Oh yea because being able to insta-revive oneself doesn’t add advantage… please. Maybe I am wrong but some perks seem to be a bit more than just defining your character.
Well, if I need to insta-revive, it means I was killed, which means I lost the gunfight. So although it did “give me an advantage,” you ultimately helped prove my original point:
“they wouldn’t determine the outcome of a gunfight anyway.”
[QUOTE=H0RSE;230155]Well, if I need to insta-revive, it means I was killed, which means I lost the gunfight. So although it did “give me an advantage,” you ultimately helped prove my original point:
“they wouldn’t determine the outcome of a gunfight anyway.” [/QUOTE]
So I killed you the first time, but then you instantly come back up and kill me. How does that prove your point? In the end I would have lost in the long run because of your perk, considering the game isn’t just about who kills the other first…
So I killed you the first time, but then you instantly come back up and kill me. How does that prove your point? In the end I would have lost in the long run because of your perk, considering the game isn’t just about who kills the other first…
lol, now you are just speculating. So you’re good enough to kill me, but not kill me twice? And even without an insta-revive perk, I could have respawned, and killed you - the insta-revive just sped up the process, or a Medic could have came by and revived me with the same outcome, so know what -Medics and respawning are unbalanced?
I think you are just searching for things to complain about.
[QUOTE=tokamak;230099]It will only mean that the team with the best communication and cohesion will enjoy a huge advantage.[/QUOTE]You say it like it is something positive but it just sounds wrong to me. There’s only so much teamplay you can expect on a public server and ETQW required too much to be enjoyable most of the times. Hopefully the mission system and smaller teams in Brink will help people do the right thing.
[QUOTE=INF3RN0;230148]Oh yea because being able to insta-revive oneself doesn’t add advantage… please. Maybe I am wrong but some perks seem to be a bit more than just defining your character.[/QUOTE]I doubt it’ll be an instant revive as that would be ridiculously imba! Basically it would be like having twice as much health. :rolleyes:
From what I’ve seen reviving takes a moment and I guess you can still gib someone before he revives himself. I imagine it to be a bit like some of the perks in Call of Duty. You may run into the Martyrdom grenade one, two or even three times. But at the fourth time you’ll know better and adapt. It’s the same with that perk which allows to keep firing with the pistol when waiting for a medic.
[QUOTE=LyndonL;230145]RE: Perks
They’ve already said that perks won’t make your character more powerful. They will simply define your character and your play style to how you like to play. So effectively someone with zero perks enabled and someone with 5 enabled could showdown and the person with no perks can still just as easily overcome the perky player.[/QUOTE]
Didn’t they talk about a perk that makes your lifemeter longer? Does that not give you a clear advantage in a gunfight?
I also really dislike the idea that I have a character that is highly specialized in playing soldier just because I have nearly only soldier perks and then I join a server and everyone else on my team has a specialized soldier. Everyone will want to play soldier, and even if they change class they won’t have the perks for the other classes and are therefore at a disadvantage against a more balanced team.
And @ tokamak, I still don’t get your comparison with trading card games.
Are the card games you are referring to team games? Because when I choose to be highly specialized in BRINK, I join a server and hope to be lucky that I fit in the team because I’m only 1/8 of my team. This game will not be about me being the uber soldier, if I don’t fit in my team I will be less valuable.
In a card game you don’t choose 1/8 of your deck (and may choose it to be heavily specialized) and then just hope that the rest 7/8 of your deck that you get randomly goes well with it.
Same with the body types.
I couldn’t imagine playing Team Fortress 2 and having to choose my class first and then the server I play on. That would be absolutely ridiculous.
I really love to adapt according to what my teammates are doing and what the enemies are doing, but it seems I am rather limited in doing so in BRINK.
edit: Of course I have never played BRINK, I’m just really concerned about these things…
[QUOTE=darthmob;230098]I think it’s a rather stupid thing that can happen in BC2. A medic can always revive you, even if you choose suicide from the limbo menu to change your class.
[/QUOTE]
so basically you can’t tap out and watch what is happening from someone elses POV until the next spawn? that’s a weird design choice for a team game. how does it handle choosing between respawning and waiting for a medic? i’m assuming Brink is using the same system since Rahdo said revive griefing would’ve been an issue.
I agree with Inferno on this, the perks don’t seem to be to balanced at all and there just the ones we know about. I only know of 3 and they all worry me.
Senses that alert you when someone has you in their crossair, so now sneaking is not a viable tactic.
Instant revive, Seriously? Inferno is right here, The whole argument that a medic could have revived you etc is a not a good argument anyway, 1 relies on another player helping you the other gives you a cheat to have another go at the guy that just took you down. Anything could happen to that other player, there is no gurantee that they will always revive you so to say there the same is incorrect. The whole point that if you killed me you should be able to kill me again is stupid aswell, you don’t know the circumstances what if I kill you and only have 10hp left, you jump up and shoot me I die, thats fair is it?
Lastly, 3rd person on objectives. The whole point is that the objective person is supposed to be vulnerable when completing it, now people will just jump out the way when under attack.
These perks maybe character defining but there also game breaking.
You are treating it as if everyone will have every one of the perks at the same time.
Sure, they might best you in one situation, but you have equiped yourself to be better in another.
Well even if you end up in a server where everyone in your team has a highly specialized soldier character, I really don’t think people will stick to that one soldier class only if more engineers and medics are needed in order to win. When you switch classes you still have the weapon unlocks, general perks, and most importantly, your personal skills, so I don’t think that it is going to be a big disadvantage.
To me, a good team has a players that are smart enough to adjust their class choices during the game if the team’s class choices are not balanced. I could not see myself playing as my favorite class if there is a dire need for players with a different class.
Anyways, it is rather pointless to speculate what the gameplay mechanics are going to be in the final game, if there is a problem with a class balance, it will become obvious in the beta/demo latest, probably sooner.
[QUOTE=H0RSE;230158]lol, now you are just speculating. So you’re good enough to kill me, but not kill me twice? And even without an insta-revive perk, I could have respawned, and killed you - the insta-revive just sped up the process, or a Medic could have came by and revived me with the same outcome, so know what -Medics and respawning are unbalanced?
I think you are just searching for things to complain about.[/QUOTE]
You completely miss the goal of objective based shooters apparently… and the point is that such a perk gives you a very real advantage over someone at a lower level. So what will other perks do eh? No idea how respawning or being revived by another medic make this less obvious…
[QUOTE=digibob;230197]You are treating it as if everyone will have every one of the perks at the same time.
Sure, they might best you in one situation, but you have equiped yourself to be better in another.[/QUOTE]
Not ment in a disrespectful way but I was under the impression that Brink was an FPS not an MMO. FPS games have always been about players using the same weapons available tot hem and using them in the best way possible = who ever wins = most skilled.
Brink = You have this ability that trumps mine you win, No matter what I do I will always lose because your ability is better in this situation. ok I change my ability and I beat you, but now I see that someone else now has an ability I can’t beat and I lose again, at no point has skill decided who has won, only chance/luck and the abilities people select.
Next thing we know people will be complaining on the forums every move for 1 ability to be nerfed an another buffed just like World of Warcraft.
You have the same things available to you, if you choose to use them. There is still skill involved, you are just choosing equip yourself better for a certain situation, there is skill in this choice as well. In the same way there was skill in the choice of which items to go for in Quake 3 as you moved around the level, and I’m pretty sure that was an FPS. You can’t limit skill to just being who is a better shot.
Games evolve, FPS don’t have to work in a specific way just because they always have done.
[QUOTE=digibob;230197]You are treating it as if everyone will have every one of the perks at the same time.
Sure, they might best you in one situation, but you have equiped yourself to be better in another.[/QUOTE]
Now if 8 random players join a team and they are all equipped for specific specializations, what is stopping them from just playing those classes (in correlation to their pre-selected perks) even if they are completely useless for an objective? If someone loads in as a medic and has all their medic specific abilities, then I doubt they will want to change to a different class… so what would prevent a situation where you don’t have people feeling inclined to play multiple classes when necessary? I don’t think that you can rely on people building an all-around-character either.
[QUOTE=digibob;230203]You have the same things available to you, if you choose to use them. There is still skill involved, you are just choosing equip yourself better for a certain situation, there is skill in this choice as well. In the same way there was skill in the choice of which items to go for in Quake 3 as you moved around the level, and I’m pretty sure that was an FPS. You can’t limit skill to just being who is a better shot.
Games evolve, FPS don’t have to work in a specific way just because they always have done.[/QUOTE]
There is no skill involved in choosing abilities that you know will benefit you in certain situations before the match starts, thats just general knowledge, In Q3 and Quake Live the weapons and powerups that give you an advantage are in the arena, everyone can get them and to get them you have to show skill by being the best, once you get them you use them to your advanatge to control the arena. If you can’t someone else gets them and tries to dominate etc.
comparing them in not valid, a more valid compairson would be knowing which abilities to select in brink and knowing which weapons/powerups to go for in Q3. The difference with Q3 is that you have to execute that knowledge correctly with skill, with Brink there is none.
Inferno is correct about the classes aswell, its going to create lots of problems between each objective. The whole point of a class based FPS is to provide flexbility between each objective and each game. By using this system in this way you are restricting it.
Lastly I don’t define skill by just shooting, movement, coordination and awarness are key as well. While games evolve there are key features that define Genres. Skill and twitch movement etc have always been high in the FPS category, Rock paper scissors gameplay and time sinks are common in MMO’s not FPS. I don’t know what SD are making anymore is Brink an FPS a RPG or an MMO?
I was not comparing them, I was merely pointing out that skill is not limited to a very specific definition.
That’s absolutely true and that is really what I like about RCTW, W:ET, ET:QW or TF2.
But in those games you don’t choose any of your tools before you join a match and then just hope that it was the right choice and goes well with what your team and the enemies are doing.
Imo what is even worse: what if you chose a solid set of perks and body type for one map as defender and everything is fine, and then the next map comes up or you have to change sides and play for the attacking team because of imbalance (2 people on the attacking team leave) and you really want to change your perks and bodytype because you just think it’s not that useful anymore.
Do you leave the server and change your character,body type or sell/buy perks? Seems logical to me, I may do it and many other people may do it, since you can’t change those things during the match.
But imo that’s complete bull**** and I would still love to be able to change my character during the match. There would still be all the customization stuff and identification with your characters and so on, but you would be able to adapt during the match.
The rest of the issues raised in this thread don’t seem as potentially problematic to me as this one.
Of course, it has been said (and shown multiple times in videos) that we can change class once we are in a game. However, can we change our class-specific perks at the same time?
Otherwise we can shunt all of our xp into being the best soldier we can be, then get forced to play a medic because the team requires it, nullifying the majority of our spent xp. Indeed, the pressure to shift classes as needed is going to be even greater than in et:qw because of the smaller teamsize. Depending on how important the medic revives are going to be (which of course we don’t know for sure yet, but can estimate), a team of 8 without a medic or two would appear to be at a massive disadvantage compared to a team of 8 with one or two medics. The same obviously applies for the other, more specific objective-oriented classes.
Body-type I can understand, as shifting from a fatty to a thinny in the middle of a game seems a bit silly, but being potentially forced to play a role which you haven’t spent xp in seems pretty harsh, all things considered. It would also mean there would be less impetus to focus on class-based xp progression, and more on general, non-specific progression, in order that you can play multiple classes without being essentially penalised.
I don’t particularly want to get to the point where I whip out my specialised soldier character and join a game to find everyone else is focusing on their optimised covops/soldier/engie and there are no medics to hit the revives :p. The chances of this are low, but its a reasonable fear in an 8vs8 game. In that situation I either have to swap to medic, which I haven’t spent any points in, or more ludicrously, leave the game in order to change to my medic character and rejoin…
Of course, this is all theory and will hinge mostly upon how important/powerful class-specific progression is in the real game, but I can definitely see a point where the necessary class-shifting of a pub game runs straight into the specialisation aspect of character customisation.
If you were not comparing them then why did you use it as an example? that does not make sense, come on… My point about not needing skill to pick the abilities still applies. Now if you said it requires some general knowledge about the game or maybe tactics then I would be more inclined to agree but not skill.