 3 counterparts (Splash Damage, Bethesda Softwares and Player base) of Brink’s multiplayer community would vote for the best map to become ported into XBOX and PS3 while achieving a different status, such as Official community map, don’t you agree?

unleash the tapir

(H0RSE) #5

And you seem to think that it is wrong to approach the game from that angle. SD is putting a lot of emphasis on character customization, so there is nothing wrong for those players who’s main focus is on customizing their character(s).

Customizing and creating characters is fun - isn’t that what games are about?

(tokamak) #6

No, that’s not what games are about.

[QUOTE=BrigandSk(A);241844]I meant community map creations, NOT gear, archetypes, cloths or even weapons!

Would be great to have a place where all 3 counterparts (Splash Damage, Bethesda Softwares and Player base) of Brink’s multiplayer community would vote for the best map to become ported into XBOX and PS3 while achieving a different status, such as Official community map, don’t you agree?

unleash the tapir[/QUOTE]

I prefer Blizzard’s way. They include community maps and even mods into their expansions if it meets their standards. The reason why I don’t like voting is because the ‘best’ community map could still be a steaming turd compared to the stock maps.

(BrigandSk(A)) #7

[QUOTE=tokamak;241847]No, that’s not what games are about.

I prefer Blizzard’s way. They include community maps and even mods into their expansions if it meets their standards. The reason why I don’t like voting is because the ‘best’ community map could still be a steaming turd compared to the stock maps.[/QUOTE]

Can’ agree with you because you are talking about a much different subject.

1st - Blizzard’s big franchise none was brought to consoles in the past recent years.

2nd - Maps would get voted not just by player’s community, publisher and developer counterparts would be involved too. Perhaps they could actually choose what map would be ready to be ported into consoles, giving the opportunity to console gamers taste something new that is extending their game, possibly for free or not depending on how much the process costs to get a map into consoles.

3rd - The mappers and modders have proved already what we all are capable of, Splash Damage is the perfect example of such success in creating community creations.

I really think that if Splash Damage and Bethesda Softworks would choose a map to become also available at consoles would be another reason why Brink is changing how FPS games will be in the near future.

(H0RSE) #8

No, that’s not what games are about.

So games aren’t about having fun? News to me…

(Slade05) #9

Having character customization as a main goal in multiplayer shooter is shuuure fresh and all, but what kind of impact will it create on the gameplay side of things? Hordes and hordes of statpadders, only difference being this time they`ll be doing it not for ranks but for pink g-strings? :smiley:

(tokamak) #10

Customising and creating characters isn’t what games are about.

Statpadders are not a problem if the reward system is rigid enough. With good distribution, the only way to be a statpadder is to be an excellent gamer. If the rules are good enough, you won’t notice the difference between someone who likes to be good and someone who just wants lots of xp.

(Slade05) #11

Pfft. Developers say those things every time, yet only working cure so far is a sane server admin.

(tokamak) #12

The rule set or regime behind the game is what really fascinates me as there’s lots of real-life concepts in there.

(BrigandSk(A)) #13

The system seems to be designed to eliminate statpadders but it surely won’t stop those who think it’s fun to harass and play the way it’s not designed to (griefers).

So…

for those whose intentions are neither win, gathering experience points or help team-mates.

Both are right, we need this new system to eliminate half the problem while we still need admins to kick those who have only bad intentions.

I wonder if converting a map from PC to XBOX and PS3 is very complicated and expensive, is it?

Whats the process?

(H0RSE) #14

This might be a valid concern if Brink was strictly a competitive, multiplayer shooter, but it isn’t, so your concern kinda falls short. Players that wish to treat it as a competitive shooter, will. And those who just want to have fun and unlock things will also - everybody wins.

(tokamak) #15

[QUOTE=BrigandSk(A);241865]The system seems to be designed to eliminate statpadders but it surely won’t stop those who think it’s fun to harass and play the way it’s not designed to (griefers).

So…
[/QUOTE]

Oh fully agreed, but that’s something completely different than statpadders.

(Slade05) #16

“Having fun” is awfully vague as a term. There always will be a guy whose actions are counterproductive, aside from just taking a slot, like those noob ETQW coverts with their radars placed so bad engie couldn`t put up an AIT. He may be having fun, sure, at the expense of his team getting a disadvantage.

Now sooner or later there is a half a team of those “have fun” people and you get a nice little steamroll, which directly leads to nobody having fun or whoring new g-strings.

(tokamak) #17

See that’s a good example of some real-life ethics applied to games. John Rawls would have a lot to say about the rules formulated within games.

The thing what makes lawmaking for games more fun than for real-life is that, hacking aside, a computer has absolute authority. So your rules will always be followed to the letter without corruption or avoidance. This makes for a very interesting sandbox for policymakers.

(H0RSE) #18

[QUOTE=Slade05;241870]“Having fun” is awfully vague as a term. There always will be a guy whose actions are counterproductive, aside from just taking a slot, like those noob ETQW coverts with their radars placed so bad engie couldn`t put up an AIT. He may be having fun, sure, at the expense of his team getting a disadvantage.

Now sooner or later there is a half a team of those “have fun” people and you get a nice little steamroll, which directly leads to nobody having fun or whoring new g-strings.[/QUOTE]
You are just projecting now - I was referring to the customization aspects of Brink and players who see it as a big part of the game. These are optional features that SD is putting in the game for players who care about them to utilize, not some gameplay mechanic that can potentially be abused. Last time I checked, no amount of cool helmets or masks can put your team at a disadvantage. You also seem to be forgetting that the game can be played on and offline, and many of the customization options that you unlock are obtained by completing challenges, which are scripted levels that can be played solo or co-op, NOT versus multiplayer, so no “whoring” going on there.

(tokamak) #19

I can think of one actually. ‘Pro’ teams want to look identical, that way they give the least amount of information to their opponent. Fighting a group of clones is harder than fighting an army of distinguishable figures.

(H0RSE) #20

There is still no advantage or disadvantage to having a team of clones. If the team sucks, what exactly did everyone looking the same accomplish, and if the team is well organized, the same principles apply - if an enemy is arming a bomb, stop him. If a medic is reviving, kill him. It doesn’t matter what they look like. The fundamental gameplay remains the same, and so does how you play it. Having a team all look identical amounts to nothing more than middle school level, trickery - hardly a deterrent vs a team of “pros.” Besides, I was referring to actual, skill/gameplay disadvantages, not psychological mind games.