Nerf this nerf that?

(BrigandSk(A)) #1

Brink isn’t released yet and people are already whining OverPowered or UnderPowered characteristics they think about certain aspects of the game.

I play games over 20 years and I’ve seen tons of games getting wrecked due to extensive nerfing, turning the game into a lame gameplay due to all weapons being mediocre or by always having 1 weapon above all the others.

Luckily for us all we have the best multiplayer fps developer team on the job, so I’m comfortable to the point that I feel like such thing won’t happen, since we have ET:W , ET:QW as examples.

No matter how the poll turns out… the idea of this topic is slight chance of triggering the click on some heads that they should think before whining!

My advise is, once you find the strength of a certain gun or feature try to discover what’s the weakness then you’ll see it’s not OP (and vice versa, if you find the weakness try look what’s the strength).

Actually, this is something that not only applies to a game, in fact in our every day lives we do things that have a positive side and a side effect… usually negative or a drawback. The Idea is that it’s always the opposite of what we get or what it needs less to create it’s own strength.

Please, 1st play the game extensively and then point out the strengths and only afterwards seek the weaknesses. Then you can try to figure out if it’s balanced or not.

Thank you.

(Shadowcat) #2

[QUOTE=BrigandSk(A);285609]Brink isn’t released yet and people are already whining OverPowered or UnderPowered characteristics they think about certain aspects of the game.

I play games over 20 years and I’ve seen tons of games getting wrecked due to extensive nerfing, turning the game into a lame gameplay due to all weapons being mediocre or by always having 1 weapon above all the others.

Luckily for us all we have the best multiplayer fps developer team on the job, so I’m comfortable to the point that I feel like such thing won’t happen, since we have ET:W , ET:QW as examples.

No matter how the poll turns out… the idea of this topic is slight chance of triggering the click on some heads that they should think before whining!

My advise is, once you find the strength of a certain gun or feature try to discover what’s the weakness then you’ll see it’s not OP (and vice versa, if you find the weakness try look what’s the strength).

Actually, this is something that not only applies to a game, in fact in our every day lives we do things that have a positive side and a side effect… usually negative or a drawback. The Idea is that it’s always the opposite of what we get or what it needs less to create it’s own strength.

Please, 1st play the game extensively and then point out the strengths and only afterwards seek the weaknesses. Then you can try to figure out if it’s balanced or not.

Thank you.[/QUOTE]
Your argument is overpowered, you should nerf it to give people a chance to debate.

Its worth mentioning though that SD can change game variable in real time due to the addition of NETCVAR files. Which ideally allows them to tweak weapons and see what happens to get a real idea of what they need to change and what those changes will really do to the game.

(Ajax's Spear) #3

I agree with this… which is why it makes no sense to even have a poll question on the matter in the first place. Were you just bored or something?

(Linsolv) #4

It’s human nature to make an ass out of yourself based on completely uninformed opinions. I know everyone here has done it multiple times.

(BrigandSk(A)) #5

yeah sort of… never is too much to try make people think

On the other hand…the answer seems obvious but it’s not, since some games either released the game unfinished (without a properly beta testing stage) generating loads of complaints from community and consequently forcing the developers to nerf all guns/features again using the feedback of the game’s player base.

OR

Some other games opt to nerff all guns once in awhile due to game design, like team fortress, they chose to update the game with new weapons from time to time and that forces them to tune up all the guns at same time (I guess).

Anyway… it’s very common to get a game wrecked because developers did not filtered the complaints… turning the game into a complete mediocre mayhem, that’s why the topic.

(Linsolv) #6

I mean, when the game is out, yes. The community can generally judge when something is OP. And sometimes, even after a dev team puts plenty of sweat, blood, and tears into their game, overpowered stuff happens.

But what we have right now isn’t really that, though I don’t think anyone’s mistaken it for that either. What we have now will ALSO show up after the game launches: people who don’t like some idea that the devs had. Again, not an insult by any means—I have a ton of disagreements with the recent Fallout games, and even though I love them I think they have some major design flaws. Does everyone, or even most people, agree with me? No. Not really. Some people think they’re going to win over the community when they try to lobby for no health regen system, or to add snipers, or to make lights move at divide-by-zero mph, and that’s what’s really causing the complaint threads.

(BioSnark) #7

f1 because SD knows that they won’t have to rebalance anything which is why they haven’t included an option to tweak that sh* after release. Next poll question, bacon, yes or no?

(sle0609) #8

i think they should keep an eye on the stats first to see if things are balanced so certain things aren’t over used and every combo should be roughly equally effective.

they should be conservative about nerfing the game based on feedback. people’s opinion and complaints about games can change over time and experience. in the beginning you will have many people who don’t fully understand the game, blame their personal mistakes on the game design and overpowered this or that. and a few vocal complainers will make an issue seem bigger than it really is.

overall they should make the game as fun for many people as possible or as they’ve already acknowledged. get everyone to complain equally about everything. not just a few things. but more than most developers i trust splash damage will do a good job.

(ed lolington) #9

post this post that
-brigandsk(a)

(Seyu) #10

Yea, the orange jelly needs some serious nerfff… wait, wrong thread.

(system) #11

The general rule of thumb is if someone manages to kill you with whatever weapon, than it’s overpowered. He is also a bunny hoper, he uses aimbots and wallhacks, and he is a twitcher. It has nothing to do with you sucking so bad.

(Ragoo) #12

At this point I wouldn’t say anything is overpowered in BRINK standard 8v8 pub play, simply cause I haven’t played it but SD has played it tons and should know better than me.

I am worried that some things might be imbalanced in 5v5 organized clan matches tho. Again, this is purely speculation, but since SD doesn’t balance for this, it is possible.

(sham) #13

Competitively things can be balanced by enforcing rules so not really much of a problem.

The heavier weapons (and character) = less mobility is an interesting dynamic and does mean there will always be a trade off to using more powerful weapons.

Also, as has been mentioned earlier in this thread, SD can change pretty much any stats on the fly to balance the game when it’s out in the wild and that’s along with spending months balancing the game already.

I think it’s a bit early to start complaining. :stuck_out_tongue:

(Daystar) #14

Yeah, I think apart from a few abilities there won’t be much to be balanced. Although as players get more skilled and discover techniques we shall see. SD seems to be well on the ball though.

(SuperWaz) #15

I agree in a way, but it’s the community’s fault in the first place.

Look at the number of guns available in RTCW for example. Just a few, very equal guns and everyone essentially used the same one. Those that did more damage (i.e. the Panzer) were there for specialist roles on the team.

Look at the guns in Quake III or Counter Strike. You can pretty much name all of the guns available and know what’s better than what. Less is more.

These days if a game has less than 50 guns (to pick a random number) people do nothing but whine. And the same people whine again if you can’t get red dot addons, silencers, quick reloads, and the like. Then, surprise, surprise, it’s those same people who whine again if one seems marginally better than the others.

I have no doubt SD did alot of testing, but I also have no doubt that the community once playing will find guns, classes and body configurations that are better than all the rest or can be exploited in some way.

It’s going to need a balance or two whether you like it or not, but I agree it should not be implemented not as a knee jerk reaction. SD are smarter than that anyway.

One real positive I saw from watching the real early Brink movies that was Paul Wedgewood stated that balancing started the moment they had their first build up after 3 months of development. Keeping in mind they’ve had around two years since to get it right, I think we’ll be in good hands.

(brbrbr) #16

no.
except if thats “every1” is ME, mwhahahahaha !![Evil laugh]

(tokamak) #17

The big problem Brink will face is balancing things that have explicit power versus balancing things that have implicit power.

A large gun has explicit power, it does a lot of damage and can dish it out fast. Fast movement speed and extra SMART mobility has implicit power, you have a lot of freedom but it’s true power is only revealed in indirect ways. A player won’t notice he’s actually powerful in being able to fight the enemy on his own terms, being able to get back into combat fast or easily reaching objectives.

From the polls we’ve also seen that light bodytypes are way more popular. That means that at least in the first phase of the metagame, many players will find themselves on the wrong end of a heavy gun rather than on the right end.

that’s why I suspect big guns will receive a lot of ‘OP’ shtick while the free mobility will get far less scrutiny.

SD should adopts Blizzard’s attitude towards balance and give the metagame the chance to balance itself out first before taking any action. The Starcraft forums are full with complaints about units and strategies being problematic. However most commonly it was only a matter of time before players learned to respond, or that some player figured out a counter which everyone could pick up.

Blizzard did apply balance fixes, but these only apply to issues that prevailed over time. They never immediately try to fix parts of the game that prove to be controversial.

People were absolutely certain that Terran was an overpowered race in Starcraft, and most of this opinion simmered down when Blizzard revealed their statistics proving that Terran wasn’t actually winning more games against different races at all. What the playerbase perceives to be the case and what the case in reality may be can turn out to be highly different.

(BioSnark) #18

I do not think SD has a perfect record of balance though that’s not unusual when your playing with asymmetrical weapons, vehicles or maps… or all three. As such, I was really happy to hear of the netvar updating system.

(Aza) #19

I do think it will be a pretty daunting task of trying to balance Brink just because of the shear amount of potential configurations that are possible with the guns when you include the attachments and how they affect the ‘stats’ of the gun. But at the same time having such an amount of possibilities may just make most of the configs a wash that only the most obvious outliers will be dealt with.

I do however wonder if SD has differing stats on the guns on the PC compared to the console version. Cause although for example the chain gun might be fine on consoles, I would think the dmg component would have to be slightly tuned down on the PC.

(TheBIG_Lebowski) #20

One day im gonna make a game where all you can do to kill someone with is a spoon. Theres no way that will be OP. :cool: