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

(tokamak) #141

Individualism is what I find really important here. I’m talking about the means to express yourself and to be original, the possibility to stand out with builds you’ve made yourself with effort and clever scheming.

You can compare WoW’s skill system to Brink’s ‘buy an abillity’ system. Both will eventually reach an end. So if you want to compare both games, they cancel each other out. In this respect it resembles COD and TF2 as well. There will be a point where you have everything and there will nothing to work for anymore. From that point on the game changes into something different because character progression is lost.

By adding a cost however, character progression won’t ever cease, because you will always need to work in order to change.

What remains is Brink’s free abillity change system, and WoW’s priced talent respecialisation. Blizzard already knew very well that getting to make choices shouldn’t be free, or it would trivialise the choices. That’s what I’m afraid of. Once most people have unlocked everything, there’s no way you can profile yourself anymore because you can change on a whim for free.

Sure you can add too much penalty, but right now there’s no penalty at all. WoW handled this cleverly by making the change once in a while cheap, and making the change often expensive. If you want to be whimsical, fine, but you’ll have to work for it. However, if you carefully make responsible choices, it will hardly cost you anything.

You must mean the ‘Indecisive pussy’ server mode.

No I’m saying that if you want to play something differently, you’ll have to pay a price for it.

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…

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but their policy fits your views right now, not mine. And it’s you who opts for a bland game by adding no consequence to decisions.

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.

Maybe you should just try to read someone’s posts first before commenting on it. I never said anything about re-rolling characters.

(H0RSE) #142

What remains is Brink’s free abillity change system,

Ed said their plans right now are that when you purchase an ability, you have 24 hours to try it out. If you don’t like it, you can sell it back at cost. After that, you have to sell it at a loss. You can’t just mix and match abilities whenever you want no cost.

(tokamak) #143

Please let’s just consider the end-game, IE, everything unlocked for the sake of argument. The buyer’s remorse policy is actually handing the indecisive player another branch, making his spending more efficient.

(Ragoo) #144

[QUOTE=tokamak;230374]
You mean the ‘Indecisive pussy’ server mode.[/QUOTE]

I’m quite sure I meant the mode where you can actually adapt and are not forced to play an uphill battle just because your choice of perks happens not to fit your random team and the enemies and where you don’t have to disconnect after each map to change characters and rejoin… so this is called ‘Indecisive pussy’ mode now?

You know , I’m really fine with not being able to change characters in an organized team. I don’t know if it’s the best option (and most likely not my favorite one), but I think it is ok, since it would be just like DotA, where the team decides who plays what role before the match. But not when you join a server and don’t know about the teams and players playing on it…

(tokamak) #145

Right and fighting an uphill battle is so not hardcore. Yes, it’s what I call the indecisive pussy mode. Real gamers will make the best out of the worst, they’ll just use the abilities they have and will find new ways to bring them to their fullest effect even if the situation doesn’t make their use apparent at first sight.

You already get to chose weapon loadouts and classes without even having to respawn. That should be enough already.

Abilities should be seen as a luxury, and not be taken for granted in the way they are now. If you’re afraid of not matching your team, you pick all-rounder abilities, if you’re confident in your plans, you will be willing to take the risk of specialisation.

(Ragoo) #146

Whatever you call it, it’s not fun and I don’t like to play the map thinking “well I made a bad choice before the game, now I have to stick with this **** and play an uphill battle or disconnect”.
I would rather be like 'well I made a bad choice but I can analyze what’s wrong and then try to adapt accordingly". Sounds like fun to me…

And this changing of the characters could even come at a cost, so I can’t change all the time. But at least twice for every main objective there is…

edit: Yeah it’s really fun to discover new and innovative ways to use specific perks and so on in specific situations, no one ever thought about before. It’s NOT fun to be forced to do that.

(tokamak) #147

I love that feeling. It forces you to be creative and tap into new resources.

I would rather be like 'well I made a bad choice but I can analyze what’s wrong and then try to adapt accordingly". Sounds like fun to me…

Not if the ability to do so is free and therefore trivia

And this changing of the characters could even come at a cost, so I can’t change all the time. But at least twice for every main objective there is…

Good now we’re getting somewhere. I’m not for absolute limits. I think people should pay in xp and there’s some really good dynamic systems out there to encourage the right behaviour.

edit: Yeah it’s really fun to discover new and innovative ways to use specific perks and so on in specific situations, no one ever thought about before. It’s NOT fun to be forced to do that.

See it this way, pioneers would be hugely rewarded by the ‘cost’ system because it would take others time and effort to catch up with the trend.

And I’m sorry, no, I’m not, but I am aware I sound rather antagonising, but I guess it’s just a combination of alcohol, passion, anger and theanine here. It’s the frustrating notion of being just a forum member instead of a developer sitting on the policy drawing board.

(Qhullu) #148

i think it’s a matter of how much of an advantage these perks give you, if you compare them to the guns in Quake, should what perks you have chosen make more or less difference in a certain situation in Brink than what gun you are using in a certain situation Quake? i think way less, especially since it seems you can’t change them on the fly making camping the spot that gives your combination of perks a great advantage way too beneficial in an end to end map flow like Brink will have.

then there is the problem of balancing all these combinations of perks, knowing how tough it was to find the balance between the 5 weapons so that none of them is more powerful than the others overall and none of them is weaker than the others overall, and still two(pg & sg) are only really useful in very specific situations. i can’t even imagine how hard pulling that off will be with the however many combinations of perks there are.

(tokamak) #149

We know how much of an advantage the perks give you. All perks will be equally powerful, so if you know a handful of them, you know how powerful the rest will be.

That should never be an argument to water them down.

(Slade05) #150

Why would you always stick to this “uphill battle” argument? In the end, if we`re not talking pure theory, you always fight one with a guy who aims better, thinks one step farther or knows sum trickjumps, for example. There is no way around that in multiplayer!

And, provided SD will not opt for a full rehash of their system in additional year they just took, all they need to do is to maintain balance between those perks, steering clear of making win/win ones or combinations. Which curiously corresponds to their reasoning for taking that year.

(tokamak) #151

We’re actually talking pure theory here. Deal with it. Besides, I’m pointing out how rich it is to request a “hardcore” mode that makes sure people won’t have to fight an uphill battle. It’s quite amusing really.

And, provided SD will not opt for a full rehash of their system in additional year they just took, all they need to do is to maintain balance between those perks, steering clear of making win/win ones or combinations. Which curiously corresponds to their reasoning for taking that year.

A balance between perks is necessary but not enough. Besides, making configurations free will make it harder to balance because people will find the optimal builds much faster.

(Slade05) #152

I don`t know, really. Grinding XP like mad just to swap perk1 for perk2 seems kinda bleak anyway, and in MMORPGS there is a sheer amount of content, dungeons to visit and bosses to kill, to even that out.

Will Brink have this amount of side errands to keep player from getting bored? Recent BC2 completely failed in that regard, you get EVERYTHING after maybe a week or two, and that`s it - the game is dead. Sure, Brink will have a robust level structure(you can still play ETQW and get a lot of fun from pure complexity and emergent gameplay, which in fact I did just now) as previous SD games, but is that enough?

(Qhullu) #153

oh i see:

“Battle Hardened offers a health increase, Grenade Shooting makes it easier to detonate enemy explosives before they hit you and, our favourite, Combat Intuition lets you know when you find yourself in an enemy’s crosshair. There are also class-specific abilities on offer too, like Homing Beacon for the Operative which allows him to select and then track an enemy and Self-Resurrection which allows the Medic to revive himself.”

they aren’t really things that make a real difference in a firefight, so SD can put in as many as they want as far as i’m concerned. some may eventually turn out to be so inbalanced in practice that they need to be disabled, but i’m sure that’ll be a simple server setting.

(tokamak) #154

[QUOTE=Slade05;230388]I don`t know, really. Grinding XP like mad just to swap perk1 for perk2 seems kinda bleak anyway, and in MMORPGS there is a sheer amount of content, dungeons to visit and bosses to kill, to even that out.
[/QUOTE]

You know as well as I do that obtaining xp in this game won’t be trivial. You get a little for things that contribute a little and you will get a lot for things that contribute a lot.

So if you mean by ‘grinding’ ‘playing the game the best you can’ then what would be wrong with that?

On top of that. I don’t even consider the amount of player vs environment content of MMORPG’s, I’m talking pure PVP here.

Why so cynical? Every ability can be made more powerful or less powerful, they don’t need to be disabled.

(H0RSE) #155

they aren’t really things that make a real difference in a firefight, so SD can put in as many as they want as far as i’m concerned. some may eventually turn out to be so inbalanced in practice that they need to be disabled, but i’m sure that’ll be a simple server setting.

lol, stop whining. You can see the Combat Intuition skill activating in the E3 gameplay (the yelow/orangish pulsating rectangle that pops up around the crosshair) - it really didn’t seem to make a big deal. The only time I could ever remotely consider it giving you a big advantage, is if a single enemy is trying to sneak up behind you, but even then, read the description of the ability:

“Intuition allows you to sense if an unseen enemy has you in their sights.”

That could mean to ironsights - now the skill takes on a whole new look: Anyone shooting from the hip, or has a knife equipped is safe.

- “Grenade Shooting makes it easier to detonate enemy explosives before they hit you”
I don’t see the big problem with this…If you throw a nade and the player see’s it coming, especially if he has enough time to shoot it out of the air, even without that ability, he’s going to move out of the way or seek cover, so your nade would have failed anyway. If you throw a nade at a player who’s unaware of the nade - he’s unawre - he’s not going to shoot at it, and he’s going to die. Also, if you cook your grenades well (which isn’t a difficult thing to ask from players in SD games) this problem should be minimalized or eliminated.

- “Battle Hardened offers a health increase”
This is the same concept as increasing magazine capacity, or how many grenades you can carry. If you’re a crackshot, increased health isn’t really needed, since you’re killing players before you take significant damage, but added firepower (grenades and ammo) would help out a lot. On the other end, someone who is not a crackshot or someone who plays defensively, or is supporting the team (like a Medic) could use the extra health. Also, Battle Hardened adds 1 extra ‘pip’ to your health, which probably means it is health that can’t be regenerated - You have more health, but to actually benefit from it, you need full health, which requires a Medic.

Something you guys seem to be forgetting is - YOU HAVE TO EQUIP THESE FOR THEM TO WORK - It’s not like everybody, everywhere, all the time will have them.

(Qhullu) #156

[QUOTE=tokamak;230390]
Why so cynical? Every ability can be made more powerful or less powerful, they don’t need to be disabled.[/QUOTE]
yea, it was just an example, of course only do that if it’s enough.

lol, stop whining

who is whining? i’m relieved. i thought perks were stuff that for example make as much difference as lvl1 gun vs lvl4 gun in et. i’m happy they are just things that add some cool little things to the game.

(Slade05) #157

I just imagined covertops crabwalking behind a clueless soldier with awareness perk and can`t stop laughing.
If everything else fails, Brink can be a nice Benny Hill show successor!
:smiley:

(tokamak) #158

Or looking up all the time.

(INF3RN0) #159

[QUOTE=tokamak;230374]\

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but their policy fits your views right now, not mine. And it’s you who opts for a bland game by adding no consequence to decisions.

Maybe you should just try to read someone’s posts first before commenting on it. I never said anything about re-rolling characters.[/QUOTE]

Oh so its okay for you to just say that I asked a stupid question, where in SD had apparently implemented a system to avoid the potential problem (that is you not reading the thread and making a stupid remark). If you have a view please explain it rather than just typing “no” or saying “ooooh it adds so much emotional depth for me”… In the case of XP unlocks, if you can’t unlock everything on one character eventually then you have to create a new character to play differently (I put two and two together of course). So it only makes perfect sense to allow everything to be unlocked, eventually, on a single character. If your concerned about it somehow diminishing this is on the “variety/depth” junk your always using as a reason for something, then shouldn’t the fact that you can only use 5 abilities in game anyways be enough since anything is achievable through multiple character creation? Plus you still have to prioritize what things you unlock first anyways. Your progressive decisions in this manner is where the “consequence” comes into play. I think there is a darn good reason to allow everything to be completely unlocked at some point on a single character. I don’t want to create a ton of characters just to find out what the abilities I didn’t unlock do. That does not add anything but frustration for me because I would rather have a single character and not need to play tons of hours on multiple ones. Now does that seem like it is in any way removing something from the game? I thought not.

(BioSnark) #160

feedback regarding coop/sp:

I said this a while ago but I’ll say it again, don’t but the obituaries and kill messages in coop and certainly not in singleplayer. You don’t want to emphasize it if the game built around multiplayer and your just throwing players at AI stand-ins. I guess the best example of multiplayer versus to co-op/singleplayer would be Left 4 Dead and while Valve did not cut the obituaries they at least named the ai after their class so it’s not “the hunter respawned again” but “I killed another hunter.” Even they didn’t make a convincing singleplayer mode, however. The worst example of this game mode transition I can think of would be the UT3 singleplayer. They didn’t have much to work with, however, because they’re using symmetrical or deathmatch maps and game types.

And if you’re worried about singleplayer/coop matches becoming multiplayer matches later on, just cut the obituaries, etc. for bot kills or at least follow Valve’s example of generic class names for the AI.