making Brink better: ideas to add or ideas for a Brink 2


(captainofscience) #1

What Brink Has
Brink touches on a lot of things that could make it a blockbuster

[ul]
[li]interesting story
[/li][li]great customization
[/li][li]balanced, varied guns
[/li][li]fun objectives
[/li][/ul]
unfortunely it has a few more cons than pros

What it needs

[ul]
[li]a single player campaign that is actually different from the multiplayer
[/li][li]more guns
[/li][li]smarter bots
[/li][li]more objectives per map
[/li][li]more maps
[/li][li]split-screen/system-link
[/li][/ul]
this is only a few of the things that can be inproved upon that could have made the game stand out and really provide a new experience.


(Kurushi) #2

I’d rather they left out ‘single player’ altogether and focussed on the multiplayer. No need for bots. No matter how well you make bots they’re still going to be bots.

More maps is always good + more objectives…

I have no need for the other things you mention.

Thinking way into the future though, Brink + ETQW + Rage would be pretty amazing :))


(r3fleX) #3

I personally disagree with these 2 points.

[QUOTE=captainofscience;368119]
What Brink Has

[ul]
[li]balanced, varied guns[/li][/ul][/QUOTE]

The current guns are not balanced, hence why everyone is running around with the carb-9 as it is the most powerful/closest type of weapon to what brink players want, while the majority of heavy weapons and assault rifles are being neglected as they still put the player at such a disadvantage.

More guns doesn’t make a game better, unless developers can perfectly balance them which is very hard and close to impossible to do. I personally prefer less variation, making it easier for developers to balance them. A standard set of weapons for each side which look visually different and have small variations in the mechanic’s yet damage/spread is similar will keep me content. (i.e in ETQW you had a Sniper Rifle for GDF & Railgun for Strogg, there was a small variation between them which required different skill but both were very useful and balanced).

My Suggestions (wishlist) for Brink 2 that haven’t been mentioned in OP:

  • Private Beta
  • Open Public beta
  • 1st Person Spectator
  • Demo Support
  • Pause function for competition
  • Get rid of ‘use’ key, have independent binding’s for tools/items (PC Only).
  • Replace the syringe throw, with standard medic packs - same with ammo.
  • Customizable HUD
  • Unlock more cvar’s to play around with
  • Release SDK close to launch.
  • More thorough testing to remove obvious bugs.

(wolfnemesis75) #4

Many of those cons and improvements can be made with Title Updates! Other games have done that. Look at Agents of Change. Labs is arguably the best map in the game now. :slight_smile:

There are plenty of guns in Brink.

More unlockables would be nice. :slight_smile:


(Verticae) #5

If it’s a sequel, I can foresee even more BethSoft meddling… So really, all I want for Brink 2 is for Splash Damage not to develop it.


(Kurushi) #6

[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;368135]Many of those cons and improvements can be made with Title Updates! Other games have done that. Look at Agents of Change. Labs is arguably the best map in the game now. :slight_smile:

There are plenty of guns in Brink.

More unlockables would be nice. :)[/QUOTE]

True. But I’m more of a Founder’s Tower person. Arg, I can’t decide :>

The old maps have a new lease of life to me too, but then again I never got bored of them in the first place


(H0RSE) #7

The game already has 24 weapons. Does it really need more guns?


(captainofscience) #8

Splash should not make Brink 2. for the time they spent on it it could have been better may times over.
maybe more guns is the right way to put it. many of the guns seem to be useless because of another gun in its area just naturally having better stats making a mojority be almost obselete.
And personally i think it would have made a sweet open world game


(wolfnemesis75) #9

Brink is only a couple months old. It needs 6 more maps at least. Stick it out fella. :slight_smile:


(Lydia) #10

No matter how much it has , it ALLWAYS needs more :penguin:

But the truth is , the existing guns should be balanced .

More unlockables would be cool too :slight_smile:

Not mentioning the maps :wink:

And with the " Add girls to the chars " … well , i gave that up XD


(RabidAnubis) #11

I think Brink should have followed it’s original story a little better, not saving or escaping the ark, but poor v.s. rich.

I think the question of if there was an outside world added appeal to the game…


(captainofscience) #12

the maps need more objectives.i usually find that the only object is the main one and an escort. it would be nice if maybe there were 2 or three others at one time also, excluding command post capture


(Xiphoid) #13

I only have one thing on my list…

[ul]
[li]A server browser for the console versions.
[/li][/ul]


(LaEspada) #14

If I could change 1 thing in brink I would change the “style” back to the original, more realistic style, used in the original container city plqythrough. Made the game look so much better and run smoother.


(lobster) #15

Got any videos of it?

Also, Brink 2, really? LOL


(H0RSE) #16




(morguen87) #17

[QUOTE=Kurushi;368129]I’d rather they left out ‘single player’ altogether and focussed on the multiplayer. No need for bots. No matter how well you make bots they’re still going to be bots.

More maps is always good + more objectives…

I have no need for the other things you mention.

Thinking way into the future though, Brink + ETQW + Rage would be pretty amazing :))[/QUOTE]
I agree no bots in multiplayer, but there are people who enjoy playing bots in single player. I don’t have a problem with barebones single player like we have now, I think of it more as practice or training for multiplayer. I just wish bots didn’t play such a big role online.

I don’t have much else I’d change between Brink and Brink 2.

  1. A demo or a beta would be nice so people could voice their opinions/concerns regarding weapon balance and what not before the game is released.
  2. No bots in multiplayer by default, have bots fill a spot vacated by a human but leave if a real human connects.
  3. An option to force class outfits (haha, I know I’m dreaming on this, but putting down a medic or an objective class can be crucial and can literally win/lose a match and sometimes it’s not practical to mouse over everyone if the enemy pushes as a group).

(EnderWiggin.DA.) #18

-Tighter gun spread.
-Less recoil
-ADS or hip firing: I don’t care SD, just pick one and make it rewarding/fun.
-less SMART
-more health/ammo packs, less auto warping buffing **** you i didn’t want to go to the comm post.
-balanced maps at release (I’m looking at you ccity, reactor, resort (at release), and shipyard).


(lobster) #19

[QUOTE=H0RSE;368428]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMW7kuoIoIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO6luK_F77Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qYnAYBVn90&feature=related[/QUOTE]

Looks the same to me, minus some different lighting effects.


(Stormchild) #20

What is such the big deal with bots online ? They only fill the gaps when the “so much smarter” players ragequit in the middle of a game, or when humans in one team outnumber the ones in the other team and nobody will bloody switch side.

And when people come back in, the bots are removed. So what is the problem ? You guys prefer half-empty teams when waiting for people to hop in the game ?

Ok the bots are sometimes not that good but in multi it’s fine for me, they are only here to slow down the other team a bit while waiting for humans to fill in. It’s better that nobody at all ! And that’s how it works as I have seen it since launch (PC), so I don’t understand at all what this is about =_=.

Secondary objectives : there are usually enough, but if you don’t see them maybe someone took care of them before you !

I understand the gripe about the solo, I think this was a early design choice that was clearly stated in the forums and videos to everyone : blending multiplayer and singleplayer experience. What did the people in the boards reacted then ?

Here are the major gripes in game design IMHO :

- Blending multi and solo does not seem to fit very well with ET objective-based gameplay. Something didn’t go very well here, could be because of the ET community traditionnal way to think, or the bots AI, or just the very type of objective gameplay, or a mix of all this.

- The locking system is not adapted to PC playing, at least the way it is now, both in the thinking and the mechanics Having to wait for the targeting routines to select the entity you need to interact with goes against the idea of fast-paced games, and limits also a little the freedom in the game. Remeber in ETQW where people would find interesting places to plant HE charges ? Hell, you could plant HE charges anywhere you wanted ! We all got infuriated when drawn to a CP when we wanted to buff a friend, and incidentally changed class, resetting our turrets/mines/satchels on the way, etc…

- The shooting mechanics and body balance generate frustration. Now I’ll be cautious on this one, because most of the time I feel ok with it, except that there is still the feeling that SMG’s are queens and Light bodytypes are kings. The spread is the most frustrating thing and could be toned down as well as damage to avoid too much dying. But then again this has to be balanced also with respawn times, amount of headshot damage (reward accuracy), body types attributes/features, and types of weapons (spread for smg is ok, maybe less for ARs, etc).

- The character customisation is counter productive to the ET gameplay. I tihnk this was some kind of experiment a bit like the solo/multi blending.Bear in mind I am not talking about the visual customisation here, but the abilities and bodytype. The way ET usually worked (and worked well) was giving a certain fluidity to the roles repartition in a team. You guys in SD kept and emphasized this with the CP’s allowing to switch class in-game instead of doing it only in limbo like before. But at the same time, the player cannot change his “avatar” in game, and this forces him to keep the same body type and abilities layout for each role, during his/her whole session. It seems paradoxical to me, especially when coupled to the fact that abilities need to be unlocked and chosen. All and all, the levelling thing and unlocks it not implemented the best way, IMO. Unlocking outfits if fine, maybe even unlocking some weapons and accessories is ok (after all, they are done very early in the game so you soon forget that they were locked at all), but I don’t agree for the abilities. I don’t like grinding in my FPS just to get back the full gameplay possibilities of a role. Also, switching role in limbo gave you something to DO in limbo. Now you just watch and wait, and will lose some time after spawn on the first CP instead. Not that good in the end IMO.

- Communication between players is not made easy if you aren’t with friends, or if you haven’t got headset+mic gear. For a team based game, and moreover a game carrying (de facto) the ET legacy, it is very strange not to have radio commands (vsays). Another “wheel” with important vsays would bolster the teamplay something fierce. Also, the VOIP at launch was more or less failed, and this is something that should have received more attention considering the preponderance of teamworking in this game.

- Some maps have strange designs choices, with some areas that seem designed to hold huge fights and choke, usually empty of all action. Some spawn points that don’t always seem natural from one part of the map to another. Some respawn time tweaking helps a lot but there are still some areas in maps that are mostly unused, and most of the time it’s because there is nothing there, and is not a proper alternate route either, or it is invalidated because the action/choke is quickly moved way further.

Now,
these problems don’t prevent me to play and enjoy the game right now, as I adapt and understand also the console “factor” (actions need to fit in the gamepad and its limited number of buttons). Now I don’t blame consoles that much, because sometimes console game designs brought neat features in the PC world such as radial menus/wheels, which are a nice way to spare bindings. Some other things don’t share well between these platforms, though. Mouse being more precise that a stick (at least for most people, some can do wonder with anything), the aiming and gun mechanics can’t be exactly the same, as well as world interaction (auto-stick, auto-move, not required in PC world where you can pinpoint the precise area of interest very quickly).

But still, there are early game design choices there that I think were not the best choices. Of course it’s always easy to comment in the aftermath. I just wish these things and the affiliated critics from players will help to make a better “next ET” game.

There are still a lot of things I like in the game.

  • SMART system, whatever some may say, is still a blast and I miss it when I play other games FPS now.
  • The global characters design, bold and unsusual, provocative but gorgeous in its league.
  • The world design in itself.
  • The weapons, their name, their look.
  • The cutscenes showing your avatar (<3)
  • Most of the abilities are fun to use (some are more tricky than others to master, and some need to be boosted though)
  • Weapons + bodytypes + roles = ultimately more possibilities and variety than in previous ETs.

Sorry for the wall of text.

tl;dr
The game has some core design choices that I think did more harm than good, but there is also a solid potential and some good fun to have, so the game itself is far from a failure. If is a bit disappointing on some levels but definitely not a failure.