The thing is, there aren’t that many objective based games which have the game mode done right. ET is the creme de la creme of the sub-genre. This is not the case for CTF, it comes in all tastes and flavors. That’s why I’m being protective of the game, I don’t want Brink to enter the history as ‘that shooter with parkour’ parkour is just a gimmick compared to it’s core; the objective gameplay.
No Team Deathmatch??
Kinjal
(Kinjal)
#122
Why not just set timer to 1200 minutes, and kick every1 who play for objective. Make server name “Brink team deathmatch server”. Of course it can’t work on all maps, and all stages of the map, but I think there will be 2-4 good stages for deathmatch for sure. 
LyndonL
(LyndonL)
#123
[QUOTE=BioSnark;248205]Silence, degenerates !!
Bow down to the master platform and the master gametype. Abandon your antiquated keyboards and mice and embrace whole body input. The age where interaction could only be input through wrists and fingertips should be brushed away with the previous generation. Burn the degenerate artform and from its ashes let progress rise as a phoenix!
:)[/QUOTE]
Hahah…
Hi-larious…
It’s clear after 7 pages that everyone is too stubborn to budge on their viewpoint (which is fine) so why expend extra effort this late in the game in trying to force your view points down eachother’s throats?
SockDog
(SockDog)
#124
I just can’t get over the ignorance and arrogance, my replies are pretty much trolling myself in their futility.
BioSnark
(BioSnark)
#125
I agree with portions of both sides so not rolling with serious replies anyway but yeah, there’s really no point.
tokamak
(tokamak)
#127
In that I agree, but I like to humour the ideas that won’t happen anyway for the sake of argument.
II_Captain_K_II
(II Captain K II)
#128
I agree with most people here. Deathmatch is completely unnecessary and will just split the community into different pockets of gameplay. I gave up on traditional fps’ because every time I tried to play an objective playlist, there would be nobody playing. I don’t want that to happen to brink, where there are a couple hundred players in objective modes and thousands playing tdm. If the casuals want tdm, go buy one of the ubiquitous generic fps’ out there that focus on watered down gameplay. Don’t come here and ruin our game, you already have what you want, so let us have what we want.
BioSnark
(BioSnark)
#129
not that there aren’t both chess-boxing and tennis clubs out there, already. So you’re worried that the chess-boxers will be converted to tennis? Or that the tennis players will drive away the chess-boxers even if the tennis’ers never leave their court. I’m confused about the relation between tennis and chess-boxer populations that you’re drawing when you’re also saying you don’t want to convert any tennis players or, indeed, have anything to do with them.
SockDog
(SockDog)
#130
Best I could fathom is that it’s better to be in ignorant bliss of what people want to play than accept they play it, support that and benefit the creator of the game.
That it’s better SD fails* (all or bust) and their next game is a TDM variant (CoD Clone). Than SD includes TDM in their game, profits from the sales and can continue to support a smaller OBJ community.
That if presented with no in game option at all, people will rather play a game they don’t enjoy than find one they do enjoy. Because lets face it Brink will be the only game on the market?!?
That faced with little choice, people will adhere to the game’s rules regardless and never ever create word of mouth server rules to play out what they actually want to play (Tok can then write lengthy posts about how annoying this all is and how it’s a fail on the part of gamers).
For me the one reason to not include it in the game is that the number crunchers deemed it wouldn’t generate enough additional sales to cover the development cost. I’ve seen nothing else presented in this thread beyond that which isn’t at best opinion and worst some weak fantastical agenda to convert the planet to playing OBJ games.
Okay, I’m really done now.
- For the hard of reading I hope SD sees huge success with Brink and with their own original OBJ gametype.
Mustang
(Mustang)
#131
@BioSnark
By all means tennis players are welcome to chess-box, but don’t bring your rackets to a chess-boxing fight.
Or something like that
tokamak
(tokamak)
#132
[QUOTE=SockDog;248294]Best I could fathom is that it’s better to be in ignorant bliss of what people want to play than accept they play it, support that and benefit the creator of the game.
[/QUOTE]
Games are a part of culture and one of the conditions of cultural development is that it does not need to comply to standards set by the public. What you want is akin to the Russian socialist realism where art must be relevant to the workers and understandable to them. It led to a big lull in the art scene because fresh and innovating art wasn’t being given a chance any more.
Lowering the bar for people to get access to a deep game experience is something completely different than pandering to the demands of the masses and serving the same shallow tripe they’re used to gobble.
INF3RN0
(INF3RN0)
#133
Since when did TDM or CTF or (insert classic mode here) fully represent the actual reason why people don’t like CoD clones? I am pretty sure that if CoD put on your favorite sweater, you would never wear it again…
I’m not going to translate Snark’s post, as it is quite obvious what he meant, but that pretty much sums up what I had to say. Having multiple game modes won’t pollute the genre of class based objective shooters, but instead benefit it entirely by drawing those who may have been hesitant to try it in the first place. It also provides the player base with any type of mode that they may be in the mood for, so no need to exit out and load up another game. I am fairly sure that it’s not the “modes” of play that entirely determine whether a game is good or bad, but the game itself… please correct me if I am wrong.
tokamak
(tokamak)
#134
[QUOTE=INF3RN0;248298]Since when did TDM or CTF or (insert classic mode here) fully represent the actual reason why people don’t like CoD clones? I am pretty sure that if CoD put on your favorite sweater, you would never wear it again…
[/QUOTE]
It doesn’t fully represent it, it’s just a part of the mediocre drab that is mainstream gaming.
LyndonL
(LyndonL)
#135
Yeah awesome… look where that led: performance art (shoot me now), and modern art (two steel wheels and a crowbar welded together for its “artistic merit”)…
To successfully progress you need elements of same, so: Hook the players with a mode they know, and also have (Brink’s original) Obj mode. Hook them with CTF and let them progress to Obj and enjoy that and convert. The only problem I can see with that Tok is you’ll have to rub shoulders with those filthy scum “degenerate” players who are so clearly below you…
H0RSE
(H0RSE)
#136
To successfully progress you need elements of same, so: Hook the players with a mode they know, and also have (Brink’s original) Obj mode. Hook them with CTF and let them progress to Obj and enjoy that and convert.
This is all speculative, and for the most part, I see it not happening. Look at games that offer multiple gamemodes, like COD or Halo. DM and TDM is still the most played. For the most part, there is no “progressing” or “converting” to anything else.
Even in a game that offered a “proper” objective game experience, like Brink, what incentive would there be for a CTF or TDM player to convert? Why learn to play chess, when I am already having so much fun (and good at) playing tennis?
Ultimately, I see it splitting the community.
SockDog
(SockDog)
#137
@tok Lol. I want a game that embraces the old AND new. Where i can enjoy the same engine and feel but with different rules. You not only want to just play OBJ you also seem to have a crazy agenda to keep your game “pure” and “cleanse” gaming of degenerates.
As for your latest excuse (being dev time, narrative etc were debunked) let’s just ask, since when have we needed to stop enjoying old music to enjoy the new? Have only new books in libraries never any old? Play games with only new rules and never repeat an old game because it’s only fun to play.
Change for changes sake is also harmful. But then not one person in this thread is saying they don’t want brink obj despite how you may imagine that to be true. What you seem to want is to destroy the old so that there is only new, that’s far worse IMO.
But hey. As I said before. You’ll at least be able to bitch about people making up their own rules on servers like you did with ETQW. Stupid degenerates trying to play how they want in YOUR game.
SockDog
(SockDog)
#138
And I’ve yet to hear how it splits the community any more than saying “go play tdm in Halo”.
Also there is the simple fact that Brink being commercially successful means more Brink and so more OBJ mode. If Brink is only marginally successful because more people prefer to buy and play a game with tdm then well maybe there is no more Brink.
Yes this is of course speculation. But IMO it’s based on a lot more logic that claims of splintering community or social political BS about art LOL
Rasputin17
(Rasputin17)
#139
[QUOTE=SockDog;248312]And I’ve yet to hear how it splits the community any more than saying “go play tdm in Halo”.
Also there is the simple fact that Brink being commercially successful means more Brink and so more OBJ mode. If Brink is only marginally successful because more people prefer to buy and play a game with tdm then well maybe there is no more Brink.
Yes this is of course speculation. But IMO it’s based on a lot more logic that claims of splintering community or social political BS about art LOL[/QUOTE]
What i don’t get is why you believe that if there were inputted regular straightfoward gamemodes like the ones you’ve mentioned that Brink will suddenly everybody who previously unaware of the game’s existence and will then flock to their local gamestops, just clawing at the chance to pre-order it. Honestly, this logic is fallible at best, utterly moronic at worst.
It seems to me that you don’t understand much about game development. I mean, I’m by all means no expert but what I do know is that these type of things take a hell of a lot more work then you’re mentioning. Forget community splintering or the purity of the game. The whole argument is rendered moot by how much work would need to go into implementing this, especially this far in the development cycle. You can’t just quarter off existing maps, that just leads to huge game unbalances, consequently the same you’ll find in CoD games.
So now we’re making whole entire levels from scratch, which, I know by experience, takes a hell of a long time. Then there’s class re-balancing. What’s good for objective focused asymmetrical multiplayer is certainly not balanced for symmetrical gametypes. It leads to many of the same multiplayer imbalances that CoD also suffers from. (You seeing the pattern here?)
As we all should know, at this point Splash Damage is doing extensive amounts of testing, fixing balance problems and trying to get the game as polished as possible. This would be a waste of time (equaling also a waste in money) in the appeasment of a splinter group to try and cater to some superficial demographic which you seem to imagine remains exclusive to CoD’s type of gameplay. This entire debate is pointless really, because it would be just stupid to implement these things at this point.
…:stroggtapir:
KnollDark
(KnollDark)
#140
I just don’t see how tdm would even work in Brink, in interviews they say that there will be cinematics before every game, not to mention the multiplayer is the story since by this time i’m sure we all know that everything will be blended together, so the only way for dtm to happen is if we had a “Bloody Sunday” thing going on which is also unlikely because it has also been stated that neither faction really wants to fight its just the only way to settle things now