Rahdo's words - what happened here?

(Kendle) #241

I think that sums it up nicely. It’s not just one thing, it’s the whole package of the game trying to help you out but actually getting in the way as a consequence.

When I point my gun at someone and press mouse1 I expect to hit what I point at. I’m cool with missing if my aim was out, I don’t need the bullets to spread out and hit “something” regardless.

When I opt to revive someone and press a key to enact my choice I expect the game to carry out my request, not sometimes decide not to, or to carry out a different action than the one requested because multiple actions are bound to one key, or choose to carry out my request on the wrong person etc.

When I’m sprinting and want to jump onto something I want to jump onto to something, not have the game decide what I really wanted to do was some cool parkour move that gets me killed cos I end up somewhere I didn’t intend.

It’s all about being in control of your character, something that’s absolutely fundamental to a FPS. I’m not a complete newb who’s never played an online shooter before, and don’t need to be treated like one, and what’s more even when I was a complete newb who’d never played an online shooter before I didn’t need to be treated like one so I’m at a loss to understand why today, with gaming far more prevelant than it was when I started, SD felt gamers needed a helping hand to do basic things like running around and shooting guns.

(.Chris.) #242

Calm down :slight_smile:

You will always get folk on either end of the spectrum. I wouldn’t read too much into the “hero” statement.

Anyway back on topic, yeah I agree there is quite a bit of hand holding outside of SMART resulting in ‘lost’ control that isn’t really needed for the PC, haven’t a clue about the console versions though, maybe some console players like to post their thoughts on the matter?

(tangoliber) #243

I’m on consoles.
From the very first time I played the game, I did everything manually because it make sense.

You have a crouch, and a jump command…and those make sense with everything you can do…sliding, mantling, wall jumping… It is intuitive and easy. Using SMART is counter-intuitive…and I forget it exists until somebody on these forums brings it up.

I’m surprised that some of you guys didn’t switch to manual after just 30 seconds of playing.

(dazman76) #244

Firstly, thanks Rahdo for responding in such detail. It’s a refreshing change to see some actual activity from SD, although it’s a shame it takes a thread like this to provoke it.

Alas, I’m afraid I’m going to throw my own cynical thoughts into this one. Before I do say, I’d like to say that I’ve read each and every post in the thread, which took quite some time :slight_smile:

OK. Most of my problems have been discussed already, here and elsewhere. I pretty much want to make one point - and it centres around this “making sacrifices for PC players”. I’m sorry to say this, but I see no direct result of these sacrifices in game. More accurately, I see no positive outcome that could be construed as beneficial for PC players, compared to the general handicapping you’ve imposed with the multi-platform approach.

Disclaimers: I know SD is a business. I know the console market is the largest. I know making games is difficult.

Bluntly put - you may as well have not bothered making the PC version. You tried to gloss over the almost non-existent concurrent player base by saying “it’s a fraction of the install base”. Come on Rahdo, this isn’t Marketing Hour - they bought the game, yes. They aren’t playing it any more. What’s more, they often can’t easily return it either, so they’re stuck with it. If someone walks out of your shop with your new product, and never uses it because it doesn’t meet expectations, they are not a “happy customer” - they are simply a customer. A 97% (+) drop in active players since release says one thing, and we can all see it - the PC player base does not like Brink, and it’s pretty much universal.

So, this really confuses me. You mention these “sacrifices”, and you’re trying to paint a picture of meetings where someone suggest cutting a feature, and another protests on the behalf of the PC player base. The feature is saved, and you’re doing your bit for the PC players. Except you aren’t - because your core game, due to all the cross-platform rubbish that DID make it in, does NOT appeal to PC players. You can claim to doing this, that, and the other in the name of your loyal PC fanbase - but since the core game is so far off expectations, you have effectively done nothing for PC players. In fact, you’ve gone the other way, and everyone knows it - you’ve made a console-focused game to pay the bills, and that’s what you should have stuck to. PC players have waited patiently for Brink, and have been massively disappointed by what they received. You should have made a console ONLY game from the beginning. Instead, you somehow managed to sell 70K or whatever copies on the premise that you “were thinking of PC players during development”. Sorry, but this doesn’t wash in the slightest. If you had any kind of affection towards the PC player base, you would have cancelled the PC version and explained why, early on.

I’m sorry Rahdo - you put a lot of time into your replies here, and I do respect you highly for that. However, in amongst your somewhat honest and “human” posts, you cannot avoid taking the typically diplomatic line. I can’t really fault you for that, but to be honest it’s too late to be trying to win back the PC player base with such neutral talk - you made a very much console-focused game, and there’s really no reason to believe you’ll do otherwise next time. Just do us one favour - if you decide to make Brink 2, consider this very early in the process. Ignore the PC version completely, and make the game console only. Because honestly - as much as I love SD’s previous work, I’m not into buying PC games simply to pay someone’s bills, and put the game to one side because it’s just “the best you could do”. This decision should be easy one for you to make - because you have already passed the point where you stopped making games for the PC player base. You’ve made a bigger, more heavily publicised game - tailored for one player base and sold to two. This is where the PC player base stops talking about what SD did for them, and it disappears into Wiki entries, old forum posts and nostalgia. And that’s a shame.

(Seiniyta) #245

To an extent I agree, I would have delayed the game for pc and made sure the console versions were really good and then port it to pc and make it more a pc game as well :slight_smile:

(sereNADE) #246

SMART seems too negatively stressed here. It’s not so bad but certainly not the level of the quake-live “placement test”. I think the game has set it’s own system back by really low jump height, invisible walls applied to each jump (bunnyhopfriction cvar), and a “locked path” once a direction is chosen after a jump (you can’t zig zag jumps or strafe jump). If motion wasn’t so artificially hampered (I think this might be a console concession, just the more I think about it) and maybe we had some maps that took a different spacial approach I think SMART could have proven itself as a worthy additional tool to the established moveset most have used for years now. Though, I do side with some of the dissatisfied players with it’s level of usefulness as, I forgot to mention earlier, the sharing of the sprint bind is one of the single most infuriating hurdles (get it?) with the set-up. For everything that goes right with it I have to endure moments with what goes wrong, sometimes costing me a life. I’m trying to discipline my key press but then I begin asking myself if it’s any fun because I do not have a sense of free movement but instead I am a slave to the chore of it (oh lord, listen to me sounding ridiculous). But yeah, a good thing that screwed itself imo, THAT CAN STILL BE CHANGED/FIXED and I even tried to fiddle around with the available cvars but that had sideways results and no real forward improvement.

edit: I see in the beginning I said it’s not so bad yet then go on to make it sound much worse… guess some self honesty manifesting itself after the fact optimism.

(tokamak) #247

–
Quick note: I feel a false dichotomy is being raised here. It’s not low damage OR COD mechanics. I have yet to see someone ask for COD damage on this forum. ETQW holds the middle ground between COD and Brink, and there’s a reason it’s still being played despite it’s relative obscurity at launch (compare to the big guns out there).

Really, SD knows what works, give Brink the ETQW combat and it becomes much more appealing to play.

@Dazman76 I agree with every word. By no means the do I like to have a go at Rahdo, but at the same time you voiced exactly the disappointment with this game. At first I thought I may had inflated expectations, but that’s not the case either, all I wanted was a worthy QW successor.

I’m sorry Rahdo - you put a lot of time into your replies here, and I do respect you highly for that. However, in amongst your somewhat honest and “human” posts, you cannot avoid taking the typically diplomatic line. I can’t really fault you for that, but to be honest it’s too late to be trying to win back the PC player base with such neutral talk - you made a very much console-focused game, and there’s really no reason to believe you’ll do otherwise next time. Just do us one favour - if you decide to make Brink 2, consider this very early in the process. Ignore the PC version completely, and make the game console only.

That’s exactly my sentiment. I’d sincerely respect it if the PC crowd would be disregarded altogether. I’d even buy my house-mate a copy for his birthday and wish you all the best.

(jazevec) #248

I think it would be better to never release a PC version of Brink. PC players would still be annoyed, but not as much as this. Some would hope that SD eventually release a PC game. After Brink, many people will no longer want a PC game from SD. They’ve proven they’re capable of deceptive marketing, “PC stats coming soon”. Lack of Quake1-era features (weapon banks, binds, configuration, demo recording), I’m not even talking about the pace of the game, skill cap - is this the future ?

(.Chris.) #249

Yet they managed to make ET and ET:QW…

One bad apple out of 3 isn’t exactly the be all and end all of SD.

(Exedore) #250

In summation: hindsight is a harsh mistress.

About the /kill, you can necro a thread where I encouraged discussion about this, and I can comment further there.

/threadtenfootpole -on

(sereNADE) #251

The notion SD actively tried to deceive is off the mark. Considering where they were coming from, BRINK is a whole new level of scope… and, based on the product I played, I don’t think they were prepared for the balancing act of concessions and feature cutting to get a game as identical as possible across 3 platforms that are not identical. That impression is also reinforced here by rahdo’s own posts where he details a few things being cut and it was settled by the case of unavailable manpower or some other resource. I could easily say they made some mistakes and that comes with learning but I won’t paint them as liars. I wouldn’t begin to hinge all my hopes on a single developer anyway and not to mention the original intent of the first post was just a wondering of what happened in the dev cycle that saw things removed. Was never about nasty SD fooling us into buying their ***** console port. I kinda feel the same heart-break intimated between the lines the SD team might have felt.

(sereNADE) #252

The notion SD actively tried to deceive is off the mark. Considering where they were coming from, BRINK is a whole new level of scope… And, based on the product I played, I don’t think they were prepared for the balancing act of concessions and feature cutting to get a game as identical as possible across 3 platforms that are not identical. That impression is also reinforced here by rahdo’s own posts where he details a few things being cut and it was settled by the case of unavailable manpower or some other resource. I could easily say they made some mistakes and that comes with learning but I won’t paint them as liars. I wouldn’t begin to hinge all my hopes on a single developer anyway and not to mention the original intent of the first post was just a wondering of what happened in the dev cycle that saw things removed. Was never about nasty SD fooling us into buying their ***** console port. I kinda feel the same heart-break intimated between the lines the SD team might have felt.

(sereNADE) #253

Also, I would like to point out that the next generation of consoles NEED kbm support for games. Would be the the single biggest blunder to leave that out. Motion control is a step up from the pad (imo, metroid prime 3 was an eye opener) but still nowhere near equal to kbm. There has to be a solution and it could potentially fix future gui crisis.

(tokamak) #254

Honestly. The community gave you all the foresight you needed. Unless of course, you meant that in hindsight the feedback could have been taken more seriously.

The interests of the community have been favoured for the imagined interests of an imagined crowd of imagined players. And really, not as many people would have been disappointed if this mass of potential players was actually real.

It’s really difficult to grasp where SD got such confidence from. It’s can’t have been a decision taken lightly. Not with years of work, millions of pounds and the company’s name at stake.

(sereNADE) #255

[QUOTE=tokamak;357856]Honestly. The community gave you all the foresight you needed. Unless of course, you meant that in hindsight the feedback could have been taken more seriously.

The interests of the community have been favoured for the imagined interests of an imagined crowd of imagined players. And really, not as many people would have been disappointed if this mass of potential players was actually real.

It’s really difficult to grasp where SD got such confidence from. It’s can’t have been a decision taken lightly. Not with years of work, millions of pounds and the company’s name at stake.[/QUOTE]

It seems to me at an earlier point the game was going in the direction pointed at by community foresight. They admitted to suffering ui shortcomings but other things appeared to be changed or cut after the fact. With weapon spread, I am not sure but some people say they appeared to handle much differently in early gameplay videos (they appeared accurate). So it’s not to say community feedback fell on deaf ears but something almost as bad took place later and who is to blame is beyond me but it most definitely stems from making one game for 3 platforms with 2 distinct realms of expectations and a limited means to please even 1. That’s a whole different discussion but I think some of the posts here by rahdo clear up the OP, and his optimistic attitude is understandable.

(dazman76) #256

Foresight didn’t tell you that SD’s following of PC players would be upset by console-centric “crippling”? Where HAVE you been for the past 10+ years? I know that the multi-platform thing was an attempt to grow the team and tackle the mainstream - unfortunately you’ve done that at the expense of the support from the PC player base. You know, those people who happily paid your bills the last time, and then waited eagerly for your next game - the game that was apparently still catering for both the PC pub and comp. crowds, according to various articles and posts. If there’s one thing the fans didn’t know for sure, it was that this need to be on the console platforms would ruin the game to the extent that it has. I certainly didn’t have the foresight to see that you’d go and stick several abilities on the same bind with no option to change it - just because you had to on another platform. I also don’t buy the fact that this would have been a “large” change on the PC side - you’re already doing it with other binds, including ones that interact with SMART, like jump and crouch. I’m no John Carmack, but if this change is so huge and unthinkable in technical terms, you appear to be “doing it wrong”. This one change would have improved opinions by some way, and I’d wager your chances of ever “selling” this first DLC would actually be above zero. Certainly not the only change required, but a good start.

Although I’m sure some SD die-hards will buy your next title, I’m also sure you’ve lost a huge amount of your PC support and respect in that market. I was absolutely hungry to play Brink, and after this I’ll be treating your next title with absolute indifference. Congratulations on your transition to a console-focused developer. I hope the new-found earnings make up for the fact that 97% of your previous fanbase no longer care, and that you’re now known as yet another console developer who dumped a pointless port on the PC community. You certainly haven’t helped to dispel the “PC gaming is dying” fallacy.

Unsurprised and yet disappointed in equal measure.

(Verticae) #257

As much as I tried, I can’t find one. It’d be just as easy to simply post in here, now, wouldn’t it?

(sereNADE) #258

But the level of those concerns might be drowned out by need to express anger at SD for crippling BRINK to console centric gameplay. I really would love to see this in comic strip form.

(Seiniyta) #259

I think it is for the best if it get’s a seperate thread, later on when this thread falls down and someone want to look for it, they might skip over this thread.

I have to admit though, this thread has been the greatest distraction from waiting for the dlc so far :smiley:

Edit: On the matter or not trusting SD anymore, as Chris said, SD made two excellent games already, they made one game which clearly some grave mistakes happened during developement. It’s however an excellent learning experience for Splash Damage and I hope sincerely they’ll take this luggage with for their next budget. I hope Brink (and Rahdo seems to imply that) sold well enough to greenlit a sequel or a game in the same vein gameplay wise. Though for now, We’re kinda stuck now with brink if you don’t want to play W:ET or QW, so we might as well enjoy it :slight_smile:

(Kendle) #260

[QUOTE=.Chris.;357849]Yet they managed to make ET and ET:QW…

One bad apple out of 3 isn’t exactly the be all and end all of SD.[/QUOTE]

I meant to mention this earlier, as a lot of people seem to be holding up SD’s past achievements as something they should have aspired to with Brink, but let’s add a bit of realism here …

In making ET SD took RTCW, added some stuff that made it worse, and made 6 maps, 5 of which were instantly consigned to the trash can by the comp community. If it were not for ETPro (and later game altering mods) I doubt anyone here apart from a few oldies like me would even remember the game had ever existed.

With ET:QW SD took what they did wrong with ET and expanded upon it, taking the game down a road most of the ET playerbase were no longer travelling (which is partly the reason way more people are still playing ET compared to ET:QW).

I don’t mean this in a derogatory sense, but simply to add some realism to the debate. SD have yet to make a successful PC game all by themselves, so complimenting them on past glories as a pre-cursor to criticising Brink is to give credit where credit is not due. Of all the “good stuff” that most of us would’ve liked to have seen in Brink SD were responsible for pretty much none of it (ET:QW server browser being the exception).

Brink was their chance to show they actually could make a good objective team game that appealed to the masses. No-one in their right mind could claim they succeeded. 99% of the game’s initial playerbase deserting in less than 2 months tells a story that can’t be misunderstood.

But … the situation is, amazingly, recoverable IMO.

Brink is a “nearly” game.

The movement is nearly there, but we need an optional separate sprint key to allow those of us annoyed by the game controlling our movement to not allow it to do so.

The player interaction is nearly there (droppable syringes are a very “good thing” IMO) but we need separate keys for separate actions.

The gun play is nearly there (it’s low damage, which is good for this type of game and it’s major audience) but the spread is killing the enjoyment and replayability for many people. Just reduce the spread and balance the guns using the many other attributes at your disposal (recoil, damage, falloff etc.)

The maps are nearly there, but spoilt by the defense bias. Increase the defense spawn time, maybe move defenders spawn areas on a few maps (like CC) so as to adhere to the spawn rule that’s stood ET in good stead.

It’s not like Brink is complete and utter trash. It’s actually very enjoyable to play, for a while. It actually does look fairly good if you have a rig capable of running it with all the goodies turned on. There really is a playerbase out there just dying to get their hands on a new objective game.

If you can “make it so” SD I suspect a great many people will soon forgive you for not having made it so in the first place. Gamers are a fickle bunch, they’ll fall in love with you as quickly as out, if you give them the chance. :smiley: