PC Users RtCW/W:ET/ET:QW players

(howie) #21

Given your name i’m doubting the sincerity of your posts :stuck_out_tongue:

Nobody can be that wrong, which means your are indeed king troll!

(DrpPlates) #22

you really want know if this game is for? then read the stickied thread: BRINK PC…

BLASPHEMER!

wolfenstein was an unholy abomination of the great and mighty RTCW!
how dare you talk of RTCW and wolfenstein in the same breath…

:smiley:

(king_troll) #23

[QUOTE=howie;317731]Given your name i’m doubting the sincerity of your posts :stuck_out_tongue:

Nobody can be that wrong, which means your are indeed king troll![/QUOTE]

not wrong, for a real tactical team game you need team of 16 like a real platoon,

if you dont have a radar in the corner of the screen, you drop of some field ops and snipers and team talk using a helicoptor, tanks camp in some bushes or jungle. SUV or troop carriers find a off road route to the objective

with 45min + to win

and megatextures can texture the whole world and map editor grid size

(vetus) #24

Well, if u want play 4 fun - BRINK is what u r looking for. I think that now it s most enjoyable FPS. However if u r old-school ET player, and u r looking for some shooter with simillar game play, thab BRINK is ur curse. The game which was supposed to be reneval of ET with so many fresh breaths, beacomes just a competetive-game-crap.
Wrong desinged maps (only Resort and Reactor are fine in case of obj)
Terrible cone of fire (there is no possobility to shot HS even if u r targeting head. U have to count on luck)
No mode for competetive gameplay
BUGS

IF there won’t be a lot of improvments like ET QW, BRINK will live only as long as sponsors will pay monay for tournaments.
Or SD forgot about their GREAT roots (ET) or Bethesda thought thay have better ideas than SD concerning shooters.

I was playin 6y ET, 4y competetivly. 2y on top level. So I’m dissapointed when I see shooter, designed for competetive gameplay, but done just for monay. I m feeling kinda lied by SD and Bethesda. :frowning:

(legend123) #25

I played RTCW and W:ET for many years. At first I thought this would be a nice alternative to W:ET.
I defended the game against criticism. But after having bought it i question is 37dollars was worth it.
The FPS issues have been resolved for me but there are still many problems.
The game feels very sluggish compared to the earlier mentioned games.

When im feeling good this game has potential. But I doubt it could reach the ‘amazing’ gameplay of RTCW and W:ET.

When im feeling down I feel this game is just another console Cod (before this game was released I told everyone it would be more like SDs earlier games and not Cod).

I still will stick with it though because I rarely buy games. The online population according to Steam seems to be around 7,000. (W:ET to this day has ~4,000). When the game came out it was above 10,000 and sometimes approaching the numbers for TF2.

(SphereCow) #26

[QUOTE=king_troll;317912]not wrong, for a real tactical team game you need team of 16 like a real platoon,

if you dont have a radar in the corner of the screen, you drop of some field ops and snipers and team talk using a helicoptor, tanks camp in some bushes or jungle. SUV or troop carriers find a off road route to the objective

with 45min + to win

and megatextures can texture the whole world and map editor grid size[/QUOTE]

What the hell are you talking about?

(king_troll) #27

which part. gameplay or megatextures

qiuake 4 idtech4 can handle small megatextures of terrain unit size of 16384x16384
ET:QW can obviously handle terrain unit size of 32768x32768

idtech5 is probaly the whole world,

megatexures, a BFTexture that is another gimmick of yoda of carmack.

dont know how big that actually go, but a full size megatexture is nodoubt all of the map editors grid size

(BJBlaskowitz) #28

[QUOTE=legend123;317977]I played RTCW and W:ET for many years. At first I thought this would be a nice alternative to W:ET.
I defended the game against criticism. But after having bought it i question is 37dollars was worth it.
The FPS issues have been resolved for me but there are still many problems.
The game feels very sluggish compared to the earlier mentioned games.

When im feeling good this game has potential. But I doubt it could reach the ‘amazing’ gameplay of RTCW and W:ET.

When im feeling down I feel this game is just another console Cod (before this game was released I told everyone it would be more like SDs earlier games and not Cod).

I still will stick with it though because I rarely buy games. The online population according to Steam seems to be around 7,000. (W:ET to this day has ~4,000). When the game came out it was above 10,000 and sometimes approaching the numbers for TF2.[/QUOTE]

I agree. I was a long time RTCW/ET player and I would be happy with a rehash of the same game. Though ET added some cool twists (spec ops, vehicles, campaign) I still think RTCW is the ultimate FPS. Its got realistic weapons, but also a nice dose of arcade like play (exploding bodeies, panzers, revive/grenade launching, no fall damage mostly). That game was a blast. The community was awesome. The maps were awesome. The V-says were awesome (why did these vanish?..consoles). RTCW was more balanced and Stopwatch was the primary game mode, which made the map imbalances irrelevant, since both sides took turns on offense. Campaign mode can be brutal and LONG when you are on a crappy offensive team. I even remember getting frustrated on Goldrush for 20 min at a time. At least in RTCW stopwatch you’re worst case scenario was 8 min of ass kicking.

Yes Wolfenstein 2009 was epic failure.

Maybe someone can reskin this game as Axis vs. Allies and make new fresh maps.

The maps in Brink are ok…but kinda all the same to a degree. Just not much variation in theme. Other than a few exceptions, I can’t tell if I am offense or defense right away. A quick look at the OBJ wheel and it says DEFEND X…10 min later I realize DOH we’re on offense! Its not just me. My friends do the same thing.

(playa) #29

etqw was the biggest fail game next to wolfenstein.

RTCW & W:ET hands down best games ever. Dont ever associate these games with **** games like etqw

(HellToupee) #30

ET:QW was ok i just felt vehicles didn’t fit too well into the objective based game play, i feel brinks a move back towards the more rtcw style which i like just could use some more PC focused polish. IMO i would like return of vsays replace wheel UIs and grenades work more like they do in rtcw/et.

Still think they should make a proper traditional SP game out of the material, if it were to match the quality of the cutscenes would be very good and establish a canon storyline would be good dlc for owners and good means to relaunch to those who did not buy.

I like it just more needs polish and balancing maps a mostly fine most issues with them can be resolved by modifing spawn timers IMO and hack objectives need tweaking.

(Codine) #31

Why do people hate ET:QW so much when compared to ET? Both are really great games. The only problem I ever had with ET:QW was that there was never enough maps and theres no actually modding community.

ET:QW is probably one of my favorite shooters of all time. Enlighten me?

(HellToupee) #32

Mainly its down to the introduction of vehicles vs the totally infantry focused approach of rtcw/ET and asymetric sides.

(DrpPlates) #33

agreed-
am fine with land vehicles(titan/descy) those are easy to avoid and even kill
aircraft in QW- whole different story with a good pilot, or hell even a decent one… all you had to do was park a mile away fire your rockets without any fear or a RL or Artillery…
that was my one and only real complaint about the game…
other than that, love the game…

(Ashog) #34

Sorry but nothing compares to ETQW in terms of diversity of gameplay and fun, even W:ET is inferior to that. The only two things that W:ET is better at are custom content and competition play. I doubt Brink will ever reach any of that tbh. Unless SD works flat out for the next whole year to correct things, which I doubt they will due to financial limitations.

(Boltthrower) #35

I would say don’t try it if you are on the fence already, if you are familiar with rtcw and et its a step backwards in a lot of directions depth of gameplay, movement,(don’t let smart fool you its basically just sliding the other aspects are not useful and are only made so cause they nerfed jumping) and accuracy etc… Interacting with other players to do your class’s basic features like give ammo, revive is rather cumbersome. I think I just gave up on the game after about 40 hours or so game time and looking at the rather fast dropping number of players on steam and the amount of populated servers I feel a bunch of people are in the same boat.

Perhaps if large patching takes place or some one from the community comes out and mods this well I feel like this game will not really take off like rtcw and et. Judging by the bare minimum patch sd will be releasing, no word on corrupted text or invis players being fixed both are total game breakers for me as well as the random crashes. Knowing how many bullets you have and who you can shot at is KINDA a big deal in a shooter.

(-XVX-) #36

Thanks for the replies.

I bought ET:QW on release day, that was a given I was going to do that, but with the decline of shooters on the PC, I felt SD was going to cave to the consoles and all the evidence I can muster through live streams, the dignitas and BrinkTV tournament and the comments here from PC players that enjoyed the old SD product for many of the same reasons I did, I cannot find it within myself to support this product.

Thank you SD for the great games of the past. Brink is clearly an inferior product for your potential and knowledge of team based objective PC shooters.

(rand0m) #37

I agree with arrowguys comment, very nicely stated.