Hey all,
Just wondering if people still play this game?
I have been trying to play the last few days and have run across maybe 1 or 2 people in multiplayer.
Am I missing something or do people really not play anymore?
Anyways, it would be nice to play some multiplayer against something other than bots. haha.
Gamertag: morvlorv
hit me up if you play Brink and would like to play some multi.
[QUOTE=morvlorv;388686]Hey all,
Just wondering if people still play this game?
I have been trying to play the last few days and have run across maybe 1 or 2 people in multiplayer.
Am I missing something or do people really not play anymore?
Anyways, it would be nice to play some multiplayer against something other than bots. haha.
Gamertag: morvlorv
hit me up if you play Brink and would like to play some multi.
[/QUOTE]
It makes me extremely sad to say it seems like everyone has moved on. Many people tried their hardest to keep community nights going and the like, but the inherent flaws of the game are almost too much to bear. Me and many others recently came back with addition of clan features, but even those are flawed and buggy frequently not starting matches like they’re supposed to. You’re free to add me as I still play once in a while and have many friends with the game, but most of them are playing BF3, GoW3, etc.
Nephandys has it right. Also, SD has abandoned the console versions of Brink. Even those of us that really enjoyed the game eventually got tired of the limited maps and inaccurate weapons. It’s a shame, because Brink did so many things right. But SD just doesn’t have the resources to support the console versions, so they have gone back to catering to their original PC gamer audience. Good for the PC gamers; bad for those of us who were looking for something different on the consoles.
Are putting this squarely on SD, or is any of this blame going on the ridiculous hoop jumping that’s required to get something as simple as a patch rolled out to consoles?
I think there’s plenty of blame to share around the numerous targets.
SD can have a little for some of their design decisions / implementations.
Bethesda can have a little for pushing the game to come out early, console focused and for the lack of QA funding.
MS/ Sony can have a little for dragging the certification of the patches.
And whoever decided that all the patches need to roll out across all platforms at the same time can take a big chink too. DLC I can understand. Patches? You’re far better off having quick patching cycles on PC, getting feedback and tweaking and then putting together a consise console patch that only goes through once and whoever drags their heels gets patched last.
If I got any of the blame missappropriated then feel free to reassign but I’m still pretty sure everyone gets a bit dirty here.
As zenstar said, there’s plenty of blame to go around. When I say SD lacks the resources to support the console versions of the game, I am referring to Microsoft’s certification process. I am fully aware that every single developer hates working with Microsoft. Bethesda has manged to patch Skyrim twice within a month of release, but it takes huge amounts of manpower and money to make that happen. Small developers constantly run into this issue (see MNC), and xbox players pay the price.
I blame SD for not knowing what they were getting into, and putting out a barely playable game at release. I blame Bethesda for not fronting the cash to get the console versions properly patched. I blame Microsoft for making the whole process such a pain in the ass.
Maybe someday (if Internet 2 ever makes it to the public sector) we can all be cloud gamers, and every single hardware manufacturer, both PC and console, can go f*** themselves.