The reason that Brinks shooting/movement isn't like RTCW/W:ET

(coolstory) #41

[QUOTE=riptide;345154]Pretty much the steepest learning curves ever too, though I think UT has it’s place in that group. But because of that learning curve they never sold nearly as well as all this slow playing stuff we get nowadays…

I lol at the “brink/cod=fast paced” comments, frantically spraying does not = fast paced. Though I will say Brink is taking a step in the right direction with at least some way to increase movement speed or change direction quickly.[/QUOTE]

Brinks fast paced for console ****ties with their aim assist. They think cod is fast paced too lol!!!

(tokamak) #42

Slightly less cynical. If they release the SDK then it can possibly be used to rip the DLC content and distribute it through other means.

This would be far less of a problem if Brink had a difference between ranked and non-ranked play. Sure you can play ripped DLC content on custom servers but it doesn’t really ‘count’ for most people.

(its al bout security) #43

oh hey i know why it isn’t like W:ET

maybe that was what 8 years ago, and umm thats not what the point was to make a W;ET 2

i really couldn’t care less about wet anymore, got boring YEARS AGO

(Seiniyta) #44

[QUOTE=tokamak;345315]Slightly less cynical. If they release the SDK then it can possibly be used to rip the DLC content and distribute it through other means.

This would be far less of a problem if Brink had a difference between ranked and non-ranked play. Sure you can play ripped DLC content on custom servers but it doesn’t really ‘count’ for most people.[/QUOTE]

They had a good way to prevent people from accessing the stock maps in the game for the SDK, parts of the maps etc were available for references and how things were done. All the assets/models/textures were available but the maps themselves you couldn’t open. Same with W:ET until SD released the files to open them in the editor :slight_smile:
You could theoretical recreate the maps but that’s a bit silly.

edit: Besides, dlc never preventend Bethesda releasing their GECK for Fallout :slight_smile:

edit 2:

I’m not sure, sometimes i’m able to but alot of the time you just slide down. SMART can create alot of skill, but I don’t think they went far enough with how mucfh control midair you have with SMART.

(V1cK_dB) #45

So basically you have nothing to add. Not surprised.

(V1cK_dB) #46

[QUOTE=its al bout security;345320]oh hey i know why it isn’t like W:ET

maybe that was what 8 years ago, and umm thats not what the point was to make a W;ET 2

i really couldn’t care less about wet anymore, got boring YEARS AGO[/QUOTE]

I’m glad you like the game as is. You and like 400 others. Most people were looking for something else. Who do u think bought this game? People who played w:et …people who they convinced because SD made those games and people who wanted a game with good movement skill based shooting…you know Hipfire low spread strafing while shooting and class based objective gameplay.
We got the objective and class based stuff…that’s it. That is why this game has been the most returned game of the year so far. So while u may be happy…most aren’t. Have fun playing against bots in 2 months. Enjoy!

1 more thing. W:et got old for you? So what. Most oldschool players have been begging for a game like that. That’s why everyone had high hopes for brink. What planet are you from?

(kilL_888) #47

so, you havent played the light body type yet, or dont know how to play it?

(Thundermuffin) #48

[QUOTE=its al bout security;345160]still dont remember brinks title being W:ET 2, do you>

did you expect a sequel?

they had gameplay trailers, if you didnt watch them and didnt know that this was brink thats your fault.[/QUOTE]
Hey it was called Enemy Territory 3; yay for Joystiq actually making it a quote.

So really, they said it was ET3 and we pretty much got ET: CoD.

Thinking of it on second thought, this guy probably has me on his ignore list, so he’ll never see this and realize all of the people he trolled/flamed were right that they said it was an ET game and not a “new” thing.

Isn’t accurate enough, nor is it fast enough. I didn’t play W:ET until it was past its hayday, but I know in ET:QW firefights would take place with both people still having a lot of speed boost from strafe jumping and in ET:QWpro the shots were pretty accurate. Your bullets never curved like they do in BRINK.

(wolfnemesis75) #49

Play Brink. Don’t wish for it to be like <insert game here>

(nephandys) #50

[QUOTE=V1cK_dB;345066]So in another thread someone mentioned how SD didn’t create RTCW they just contributed some maps. Is this accurate? They then went on to create W:ET. The point is that if true then id software are the ones truly responsible for what made RTCW the greatest FPS of all time.

  • The shooting. Low spread, accurate, skill based.
  • The movement. Fast, smooth, strafing while shooting was critical and so were things like strafejumping.
  • The details. When you shot someone in the head…their helmet flew off! This is how you knew you got a headshot and if you had the upper hand in the fight. I mean C’MON! That is awesome. What happened to details like those? In Brink you cant even tell if you got a headshot or not until you actually get the kill and even then it’s random lmao.

Those are just some examples of what made RTCW/W:ET great. I use those games because SD used those games before Brink was released as a way to sell brink. They said they created W:ET and it’s still being played over 8 years later. 1 Billion matches played! Remember?

Then they release Brink. A game that plays NOTHING like those games. Sure it has classes and objectives. That’s about it. The shooting and movement is nothing like those games. I wondered why they would do that. Why if they already had a perfect formula in a game like W:ET would they change it up so drastically in Brink. My questions was answered in that thread. SD didn’t make RTCW. id software did. SD overestimated their objective class based gameplay. That isn’t good enough and your sales numbers show it especially your current people playing the game numbers and especially the return numbers.

So some people will say that RTCW/W:ET gameplay is oldschool. Games are more advanced today. I say BS! Most kids today have NEVER played anything like RTCW/W:ET. They have only played slow ADS low skill shooters. My theory is that if SD were to release a game closer to RTCW either through a Quakelive type situation or XBOX marketplace situation that it would be played like crazy and expose many younger players to true skill based shooting and movement. Maybe even usher in the comeback of the golden age of shooters. I can dream can’t I?

They had their chance to do this with Brink. Instead they tried to change up the formula. Specifically the shooting and movement. They failed miserably.[/QUOTE]
I was the one who posted that in the other post. I got it off the Splash Damage wiki page and some other searching around. Apparently that’s dead on as other posters have commented. Like I said in the other thread, your reasoning is pretty sound as it’s pretty much two entirely different sets of people making the respective titles.

(riptide) #51

You’re naive. We wanted Brink to be the game they TOLD us it would be. Not conform to this **** they put out.

(engiebenjy) #52

Brink is what it is. They had to make it for consoles to make money…

The End.

(V1cK_dB) #53

light bodytype has low spread? Nub.

(V1cK_dB) #54

[QUOTE=Thundermuffin;345474]Hey it was called Enemy Territory 3; yay for Joystiq actually making it a quote.

So really, they said it was ET3 and we pretty much got ET: CoD.

Thinking of it on second thought, this guy probably has me on his ignore list, so he’ll never see this and realize all of the people he trolled/flamed were right that they said it was an ET game and not a “new” thing.

Isn’t accurate enough, nor is it fast enough. I didn’t play W:ET until it was past its hayday, but I know in ET:QW firefights would take place with both people still having a lot of speed boost from strafe jumping and in ET:QWpro the shots were pretty accurate. Your bullets never curved like they do in BRINK.[/QUOTE]

Lol. Thanks for finding those quotes I was referring to. There were a couple of people on here questioning whether I did my research on the game or claiming I wanted Brink to be ET. Well…your quotes prove that it was not unreasonable to believe that Brink would play like previous ET games. It’s funny because that kid telling me that I needed to do my research on the game can take his own advice. You know who you are.

(V1cK_dB) #55

It’s difficult to explain that to people who either have low expectations or just accept things as they are without challenging the status quo. That’s their mentality. They go through life that way. I can’t even imagine that. “Oh, you sold me a lemon? I guess it is what it is”. Eeew…terrible way to live.

(Rex) #56

To sum it up: Brink is sh!t. It will never change. The next game is far away. Even this has a huge chance to fail, because SD changed their direction.

(V1cK_dB) #57

I’m really hoping that at some point a dev can get on here and explain why the shooting mechanics are so drastically different from previous ET games. Specifically W:ET since thats the game they were gloating about when they were hyping up Brink. It’s wishful thinking I know but I can hope.

I think I know the answer and it’s in my first post on this thread. They didn’t actually have much to do with the shooting mechanics in RTCW/W:ET and the worst part is that they don’t realize that is the real reason those games are still popular today. Objectives and classes just made it perfect but you can’t have objectives and classes without the shooting and movement mechanics. It DOES NOT work.

(noupperlobeman) #58

[QUOTE=V1cK_dB;345166]Of course people camped and spammed in those games. I never said the game was perfect. The difference is that in those games you could run away and come back and maybe get a lucky nade off or throw airstrikes of your own or artilleries and rush as a team to overcome that camping. Although these things could happen more often than not I played 100% fun matches with countless 1 v 1/1v2 or 3 situations PER match that were extremely intense. 1 v 1 or 1 v 2 situations in COD are from about 200 ft away and I get a double kill with one burst killing the guy behind the guy I was aiming at without even trying. That’s skill? Sure.

The pacing was much more methodical also. I played LMS quite a bit also and I never really had a problem with what you are talking about and I will take that type of spam over COD noobtube, nuclear weapon killstreak rewards, 2 mile away snipers, OHK campfest any day of the week.

In newer games the ENTIRE game is more camplike. Yes there is some running and gunning in COD but it’s NOT THE SAME. You supposedly played RTCW so I don’t know why I have to explain it to you. Maybe you weren’t good at it? Just because you played it doesn’t really mean much. I remember people complaining that it was too hard because they kept on getting owned and they didn’t even bother learning the game.[/QUOTE]

So now people have to be good at a game to be able to form an opinion that isn’t dismissed?

I’m not following any of your lines of reasoning. Your opinion is sound, and I understand what you are saying. But your logic is ridiculous.

If you have an opinion that is fantastic. Share it. But don’t present it as fact. Telling people their opinion is wrong because of X reason is foolish. “Your opinion doesn’t matter because you aren’t good at this game” is absolutely 100% the closest you can get to being retarded without actually being so.

(V1cK_dB) #59

[QUOTE=noupperlobeman;345572]So now people have to be good at a game to be able to form an opinion that isn’t dismissed?

I’m not following any of your lines of reasoning.[/QUOTE]

Don’t really want to go here but yes if you played RTCW and you weren’t good at it then you couldn’t have appreciated the details of the game that made it great.

If you are a poor player at a game then you didn’t realize that game’s full potential so yes your opinion wouldn’t be as important as someone who is actually good at the game.

You see that bad player would hopefully become a good player one day and then when he does become good at the game would understand what it took and appreciate the game more. That player would be striving every single day to be a good player learning and trying new things out. You don’t have to be “pro”…just good enough. All of the complaining about “spamming” in RTCW/W:ET kind of gives it away. Just sayin’. That’s all my personal opinion anyway.

Games these days don’t really have that to the same extent. A simple burst kills someone in 90% of the games out there. The learning curve is much shorter now.

Edit: No need for the retarded comment. Heres another example. I have a friend who plays Madden and NBA 2k11. He is absolutely TERRIBLE at it. I mean HORRIBLE at both games. He can absolutely have an opinion but anyone who plays more serious sports simulations would never take his opinion seriously. Why? Because he hasn’t even tried or practiced enough to get good at the game. He says things like, “There are too many plays”. That’s his opinion. Is he wrong? In my mind in a game like Madden…yes.

In RTCW type games I could see some people saying, “it takes too much to kill someone” “why can’t I just ADS” “this game is just spray and pray”. Those are are opinions. In an arcade skill based FPS I believe they are misinformed. It’s only spray and pray for bad players. Good players have steady aim while they move like crazy. Bad players don’t understand that simple concept because well…they aren’t good enough to do it yet.

(noupperlobeman) #60

[QUOTE=V1cK_dB;345575]Don’t really want to go here but yes if you played RTCW and you weren’t good at it then you couldn’t have appreciated the details of the game that made it great.

If you are a poor player at a game then you didn’t realize that game’s full potential so yes your opinion wouldn’t be as important as someone who is actually good at the game.

You see that bad player would hopefully become a good player one day and then when he does become good at the game would understand what it took and appreciate the game more. That player would be striving every single day to be a good player learning and trying new things out. You don’t have to be “pro”…just good enough. All of the complaining about “spamming” in RTCW/W:ET kind of gives it away. Just sayin’. That’s all my personal opinion anyway.

Games these days don’t really have that to the same extent. A simple burst kills someone in 90% of the games out there. The learning curve is much shorter now.

Edit: No need for the retarded comment. Heres another example. I have a friend who plays Madden and NBA 2k11. He is absolutely TERRIBLE at it. I mean HORRIBLE at both games. He can absolutely have an opinion but anyone who plays more serious sports simulations would never take his opinion seriously. Why? Because he hasn’t even tried or practiced enough to get good at the game. He says things like, “There are too many plays”. That’s his opinion. Is he wrong? In my mind in a game like Madden…yes.[/QUOTE]

You are so jaded man. It makes my head spin.

I’m done in this thread.