E3 2010 Coverage Round-up - Day 2: Brink Footage and More

(Qhullu) #121

[QUOTE=LyndonL;230296]I still don’t see why everyone is so concerned at these perks?

I’ve read SO MANY people bragggging about being clan members and competing at the (self proclaimed) pro levels… if you really are as hardcore-awesome as you say you are, surely coming up against some “noob” with lots of perks that you don’t have won’t make you scared…
[/QUOTE]
i guess this was directed at me among others, i’m a pretty casual player and play nowhere near “pro levels”, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is easy for anyone to see that giving too much importance to “passive” (as in things you can’t affect mid-fight) skills is a bad idea. pointing it out is just in reply to a trend i see here, where people tend to write like these perks are some kind of holy grail, where mastering your skills at choosing them is as important as mastering moving, aiming and timing, instead of being something that is a trivial choice after couple of weeks of play time. some kind of “active” skills where you can freely choose between some mid-fight might work but gamepads don’t have enough buttons for that (crysis has something like this but a menu system is too slow to be useful in the middle of a fight in a mp game), so we wont be seeing any of that jazz any time soon.

(Qhullu) #122

[QUOTE=LyndonL;230296]I still don’t see why everyone is so concerned at these perks?

I’ve read SO MANY people bragggging about being clan members and competing at the (self proclaimed) pro levels… if you really are as hardcore-awesome as you say you are, surely coming up against some “noob” with lots of perks that you don’t have won’t make you scared…

Someone was whinging before about being warned when someone has you in their sights… Are you that desperate to argue that you’re using that as an excuse? Show of hands all who target someone in their sights and then wait before you shoot???[/QUOTE]
i guess this was directed at me among others, i’m a pretty casual player and play nowhere near “pro levels”, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is easy for anyone to see that giving too much importance to “passive” (as in things you can’t affect mid-fight) skills is a bad idea. pointing it out is just in reply to a trend i see here, where people tend to write like these perks are some kind of holy grail, where mastering your skills at choosing them is as important as mastering moving, aiming and timing, instead of being something that is a trivial choice after couple of weeks of play time. some kind of “active” skills where you can freely choose between some mid-fight might work but gamepads don’t have enough buttons for that (crysis has something like this but a menu system is too slow to be useful in the middle of a fight in a mp game), so we wont be seeing any of that jazz any time soon.

(Ragoo) #123

What are you trying to tell me? That I can still be a noobbasher on pubs? Why would I want to play with total noobs in the first place?
When I talk about game theory, I talk about teams with players of equal skill…

The good thing about being a “hardcore-awesome” gamer is that you can always hope for a good Promod :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #124

****, I missed an epic discussion.

[QUOTE=digibob;230250]You set up each class how you wish, and you will switch abilities when you change class.

You obviously need to have bought all those abilities though![/QUOTE]
So you can actually specialise your character in one class for one match?

That’s too bad.

(LyndonL) #125

It wasn’t really aimed at anyone in particular. I’ve just sensed an air of arrogance on the forum, and that was aimed at that air rather than any one particular person.

Don’t forget that most people will be gaining XP etc at around the same time and everyone has different agendas/play styles… As such I don’t think Perks will be an issue since there will be enough of a spread to negate any negative impact. And as for new people who have no unlocked perks… the game matcher is supposedly able to match people of similar skill (read as: play time/similar unlock levels), and therefore they won’t be at a massive disadvantage. You might also compare it to the likes of TF2 where people who’ve played for a long time all have upgraded weapons etc, whereas a new player has nothing - they still have as much chance of success as the fully loaded out players.

We need to see all this in action before we get our panties in a twist.

[QUOTE=Ragoo;230321]What are you trying to tell me? That I can still be a noobbasher on pubs? Why would I want to play with total noobs in the first place?
When I talk about game theory, I talk about teams with players of equal skill…

The good thing about being a “hardcore-awesome” gamer is that you can always hope for a good Promod :)[/QUOTE]

I think you took this the wrong way around. I mean that the “noob” players are the one with the unlocks/perks and the “pro” player is the one who therefore shouldn’t be afraid. I was saying - if you’re as good as you say you are at aiming etc etc then you shouldn’t be scared of someone else with perks enabled since at the end of the day it comes down to how good you are at the game, not what loadout you have chosen.

No offense meant. I come in peace :slight_smile:

(Ragoo) #126

[QUOTE=LyndonL;230330]… then you shouldn’t be scared of someone else with perks enabled since at the end of the day it comes down to how good you are at the game, not what loadout you have chosen.
[/QUOTE]

If he is equally skilled at aiming, movement, timing and so on ( basic FPS skills) the choice of perks will make a difference. But I don’t have a problem with that, as long as I can change my perks according to the map, main objective and overall situation in the match :wink:

(Slade05) #127

Ah, so you`re discussing spherical horses in vacuum, i see.

(AnthonyDa) #128

[quote=LyndonL;230296]I’ve read SO MANY people bragggging about being clan members and competing at the (self proclaimed) pro levels… if you really are as hardcore-awesome as you say you are, surely coming up against some “noob” with lots of perks that you don’t have won’t make you scared…
[/quote]
It’s not about being scared but bored.
Also, W:ET jaymod is much better than base or etpro for you ? It’s kinda the same thing here …

(tokamak) #129

Are you seriously worrying about everything which has no reason not to worry about?

The onus is on you to demonstrate why we should worry about this.

Yeah, away with player diversity, turn everything into a bland tasteless mass.

(Ragoo) #130

[QUOTE=tokamak;230341]
Yeah, away with player diversity, turn everything into a bland tasteless mass.[/QUOTE]

Yeah seriously, these stupid games where everyone on the server can choose everything and is not limited to a specific set of perks he bought. Games like ET, ET:QW, TF2 , Quake, CS, CoD and so on all suck…
Seriously?

(Slade05) #131

CoD, CS and TF2 suck allright.

(tokamak) #132

[QUOTE=Ragoo;230342]Yeah seriously, these stupid games where everyone on the server can choose everything and is not limited to a specific set of perks he bought. Games like ET, ET:QW, TF2 , Quake, CS, CoD and so on all suck…
Seriously?[/QUOTE]

I really dislike it when games have ‘prestige ceilings’. The incentive to work on yourself should be as high as when you started for ever.

Decisions need to hold weight, there shouldn’t be a free lunch, even if you’ve worked months on collecting your shiny tokens. Experimenting with different builds needs to have a price, so it rewards the players who plan and anticipate the meta game in advance.

At least ETQW and ET have a great restriction (time limit) to reach ‘perks’. CS has nice management system for it as well. That what makes these games addictive, you want to try out something new, but you need to work for that, while working on it you get new ideas and you’re already starting to save up for that new plan.

Brink is heading in the same direction as TF2 and COD, which is a shame. It means the longer you play the more choices you get which you can then pick without effort. Once you’ve hit the entire collection your decisions no longer weigh anything anymore. This will lead to complacency amongst players. Why bother thinking in advance if you can adapt without cost?

Why would thinking ahead only be necessary at the start of the game? Why throw that all out in the end-game? This game has so much potential for very, very long addictiveness and replayabillity but eventually unlocking everything there is just heavily compromises this.

I prefer to see a system like WoW has. Talents are scarce until you reach the max level, after that the cost to change your talents increases with each subsequent re-specialisation.

This means there’s always an incentive to gather xp points as you’ll need them to adapt and tweak your playstyle. Again, why would xp only be valuable to beginner players while it can retain it’s value for everyone, forever?

(Ragoo) #133

[QUOTE=tokamak;230346] Once you’ve hit the entire collection your decisions no longer weigh anything anymore. This will lead to complacency amongst players. Why bother thinking in advance if you can adapt without cost?
[/QUOTE]

Without cost? If I try out certain perks+bodytype+weapon and I fail, the time I lose is already a cost. So when I constantly fail to realize which build to use, I will waste too much time, so thinking in advance is totally necessary even if you can change things during the match.

Also you never seem to take into consideration that this is a team game. Your individual decisions are rather unimportant if they don’t fit in the teams play style and if the overall team strategy isn’t good. So in theory, you don’t try out new things yourself but instead your team tries out new strategies and new combinations of classes/bodytypes/perks and so on.

I think with all the different classes, bodytypes, weapons, weapon customization, objectives and maps the metagame will be interesting for a long time and even more so if adapting to different objectives, enemies and situations give a game interesting turns.
I mean I really understand the fascination of a well thought out strategy that completely dominates the enemy, but I still want to give the teams a chance to adapt during the match, so games are won by the team that can constantly outsmarts the other team with superior strategy, and doesn’t choose the one perfect strategy before the match and then the other team fights an uphill battle.

(tokamak) #134

[QUOTE=Ragoo;230355]Without cost? If I try out certain perks+bodytype+weapon and I fail, the time I lose is already a cost. So when I constantly fail to realize which build to use, I will waste too much time, so thinking in advance is totally necessary even if you can change things during the match.
[/QUOTE]

That’s a truly marginal cost as you’d be able to fix it next match without having to work for it. The cost needs to be substantial so players don’t take decisions lightly.

Also you never seem to take into consideration that this is a team game. Your individual decisions are rather unimportant if they don’t fit in the teams play style and if the overall team strategy isn’t good. So in theory, you don’t try out new things yourself but instead your team tries out new strategies and new combinations of classes/bodytypes/perks and so on.

I never ever said that trying to find a build that works best for you doesn’t involve evaluating how it works in the context of the rest of the team. If it doesn’t work out for both you and the teams you find yourself in you clearly don’t have the best build you can have now do you?

I think with all the different classes, bodytypes, weapons, weapon customization, objectives and maps the metagame will be interesting for a long time.

I don’t want it to be interesting for just a long time, I want the metagame to keep running indefinitely, which can only be achieved by making sure that the amount of consideration required to make good decisions is as much for a veteran as it is for a complete beginner. Something which isn’t the case right now.

I mean I really understand the fascination of a well thought out strategy that completely dominates the enemy, but I still want to give the teams a chance to adapt during the match, so games are won by the team that can constantly outsmarts the other team with superior strategy, and doesn’t choose the one perfect strategy before the match and then the other team fights an uphill battle.

Good because I understand the fear of configuration-determinism as well :). But that really isn’t a problem here considering SD already included an all-rounder set of perks.

I want specialisations to be risky but rewarding if executed well and all-rounders to be safe but hard to excel in anything. I

(H0RSE) #135

Brink is heading in the same direction as TF2 and COD, which is a shame. It means the longer you play the more choices you get which you can then pick without effort. Once you’ve hit the entire collection your decisions no longer weigh anything anymore. This will lead to complacency amongst players. Why bother thinking in advance if you can adapt without cost?
Granted, the longer you play the more choices you have, but you can’t have them all. - The “cost” is that you need to pick and choose wisely. Even if you can sell skills back and purchase new ones, you can never have the complete set.

Even if you concentrate on unlocking everything in a single category (which I don’t know if you can)

  1. you can only bring so many skills into battle
  2. you will be less versatile in all the other categories.

On top of this, the matchmaking system makes sure you can’t be overpowered. If you are a lvl 20 and I’m a lvl 4 and you join my game, you are now restricted to using only up to lvl 4 abilities.

What “cost” do you suggest players should have to suffer?

(tokamak) #136

Whatever currency players use to obtain abillities, I guess xp, should also be paid to re-configure your 5 abilities. This cost needs to increase exponentially each time you change, but also decrease over time. It works a charm in WoW.

[QUOTE=H0RSE;230363] If you are a lvl 20 and I’m a lvl 4 and you join my game, you are now restricted to using only up to lvl 4 abilities.
[/QUOTE]
Did I miss something? Who said anything like that?

(H0RSE) #137

Whatever currency players use to obtain abilities, I guess xp, should also be paid to re-configure your 5 abilities. This cost needs to increase exponentially each time you change, but also decrease over time. It works a charm in WoW.
Although I understand your point, but WoW is an MMO Brink is an FPS - 2 completely different games which attract entirely different audiences. WoW also has a skill tree system, where you will need to purchase so many lesser skills before you can buy the higher lvl ones. Brink is more about, “If I can afford it, I can buy it.” You can’t add too much “penalty,” since it adds to frustration and loss of fun.

Did I miss something? Who said anything like that?

Ed Stern says it in that E3 video - the one none of you can understand what he’s saying. I can hear him fine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbayGocUt-8&feature=youtu.be

At 4:25 this is what he begins to say:

“We will only let players of roughly comparable level play each other. So let’s say I’m joining your game, let’s say I’m level 18 and you’re level 4. I will only have access to level 4 abilities. So it’s like, okay, I’ll re-roll my guy. When I was level 4, I had this much XP, I’ll choose these things, and we can play on an equal level.”

That is most likely how the matchmaking system works. They already said you can choose to disable matchmaking and play however.

(Apples) #138

Not being able to change on the fly is a big NO NO anyway, and the argument that “you can change for the next match” is rather unadapted and void IMO, cuz as everyone can change for the next match you can turn yourself being unprepared X matches in a row, loosing all the phun IMO.

I repeat that it must stay a damn FPS, or else it’ll fail in many ways. FPS + a bit of RPG / MMO stuff is great, the opposite is kinda weird for brink, If I want to choose my equipment wisely before entering a battle I’ll play fallout or borderlands not brink.

Peace

(INF3RN0) #139

Oh gee so I guess you didn’t see that digbob said they did exactly what I was hoping they would when asking that question… it was a very realistic question. If I am blabbering about jet packs, big explodeys, etc (like I have seen on the Bethesda forums) then I will allow you to be in the right. I am very glad that SD made the choice to allow separate ability load outs per class as I saw it as a very important issue that had not been addressed to my knowledge. Now that is one more thing I don’t have to worry about thanks.

[QUOTE=tokamak;230341]

Yeah, away with player diversity, turn everything into a bland tasteless mass.[/QUOTE]

Hmm… so you are saying that if I ever want to play something differently I should just create a brand new character instead of being able to switch up my play on an existing one for the sake of diversity? Or perhaps you just feel the need to nay say 24/7. You are not SD’s best friend and you are not a game design prodigy, so please don’t bother telling me that I am wasting anyone’s time or attempting to force a bland game… In the case of being able to eventually unlock everything on one character, I don’t mind if it won’t be included, but I see no reason not to. I personally would rather not have to create completely new characters every time I want to play a bit differently, but maybe I just don’t have as much play time on reserve for Brink as others.

(Ragoo) #140

@SD Is there a server option for the ‘hardcore’ servers to enable changing your character during the match? And if not, can a modding team easily add this, or is it a big technical problem?