[QUOTE=Verticae;357695]Counterstrike, Team Fortress, Team Fortress 2, Wolfenstein, Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, Call Of Duty (series), Day of Defeat: Source… Yeah, must be just Brink.
[/QUOTE]
I loled so much 
Some of those are on the market and selling more per month than brink. Curious, did you ever play any of those titles?
Portal, Mirror’s Edge, STALKER, TF2, Metroid Prime, Conduit, Red Steel, The Ball, Left 4 Dead, Half Life.
+1 for Rhado communicating with the people of the forums. you sir, have earned my respect.
[QUOTE=Thundermuffin;357699]http://store.steampowered.com/search/?
Pretty sure those games are still on the market and bought all the time.[/QUOTE]
Counter-strike. Released 2004. Track Record. Holy Grail. Its 2011. Example: I bet Super Mario brothers & Zelda still sells more copies than new games put out by Nintendo. But, if you want a new Team-based OBJ FPS game, how many are on the market? And COD is a not a team-based game. Its just one group of individuals separated in to two teams and count kills. You get next to zero for playing as a team. Battlefield 3 is one game that is intriguing. But it comes out this year and games after 3 start to get stale. Two years from now, let’s say Brink 2 get’s released, it still will feel fresh compared to the dirge of COD Clones. And that makes it worthy of a go. And that’s why I say, *“we won’t be fooled again” crowd will “get in line again!”
*who reference
I laughed out loud @ Call of Duty as well, haha. I played Black Ops last night on Domination (one of the match types that uses “teamwork”), and ended the match at around 57-26 K/D with multiple captures and a few defends of the points your team is trying to capture. The rest of my team was under a 1.0 K/D ratio, and next to none of them actually helped capture points, so basically it was a useless team. Guess what? We still won, because just 1 person did well (myself). A CoD match can easily be decided by 1 player, and 1 player alone.
The rest of those games mentioned that wolf quoted are for the most-part really old too, which doesn’t downplay the fact that they are fun and involve teamwork, but there really hasn’t been many recent FPS games that have a heavy emphasis on teamwork. It is going to be as big as say TF2 or CS ever? No. But that doesn’t change the fact that not many companies put out games like Brink that rely heavily on a team effort to succeed, Brink just failed to hit the right game-play quality that leads to a game being played over 10 years later like CS.
COD S&D is a pretty damn team-oriented, objective-based game. Of course, if you only play pub and TDM, you’ll never know that.
EDIT: I do think we’re getting further and further from the original purpose of the thread though.
Lol. Closing the net again to ‘prove’ your point? The genre of the game is First Person Shooter, to quote Paul Wedgewood (YouTube, find it yourself 
) “It’s a shooter first and foremost”. End of.
Make sure you’re here on their next release if you’re so sure I’ll be a day one adopter. Something you probably don’t know is I don’t buy a lot of games day one. I pick and choose my titles very carefully - once bitten, twice shy and all that. I do wish them success but I’ll personally be more cautious on their next game.
Those games got blasted! ha ha ha ha! R U Serious? Half Life is an old PC game. That’s not a risk but an established FPS. Mirror’s Edge. Did not sell as many copies in its lifetime as Brink did on day one. TF2. Time put a shine on that game and the word FREE and packaging it as Orange Box. Are you serious with this list? Left 4 Dead is a game I will pick up soon at some point and is worth a go. Portal was not a full game. It got the golden shine along with TF2 as a “bonus value pack”. TF2 looks like fun. But come on. Brink fits right in with that motley crew of a list. Come on. That’s what makes Brink cool and undeserving of such uber-harsh criticism. Man, I wish you guys would smash those other games as hard as you smash Brink because I guarantee there was a laundry list of problems with even the mighty counter-strike when it first released. Did it even sell well? I mean, I get that it is played today still, and it influenced lots of games afterwards, but breaking the mold hurts obviously, because COD probably has more people playing the game on a regular basis than people who ever bought counterstrike in its totality.
On the subject of Mirror’s Edge, it sold over 1 million units somewhere around 2009. Brink had around 7 to 800,000 units around 3 weeks after it’s release, if those numbers are accurate.
I have some issues with some of those games (Conduit and I assume Red Steel 1) aren’t really that good at all, much worse then Brink imo.
For the rest a fine choice of games, especially Metroid Prime
And Wolf, those games don’t need as much ‘bashing’ as Brink as those games just are gems where there wasn’t alot to improve on at that time of the release. It is not because you like Brink you should defend it blindly, the game has issues and that’s just the fact of the matter.
Really, wolf, all you are doing is dragging this thread further and further way from the main point without giving any insight into what PC gamers want nor are you trying to have a legitimate discussion abut the shortcomings of BRINK; if you’ve noticed a lot of us have been trying to have a hearty discussion with rahdo about what went wrong and what would help to fix it next time around, because we’ve played games competitively and we know what makes a PC game stand the test of time.
The age of the game shouldn’t matter in the slightest, only the quality of the game. Half-Life, Counter-Strike, QUAKE, Wolfenstein, etc., etc., may be old, but they all gave something to the shooter genre and progressed it further than pretty much any modern game has. These games are still played because of how great they were and still are; they had their problems (most likely, wasn’t there at the start for any of them), but they were able to fix them quickly and make the game a major hit. Some of the bugs even progressed the genre further and further (rocket jumping, strafejumping, etc.) and became major features in their respective games.
Breaking the mold doesn’t hurt when the game is of great quality; TF2 broke the mold and it sold amazingly well on its own, whether or not you want to believe it. I don’t feel like digging up the quotes from PCGamer (I think it was them who did the interview) where VALVe talked about how the game kept selling and selling the older it got and they were making a lot of money from free weekends or a 50% off sale, because people would jump in and try it or realize that hey it’s 5$ I can spend that on a game and not feel any regret.
Please, just let us have our discussion with rahdo, or whatever other developer reads this, about a platform you don’t even play on in peace; you can have your own thread for your platform of choice with criticisms or praises, and just ask us to stay out and the majority of us will as we have no reason to post there.
No. Mirror’s Edge sold round 500k total like in 10 weeks and after years reached 1 million. Brink was at 1 million sales a month ago, brother. 
Brink 700K is JUST Xbox. 
wolf, i know you are a console player, so i dont blame you for your non existing pc gaming knowledge.
i think the respond from .cris. was about games taking risks. here my knowledge about that list
portal. portal is actually a full game. you can buy it at steam for 9euros. it did take a risk, because its gameplay came up with something new. something that has never been done before. that alone is a risk
mirrors edge. i guess also for doing something different that has never been done before. and that would be the parkour thing in first person. is it a first person shooter? is it a jump’n’run? i dont know. its new, its risky to establish something new…
stalker. for combining elements of different genres. shooter, large open world, rpg… cant be too specific though, because i dont know staler that much.
tf2. i guess for its comic style. it took a huge risk to go that road. and it succeeded. a lot.
metroid prime. dont know that game.
conduit. dont know.
red steel. dont know either.
the ball. again for inventing something new. it didnt took a real risk though, because it is developed by a modding crew and got published for free. now its commercial i think.
left4dead. i dont know. maybe because in a world of deathmatch dominated shooters, left4dead did the cooperative way?
half-life. took a risk because its valves first game and its a new brand?
i dont know what your point is though. what does it have to do with brink?
[QUOTE=Thundermuffin;357717]Really, wolf, all you are doing is dragging this thread further and further way from the main point without giving any insight into what PC gamers want nor are you trying to have a legitimate discussion abut the shortcomings of BRINK; if you’ve noticed a lot of us have been trying to have a hearty discussion with rahdo about what went wrong and what would help to fix it next time around, because we’ve played games competitively and we know what makes a PC game stand the test of time.
The age of the game shouldn’t matter in the slightest, only the quality of the game. Half-Life, Counter-Strike, QUAKE, Wolfenstein, etc., etc., may be old, but they all gave something to the shooter genre and progressed it further than pretty much any modern game has. These games are still played because of how great they were and still are; they had their problems (most likely, wasn’t there at the start for any of them), but they were able to fix them quickly and make the game a major hit. Some of the bugs even progressed the genre further and further (rocket jumping, strafejumping, etc.) and became major features in their respective games.
Breaking the mold doesn’t hurt when the game is of great quality; TF2 broke the mold and it sold amazingly well on its own, whether or not you want to believe it. I don’t feel like digging up the quotes from PCGamer (I think it was them who did the interview) where VALVe talked about how the game kept selling and selling the older it got and they were making a lot of money from free weekends or a 50% off sale, because people would jump in and try it or realize that hey it’s 5$ I can spend that on a game and not feel any regret.
Please, just let us have our discussion with rahdo, or whatever other developer reads this, about a platform you don’t even play on in peace; if you made a console only thread for discussion, most of us would stay out and let you all go wild with your criticisms or praises, because we don’t play 360 or PS3.[/QUOTE]
Ha ha ha on PC gamers staying out of a console only thread. that’s a stretch. wow. Believe me, I can make a laundry list of stuff I think could improve Brink and sales, but I am pretty sure you’d not like them.
Then go do so in your own thread, for there’s no reason a PC game and console game have to play exactly the same. So there’s no reason for us to come in and slam your ideas if you say “hey these ideas are for consoles only and shouldn’t even be thought of as ideas for the pc version.”
Firstly, you said that Brink day one sold more than Mirror’s Edge lifetime. Wrong. Mirror’s Edge sold more than a million copies. Day one, Brink didn’t achieve this.
Read my post, I’m not saying Brink is not over 1 million sales. I clearly acknowledge that the information I found was around 3 weeks after the release date - and incidentally were total sales at that time. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s well over a million now. That wasn’t touched on or even the point. The point was to demonstrate your inaccurate information.
On that note, Mirror’s Edge released November 2008. By February 2009 it was publicised they had sold more than a million. That’s not ‘after years’ but instead, mere months.
See you’ve completely waxed over the point that it’s not games sold that matters it’s retention of players. Many of the “OLD” games you find laughable have managed to retain their player base and it’s not because they are free or bundled, it’s because they satisfy a segment of the market, to this day!
Brink seems to have sold well initially then taken a steep dive retaining the existing and bringing in new players, given the limited data it doesn’t seem to be just on the PC either. This suggests the game isn’t hitting as wide an audience as SD expected and has nothing to do with it being a new IP. In respect to the original topic of this thread I think that contradicts the attitude that Rahdo (SD?) is taking with the game, that it is the players who don’t get the game Brink is meant to be rather than accepting that the game just isn’t as accessible, appealing or entertaining as they’d hoped it would be.
As for queuing up to buy they next game. I’ll be watching closely but will be way more cautious this time around. Probably to the point that sans a pre-release demo or beta of some description I won’t buy the game on day one. One bitten, twice shy. I’ll given them my money but they need to earn my respect and unfortunately Brink’s development has damaged the latter.