Maybe you should elaborate on your ‘system’ then because as for now you’ve just suggested something that magically drops in powerups whenever people need it.
It’s like suggesting to have a combustion-fairy under the hood of your car because a real engine is too complex too work.
the xp system we have in etqw does not make the game better even worse.
Almost all player dont wanna care about balance and fair matches, only about easy xp.
I played so many stacked games on public I cant count. it sucks!
Its time to reconsider this system and maybe its time to drop it.
even this unlockstuff brings no better matches. only unbalance.
Take a look to the reallife games, soccer for example.
It´s like Frank Ribéry starts with shitty shoes (i mean really shitty shoes) and later in the
match he gets his shoes upgraded because he played good and now he can shot better. but before he gets his
“shoegrade” he always gets ownt by a soccer newbie because he already have the better shoes. try to imagine this.
and yes, you are right thats total bullshit.
brink is also game where two teams battle for win. and all players should have the same
conditions to get fair and balanced matches.
maybe medals & trophies should be enough to motivate players to play team orientated.
[quote=abnorm;214509]the xp system we have in etqw does not make the game better even worse.
Almost all player dont wanna care about balance and fair matches, only about easy xp.
I played so many stacked games on public I cant count. it sucks!
Its time to reconsider this system and maybe its time to drop it.
even this unlockstuff brings no better matches. only unbalance.
Take a look to the reallife games, soccer for example.
It´s like Frank Ribéry starts with shitty shoes (i mean really shitty shoes) and later in the
match he gets his shoes upgraded because he played good and now he can shot better. but before he gets his
“shoegrade” he always gets ownt by a soccer newbie because he already have the better shoes. try to imagine this.
and yes, you are right thats total bullshit.
brink is also game where two teams battle for win. and all players should have the same
conditions to get fair and balanced matches.
maybe medals & trophies should be enough to motivate players to play team orientated.[/quote]
lol, I don’t know, but for those who actually played RTCW back in the day, was there stacking, or stuff like that? Because RTCW, instead of XP, has a scoring system, where you get points for completing objectives, fragging enemies, and lose points for dying. Unlike XP, points don’t count for anything, just to show how well you did in the match.
That is how I treat the XP in ET and ETQW, and that is how I treat the Gold amount in Wolfenstein, as a score, and not money to buy stuff, except I lied about wolfenstein, I only play that to get trophies in the PS3 version. I also use XP to guage how good people are during that single match, but given the statpadding, that isn’t a good way to know how good players are.
The thing is that if you hold down tab in RTCW MP, you see your name, your class, your ping, and how many points you have. In ET, it is the same thing, except Points is replace by XP. I guess when you say your score is XP, or GOLD, it really adds more meaning to it, than the scoring system.
I mean, do you know any statpadders who actually try to get the highest score in any game, where the score is given by the name score, and not XP or gold?
As long as you are only gaining XP for doing something useful and not for some print out award you can pin on and show your mom, it can be helpful I suppose (though it is not that necessary). Balance is the key issue that has to be taken into consideration. Unlocking new weapons is fine by me, as long as they aren’t significantly more powerful than others. I don’t think XP is connected with stacking too much (that’s mostly due to stats), but rather making people do things that are usually completely worthless. A non-exploitable XP system that keeps things balanced is a fine thought indeed, but does it exist? Let’s hope they got it right.
[quote=tokamak;214468]Maybe you should elaborate on your ‘system’ then because as for now you’ve just suggested something that magically drops in powerups whenever people need it.
It’s like suggesting to have a combustion-fairy under the hood of your car because a real engine is too complex too work.[/quote]
No you took a simple concept, attached multiple things you hated, that were never even suggested and then continued to flush the result into this thread.
Don’t whine about getting the wrong end of the stick when you’re the one turning it around.
[QUOTE=darthmob;214232]Unlocks can be a good thing and I do hope it will be done right in Brink.
Things to do wrong (apply to Battlefield or Call of Duty):
In Cod 4, the two best weapons (m16 and Mp5) were unlocked at level 1, same as stopping power.
The only two perks you didn’t get at level one were bandolier (or frag times three if you were going to be one of those cheap spam naders) and dead silence.
Cod 5 was the same, I just didn’t like the game dynamic and the best sniper was unlocked last.
MW2, I totally agree (models, ak, raffica, rpg, etc, etc) The guns in MW2 were meant to be balanced, which is why that happened to begin with. Usually the best idea is to give out the better guns at the beginning and make the rest (ie p90) for later, since they are technically worse but easier for players to use.
[QUOTE=abnorm;214509]all players should have the same
conditions to get fair and balanced matches. [/QUOTE]
I love the shoe analogy, but I am pretty sure as long as the balancing crew (and beta?) does its job this won’t be a problem. Cod 4 gave out the two best weapons on the first level in preset classes and the M40A3 or w/e and create-a-class came by about level five. I think this is how they are planning on doing it. They said customizable abilities/ body types etc are unlocked later: all putting it off does is gives you an idea of what you want to do before you do it. Body type may only take a level or two, the rest is basically the player’s choice, whether he wants to specialize in medic, soldier, etc. The game should make this dynamic interesting, as long as one ability isn’t a far off unlock (ie putting stopping power level 70 in MW2, because then very few ppl would prestige).
[QUOTE=Lequis;214567]In Cod 4, the two best weapons (m16 and Mp5) were unlocked at level 1, same as stopping power.
Cod 5 was the same, I just didn’t like the game dynamic and the best sniper was unlocked last.[/QUOTE]That’s interesting; it may be a reason why MW wasn’t as frustrating to play as WaW (even though I liked WaW more). The PPSh, STG-44 and Type 100 in CoD5 were way too powerful and unlocked late. But then I only played hardcore mode and the wiki states balance was different there.
[QUOTE=Lequis;214567]In Cod 4, the two best weapons (m16 and Mp5) were unlocked at level 1, same as stopping power.
[/QUOTE]
I’m feeling too pedantic tonight to let this go. MP5 was the best equal SMG along with AK74, but M16 was only the best AR in the XBOX version. You were more likely to see the AK47 and M4 among good PC players.
I do hope that they stay away from the one ‘medicore’ gun balanced for everything. In Raven Shield it was the G36K, everyone was running around with it. Bleh. At least have two ‘average’ guns slightly specialised (like lacerator and assault rifle’ so nobody can ever a true all-rounder.
Randomly or semi-randomly spawning powerups in an objective based teamplaye fps is a TERRIBLE idea. Where is the satisfaction of owning the opponent, if you know you were only able to do it due to the ‘powerup x’? Where is the incentive to own the hell out of somebody, only to see the game help them?
Game should be as fair as possible. The result should be coming down only to the performance of the players themselves. Naturally, in an objective based gameplay offense should be slightly favored, to support intense stopwatch games.
For my part at least I wasn’t suggesting anything random. Only that powerups could be triggered based on an AI decision similar to L4D or if you think that too random then a fixed team based XP or objective. The goal being that players would spend less time trying to earn an upgrade at a fixed XP and more time playing towards their teams success.
The current system heavily relies upon the XP system being flawless in that every action that earns XP towards a powerup also contributes to the team’s success.
sometimes yes, i have a funny mental image that german servers were worse in that regard, probably not true though hehe. but it was rare in the finnish servers i played in, and nonexistent in the server i played in after the finnish servers started emptying called jolt3, it had autoshuffle after every round. the problem with autoshuffle is when there are few people want to play on the same team, but the playerbase on jolt3 was pretty much static since you had to wait like an hour in queue most of the time to get in, so that wasn’t really an issue there.
So other than missing the point and being intentionally antagonizing you’re contributing pretty much nothing to this thread? Good work. :rolleyes:
pretty much. to be a bit more specific, there are some upgrades and abilites and stuff that do make you more powerful, BUT, those are all the things you can get very quickly. the stuff that you get later in the curve are about new abilities that don’t make you more powerful, but give you more options.
as an example, early in the game, you can get the ability to literally make your life meter a tiny bit longer. everyone can earn this very fast, within the first hour play. so it’s not unbalancing, since everyone has the option to have it almost right from the start. alternately, an ability you might earn later in the game would be (trying to think of abilities that have been announced here… umm…) soldiers shield ability (you could see it referenced in the released gameplay videos). this doesn’t make you more powerful, but does give you additional things you can do.
that’s the philosophy anyway.
to the original question of why we’re doing it? if i’m honest, it’s because we want to sell more copies of the game. players these days like this kind of positive feedback loop of “the more time i give to the game, the more the game will give back to me”. but there’s another very important reason as well: there’s so much content, so many abilities in brink, that if we just made everything available right from the get go, players would be completely overwhelmed with choice and the game would suffer. by ensuring a system where new functions get introduced slowly over time, the game experience as a whole is better becuase you can master things, and then get new things to master. kind of the same as TF2 constantly over the years adding more and more features to the game. except we’re building that into what’s in the box 
