[QUOTE=potkettleblack;239556]There are just as many bad medics who dont know when to revive, who revive the ‘wrong’ players, as there are wannabe rambo snipers. My issue isnt how good or bad these players are. My issue, is the perception that playing rambo doing the maximum damage to the opposition isn’t classified as being a team player. How competent these players are determines how much of a valuable asset they are to the team, but the actual action itself is still predicated on contributing to the team.
More people who understand that, the less people start saying stuff like:
“Fu<k the Lone Wolves, love the team players”[/QUOTE]
potkettleblack, in my enthusiasm, I posted rather carelessly. I think this is a problem of semantics.
I chose the term “Lone Wolf” as a descriptor of the selfish, kill your teammate to take his power weapon, play with total disregard to the rest of the team and the objective of the game, gamer. Depending on circumstances, this gamer moves into the griefer category. In contrast, I would use the term “Slayer” to describe the incredibly effective killing machine that always has the best interest of his team at heart. He kills for the benefit of the team, not his personal stats. For my purposes, any other terms are fine if they can be given those meanings.
In application, MW2 is a game that not only allows “Lone Wolf” play, but actually encourages and rewards it, even in the CTF gametypes. Because flag captures are given so little reward for the objective work, there is no incentive, aside from the win itself, to be the flag carrier. If you do choose to help your team by carrying the flag, you will almost certainly be listed near the bottom of the leaderboard at the end of the game because all the “Lone Wolves” and “Slayers” too, will have been killing and streaking and scoring major points the whole time you were hoofin’ it with the flag. Treyarch’s imminent Black Ops is cranking that exact gameplay up a notch. It looks to be a lot of fun, but it is what it is. There are lots of other games like it, as well. That genre is well stocked.
Splash Damage is trying to do something different with Brink, and that is what excites me (compare MW2and Brinkin Gamer Appeal). As illustrated in that jpg, I think Brink is going to appeal to a whole range of gamers, including “Slayers”. In fact, for Brink, even the “Slayer” will have a shot at the top of the leaderboard (i.e., the Glory), but it will mean that he will have to focus his killing around the objective, and in direct relation to the support of the team.
If you are creating a “class-based” game with “objective” gametypes, doesn’t it make sense that you should reward all the classes and all the required actions, not just the killing?
I know that we need the “Slayers”. Without someone who can run through several enemies in a row, things can’t get done. I love the fact that I can hop into a room with my “big brothers” and be of support to them while they decimate the enemy. I love watching them survive while the enemy falls time and again.
How about this: “efff selfish griefers who pay no attention to the actual game itself but take up a valuable slot on the team: love the Slayers and Objective and Support classes.”? 
