Single Player vs. Online

(H0RSE) #41

You can set their difficulty. Would be cool if their skill automatically adjusted to the skill of the player(s).

(beute) #42

it’s an online game…

the singleplayer will be exactly like the multiplayer… with bots.
so I see no reason to play the single player campaign.

it’s like playing single player in l4d… no one will chose bots over real players imho.

(Ix LP xI) #43

[QUOTE=beute;261036]it’s an online game…

the singleplayer will be exactly like the multiplayer… with bots.
so I see no reason to play the single player campaign.

it’s like playing single player in l4d… no one will chose bots over real players imho.[/QUOTE]

It depends if you prefer playing with/against AI (artificial intelligence) or with/against RS (real stupidity). I’ll probably play both.

(Apoc) #44

Always multiplayer…i pretty much just ignore the single player completely, cant stand fighting bots, doesnt mean anything and i get bored fast.

(BrigandSk(A)) #45

Why not try a different experience?

Start the campaign alone, fight bots while players start jumping in. You probably won’t even notice the bots or even better… playing against bot while having the chance of confronting a human player will keep you in your toes.

Starting in single player while leaving it open for others to join, will actually add an element of surprise, and that’s good for players who are tired of the routine.

As long as bots are not like ‘mind jack’

(Cankor) #46

[QUOTE=3Suns;261026]One thing about the “SP/Co-op” will be that it will be a great place to work through strats with a clan/community.

Are the bots going to be scalable in skill level?[/QUOTE]

You just password protect your server. If your idea is practicing a strat vs bots, only if you are short of real people :slight_smile: Even then you’d do it on a “regular” server.

(trigg3r) #47

single player first, multiplayer later

(Herandar) #48

Well, they will have access to any ability that you have, so they will scale that way.

I don’t think they should give selectable difficulty to bots, since they want the diffference between SP and MP to be negligible. Well, at least, there shouldn’t be easy/meat level AI. If you want to crank up the AI for a challenge, I’m all for that option.

(Seyu) #49

I think it’s great to have integrated single and multipllayer, now I wouldn’t have to worry about my moody internet connection leaving me out of the action.

(Cankor) #50

[QUOTE=Herandar;261108]Well, they will have access to any ability that you have, so they will scale that way.

I don’t think they should give selectable difficulty to bots, since they want the diffference between SP and MP to be negligible. Well, at least, there shouldn’t be easy/meat level AI. If you want to crank up the AI for a challenge, I’m all for that option.[/QUOTE]

Why not? If you totally suck and medium skill bots take you out more than 1/2 the time, you should have the option to be able to turn them down. Then later on, when you are a little better, you can make it more challenging for yourself.

I’d be really surprised if they weren’t customizable, even if it’s just in the amount of health they have.

(Herandar) #51

Because they don’t want you to know that you are playing against bots. The AI is supposed to be comparable to human players (although, to be honest, lots of game developers have proclaimed this and failed. AI is hard!) If you are playing a drop-in SP/MP game, there should not be a vast difference between the AI players and human competition.

Easy bots will only encourage the player to never venture online. Though I’m not sure that is really a problem, now that I think about it…

(DarkangelUK) #52

I’m wondering if Brink will parry what Blops did and use the names from your Steam friends list to populate the bots names, or just have them randomly named.

(madoule) #53

i prefer when you can name’em like you want. BF2 /CSS an such…

(light_sh4v0r) #54

I’ll prolly just do MP and the challenges. No point in doing SP campaign that I can see.

(BioSnark) #55

I prefer nameless bots. Otherwise they just point out that they’re fillers and not real people in a mp game.

real competition and cooperation…

(Ix LP xI) #56

[QUOTE=BioSnark;261392]I prefer nameless bots. Otherwise they just point out that they’re fillers and not real people in a mp game.

real competition and cooperation…[/QUOTE]

are you on PC?

(beute) #57

splash damage/bethesda should have marketed it as an multiplayer FPS with integrated story.
and not this whole “blurring the lines” stuff.

Im afraid alot of people (including reviewers, especially console centric ones) will be greatly dissappointed with the game as soon as they find out that the “single player” mode is just multiplayer with bots.

I dont know why anyone would enjoy the SP more than the online in brink,
it’s like L4D… there is no difference between online and offline, except for the fact that playing with real humans is more enjoyable (for most people) than playing with bots…

they should really point that out, before thy piss alot of reviewers off…

(Ix LP xI) #58

Or the opposite: multiplayer is like single player but with real human players for allies/enemies.

sounds a lot better that way!

(DoHo) #59

BRINK is a multiplayer game and I don’t believe that “playing with bots” makes it a “single player” game in the traditional sense. The format reminds me of Conker’s Bad Fur Day/Live and Reloaded where you could play against bots, but it was just a multiplayer game with bots with cutscenes at the start and end of maps.

(beute) #60

[QUOTE=Ix LP xI;261517]Or the opposite: multiplayer is like single player but with real human players for allies/enemies.

sounds a lot better that way![/QUOTE]

Yes, I dont actually care about the singplayer/co-op stuff…

it’s just that I think alot of reviewers/customers will mistake this game for a singleplayer game with attached multiplayer.

But in reality it’s more a multiplayer game with attached single player elements, like cutscenes.
there are alot of people on consoles that just dont expect a full priced retail game to be multiplayer only game.
DICE knows this, hence why they’ve started to create single player campaigns for their battlefield series, even for Battlefield3.

I mean Paul Wedgewood constantly remarks that you can play “singplayer, co-op or full competitive multiplayer”
MANY people will misunderstand that and assume that all the 3 modes will offer a completely different expierience, like it is in the CoD games.
when activision talks about SP,Co-op and MP, they are talking about the singleplayer campaign, the zombie/spec ops modus and the standard perk driven multiplayer.
All fundamently different gaming modes.

This wont end well, there will be alot bad publicity coming from reviewers and other gamers, especially console focussed people.
they’re not used to that kind of games.