First Post. Possible weakness for Brink

(placebonation) #1

I could easily be wrong. I feel I’ve informed myself feverishly on this game but if this is already something that will be implemented please be gentle.

The game looks fantastic and I’m sure after these ‘extra’ months of extra development clearly one of the longest preorder to release steam game I’m sure the extra polish will help add more interesting features.
(besides than Fallout and Medal of Honor)

Territory control. Domination. Make the act of actually logging on and killing people for hours actually means more than only adding more accessories and weapon unlocks. Weapon addons ect. I want my actions to affect not only myself and my teammates but my whole faction. I think after a year and a half of playing Brink we will still enjoy it but it will become stale too early like “Battlefield Bad Company 2”. Great game. Very fun but after you’ve unlocked everything it starts to get old. Because it shouldn’t only be about my new earing or my next tattoo unlock. Resource control. Politics. Guild/Clan war and marketing. Add the item customization from APB. Horrible game. Fun at times. But their item customization was tops.

I know I know. tl;dr.

But that’s what kills games like this. Graphics have gotten better every year. Call of Duty series, Bad Company. The love spawn that Medal of Honor is. It will get to the point that nothing graphical will sway our decision to purchase a game or stick around.

We need substance. Not just cosmetics. I want this game to live and breathe. Lets hope they use this extra development time to create that for us. Create something that will keep itself alive after we have unlocked our very last t-shirt.

Think Planetside domination and control. With the expertise of Spash Damage. Now picture that without Sony touching it.

(tokamak) #2

Welcome! Still, posts like these make me very cynical so I’ll refrain from elaborating too much. Just try the two Enemy Territory games (one is even free) and you’ll see that SD isn’t known for shallow games. As for graphics, SD took the route valve and Blizzard took. Add an interesting style or touch, and the graphics will be timeless. It’s only the realistic graphics that age .

(amazinglarry) #3

While I’d love to suggest trying the previous 2 Enemy Territory Games, I can’t find myself suggesting the first ET simply because there are no pure servers anywhere. I’m all for the mod community but there are too many servers saturated with some pretty wild gameplay.

I would definitely suggest giving QW a try though.

EDIT: And before anybody goes off telling me to host my own server if I don’t like the mods - I was simply stating that most of the servers out there that have some wild gameplay are NOT accurate representations of the original game, or what I expect from SD.

(Nail) #4

Well, come play on ours 195.4.17.142
26.0b/ETPro 3.2.6/ 6 stock maps / mine complaints turned off/ lua combined fix

(darthmob) #5

[QUOTE=Nail;240700]Well, come play on ours 195.4.17.142
26.0b/ETPro 3.2.6/ 6 stock maps / mine complaints turned off/ lua combined fix[/QUOTE]I’ll keep that server in mind. I thought about installing ET again a couple of days ago.

(BioSnark) #6

Eh, to me the item customization… actually the item progression was ruinous to APB because it’s mixing player vs. player shooting skill with rpg grinding. The result is that the shooting is unsatisfying because it’s dependent on who ground better weapons out as much as player aim and the grinding is unsatisfying because it’s dependent on the bullsh* firefights. Catch 22 of fails. There’s a path I fear Brink could follow.

On territory domination, persistent worlds are better in the hands of MMO games because MMO’s have the player count to populate the size necessary to make the game world truly persistent but also varied.

(Nail) #7

Even if you only play offline by yourself, there’s 3 body types, 4 classes, and 2 factions. That combined with the fact although you may have everything unlocked, you can’t carry/use more than a few at any time should keep the game varied enough. Want more ? Play online, humans are the most unpredictable beasties you can find

(placebonation) #8

Sorry but neither of those games fit what I am explaining. When you join a match you can randomly choose a location on the map to defend or assault. Q’ing for those matches will generate that map and add the overall performance of your faction. So even unlocks are escalated to even more unlocked content. Guild/Clan buffs or specialties. Guild only unlockable content/weapons. I’m just thinking on the fly here.

(H0RSE) #9

Sounds like you’re thinking more of a persistent, online gamemode, where at any time, Resistance and Security are fighting over territories - like a modern day game of Risk.

(niffk) #10

^or a two-faction planetside.

everyone would love for that game to be made again and made properly, but it isn’t going to happen, and brink definitely isn’t the game for it. yeah, it would be great, but it would be an absolutely gargantuan effort to implement and a complete design overhaul, effectively changing the entire face of the game. how could you ever think that would be serious suggestion to make?

(placebonation) #11

Because a slight suggestion could ring throughout a developers ears. Nothing wrong with attempting.

(LyndonL) #12

There is [something wrong with attempting] if you don’t want Brink to follow the path of Duke Nukem :wink:

(tokamak) #13

Agreed. Bit of a shame really.

You want an overarcing meta-game. That’s just a trivial addition and doesn’t really improve the real gameplay of the game. I would love to see a MMO shooter (that is not planetside) but I don’t think the technology is there yet. Even ordinary MMORPG’s still haven’t managed to come up with an interesting player versus player metagame.

(Szakalot) #14

planetside proved that its possible, however it can only workout as a great undertaking rather than a small addition.

The whole game would need to be built around that mechanic - not anytime soon.

(tokamak) #15

Aye. I would LOVE to see that, but that’s something that will need WoW’s budget and a monthly subscription to work. You can’t compare that to the ambition of simply making an excellent and original shooter.

(placebonation) #16

Well it’s obvious that this sort of game would be on top of many peoples list. Just hope that we get some inventive developers to add or create a game that has these features at its core.

(Exedore) #17

I played Planetside a lot. It’s not necessarily developers that you’d need to convince… :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #18

You’re knocking on the wrong door. What you, or everyone else wants takes a huge budget and years of research. On top of that, a shooter with a massive meta-game doesn’t automatically make a fun game to play, Battlefield Heroes is the best example of this, big meta-game, mediocre shooter.

If I had to chose I rather play unlinked interesting matches than linked uninteresting matches. For now a good MMOFPS remains a dream of the future.

(placebonation) #19

Who said the matches have to be uninteresting? Winning territory could give benefits. I am simply thinking outside the box. Being extremely against my imagination isn’t making my post less meaningful.

(placebonation) #20

Haha that’s true. Like Warhammer Online without a stable subscription base. ZzzZzZZz. Good idea. No one is playing it.