They are beta testing.

(wolfnemesis75) #21

Hey, miracles happen every day! We are one step closer to Founders Tower!

(Thundermuffin) #22

No, just no. This isn’t a football game where the field is laid out the same way for every stadium. It works in football, because the only thing that really differs is the turf and if the field is inside, outside, or has a retractable roof. Now most stadiums use the same turf so that isn’t even a big deal and lots of stadiums/teams are going for retractable roofs. (note: talking about American football)

In FPS gaming, knowing the map is crucial. Giving the 2 teams a map they’ve never played before doesn’t show true team coordination, because how will a team coordinate on a map they don’t know? The only way to coordinate would be to bum rush the objective with everyone going through 1 door. BRINK’s minimap doesn’t show corridors or rooms, so you wouldn’t be able to try to even plan anything out in your spawn or on the fly.

QuakeCon is suppose to be a prestigious NA LAN. Showing a final game with 2 teams running around like chickens with their heads cut off not only makes QuakeCon look bad, but it will make SD and BRINK look even worse than they do now to the competitive community.

(wolfnemesis75) #23

What I am saying is literally a scenario where both teams do not know the playing field because its neutral and must react. Best and more coordinated team would win the scenario and quickly formulate a plan. Using the objective wheel to plot a course to the main objective and work together to form a defense or attack plan. The football was just a reference to the aspect of a neutral playing field. Think of it as The X-men Danger Room. You must work together to win. Or a real tactical swat drill. You are thrown in to a battle where you must quickly come up with an effective strategy on the fly.

(SebaSOFT) #24

To the OP: Why do you assume that each new map will take two or three days? It could be weeks from now.
There can be bugs comming out of testing and those have to be squashed or worked around. So development is still necessary and no code is fixed just yet.

(wolfnemesis75) #25

[QUOTE=SebaSOFT;361807]To the OP: Why do you assume that each new map will take two or three days? It could be weeks from now.
There can be bugs comming out of testing and those have to be squashed or worked around. So development is still necessary and no code is fixed just yet.[/QUOTE]

I think he is just speculating. You are correct sir. Could also be that they are doing one final quick walkthrough before releasing the DLC in…5…4…3…2…1… :slight_smile:

(Thundermuffin) #26

The only way to have a neutral map like I think you’re saying is to have dual objectives or a “5CP push” map a la cp_badlands of TF2, neither of which BRINK will have. Otherwise, there is no way to have a neutral map without totally screwing up the idea of a LAN.

Have you ever watched any type of competitive gaming (preferably finals) besides BRINK? The whole point is to have the teams play a map both teams know extremely well so it’s all down to aiming, teamplay, and their best strats they have practiced and learned to execute flawlessly; it is not suppose to be throw 2 teams into a random map no one has ever seen before with no minimap of it and expect the best team to always win. The best team could potentially lose because the map is confusing and no one knows where to go, it’s defensive sided and no can set a time (that could never happen in BRINK hahah) without scrimming the map for weeks, or you get spawn camped if you don’t plant in 30 seconds.

Do you really want a game where there’s prizes at stake to be decided by really essentially a coin flip?

The objective wheel is useless for competitive teams. You do realize that, right? It takes up so much of your screen with this horrendous outlining that can screw up your aim, because you already have enough trouble telling who’s a teammate and who’s an enemy because of the lack of silhouettes and contrasting team colors.

(BiigDaddyDellta) #27

Cause that’s exactly what I was doing? Assuming, that’s WAS the point man.

(wolfnemesis75) #28

[QUOTE=Thundermuffin;361810]The only way to have a neutral map like I think you’re saying is to have dual objectives or a “5CP push” map a la cp_badlands of TF2, neither of which BRINK will have. Otherwise, there is no way to have a neutral map without totally screwing up the idea of a LAN.

Have you ever watched any type of competitive gaming (preferably finals) besides BRINK? The whole point is to have the teams play a map both teams know extremely well so it’s all down to aiming, teamplay, and their best strats they have practiced and learned to execute flawlessly; it is not suppose to be throw 2 teams into a random map no one has ever seen before with no minimap of it and expect the best team to always win. The best team could potentially lose because the map is confusing and no one knows where to go, it’s defensive sided and no can set a time (that could never happen in BRINK hahah) without scrimming the map for weeks, or you get spawn camped if you don’t plant in 30 seconds.

Do you really want a game where there’s prizes at stake to be decided by really essentially a coin flip?

The objective wheel is useless for competitive teams. You do realize that, right? It takes up so much of your screen with this horrendous outlining that can screw up your aim, because you already have enough trouble telling who’s a teammate and who’s an enemy because of the lack of silhouettes and contrasting team colors.[/QUOTE]
What if those who signed up for the competition already have access to that map, Labs? And are not allowed to divulge that information as part of the competition rules. You never know, right? Besides that, we can agree to disagree on Neutral battles. :slight_smile:
But, at least there’s hope that the map will be out soon. Yay!

(BiigDaddyDellta) #29

I think they’re testing for online capability and LAG and so forth. but they comp guys could have it I suppose. but once again the Resistance is winning all the time. the resistance seems to win every week.

(Smokeskin) #30

The time it takes you to figure out good strats and spots for a map has a HUGE random component, no matter how good you are. Bad idea imo.

(Smokeskin) #31

If people are playing it, it could also be reviewers getting access to write reviews so they can be ready for the release date.

(wolfnemesis75) #32

You have to hand it to the underdogs. They sure put up a good fight. The Founders should’ve never allowed them to hang around so long obviously. Now they have a real problem on their hands. :slight_smile:

(wolfnemesis75) #33

Let’s hope not! lol. Even on easy, the bots are good enough to Spawn Trap reviewers. :tongue:

(BROTOX) #34

If they are beta testing, I wonder how long it will take? Then I guess it has to be re-submitted for approval… unless other issues pop up I’m also seeing this finally being ready by mid August. It’s a shame it took them this long but at least now we know what to expect as far as timeframes for any future DLC.

(ZionDelhamorte) #35

If they make any Bro…Highly unlikely after all this…

(Thundermuffin) #36

[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;361813]What if those who signed up for the competition already have access to that map, Labs? And are not allowed to divulge that information as part of the competition rules. You never know, right? Besides that, we can agree to disagree on Neutral battles. :slight_smile:
But, at least there’s hope that the map will be out soon. Yay![/QUOTE]

Considering most of them aren’t even online scrimming anymore, I highly doubt anyone has the map. Plus if they had it, they’d show up on Steam friends as playing on mp/labs and no one has even logged into BRINK on my list for a long, long time even though lots of them have been playing ET:QW.

I’m not even hoping for the maps at all. I’m just hoping that id will see how frustrated all of us are with this game, see how many people want to actually play this style of game on the PC and release a RtCW Live or W:ET Live.

(BROTOX) #37

Yeah, I can’t see anyone willing to shill out money to these guys after what they put us through. It’s a shame because there is alot of potential real estate on the arc that could be used for future DLC, not to mention the plot extension. Reminds me of how GearBox never quite made it to Sanctuary in Borderlands. I wouldn’t mind seeing a sequel to Borderlands come to think of it. But anyway, if SD do somehow manage to turn all this negative momentum around and scrounge up a little income off procrastinators with the DLC then maybe we might see more DLC in the future. But if they charge for it then it should just be maps and skins and not a level cap raise.

(ZionDelhamorte) #38

I hear you…Most people i normally can convince to get a game wont even second guess brink after the release and then all the bad media that followed…

(BiigDaddyDellta) #39

Gearbox wanted to finish Duke Nukem (god knows why?) before thinking about a Borderlands sequel, and now they may be doing just that.

On topic: I would pay for this DLC, I would pay for more DLC I just want them to make it. More maps would be great and extend the playability of this game immensly.

(wolfnemesis75) #40

I would pay for more maps too. Four more maps in addition to AOC would give me 14 maps to play. A lot better than 8. :slight_smile: