Guys, more guns are pointless if they are nearly the same (Brink, and its peers). Compare with any Quake game where you have up to ten guns but each is used differently (which can also mean: not at all). It’s not fun to choose between guns with small differences. Guns in RTCW and W:ET are substantially different from each other.
Not all change is progress. People in western civilization have this childish tendency to view history as progress. Did you know the Chinese were fully capable of reaching America 800 years before Columbus ? They had the technology ! They were routinely trading with east coast of Africa. They closed themselves to the world because the faction of beaurocrats won. Beaurocrats were envious, because traders/explorers were getting all the fame.
Games released later would be invariably better if people were able to perfectly learn from their mistakes and from the past. But they can’t. RTCW and W:ET were more primitive visually, but it’s game design that matters. Fast-paced FPS games are simply not made anymore, or made poorly. You can’t just play DooM, Quake or RTCW and make a better game. You have to understand what made it good, what was a bad idea and can be improved, etc. This requires a lot of perception and an analytical mind. We still use scores to rate games at sites like metacritic. If later games were better, we’d just use a release date.
Also, adding something to a game doesn’t always have a positive net effect ! Quad damage and BFG exist in Quake/DooM games, but they were widely banned in multiplayer games. They completely wrapped the game around them. In Quake 2, hyperblaster, shotgun, machinegun, even handgrenades and grenade launcher were practically unused. Power armor was absent in multiplayer maps. Adrenaline, +maxHP abilities were added to W:ET and they made other classes all but obsolete. It’s the number of viable options in a game that matters, not number of of items or theoretical options.
