Weapon tutorial guides

(ArchdemonXIII) #81

You seem to think the comp scene is a finite resource and that if the current comp scene doesn’t embrace it, it will never have one. Look at Halo. All the old-school PC vets turned their noses up at it and called out to the mountain tops how it was dumbed down and lame. People say the same about pretty much any console shooter. Yet they still end up having comp scenes.

  1. I have not played the new patch, but I will test it once I get my new PC as I am out a gaming pc at this time. I’ve played other SD games and been a big supporter, then I bought Brink and did not like it for many of the reasons why the other millions of people that dumped it did as well. Is it wrong to give an explanation as to why so many of us had a bad taste in our mouth over Brink? Absolutely not. If I were to be critical I would ask you why you post here, since you obviously choose to ignore the heavily tested and proven facts and instead make uneducated/untrue remarks with nothing but your gut feeling and low form of experience.

Could you link this the survey that was done that shows why people left? Or is it more likely that you’re assuming that since other people didn’t like it that it must be for the same reasons you didn’t like it? For all we know bugs, or the lack of TDM could have resulted in players not liking the game. There’s no proof either way. For that matter, there may be thousands of people playing offline. Those people paid their money, and their opinion would be just as valid.

You absolutely have the right to express your opinion regarding the game. That’s kind of what the forum is for. But telling people that disagree with you that your opinion is MORE valid is an absolute crock of BS.

  1. Anyone who still plays the game must be very easily amused, and obviously does not share the same values as the majority that abandoned it. Why would I trust the word of people who liked the game in it’s original unrefined state? I was hoping at least one person who was disappointed with Brink because they were outraged that it was classified as a development of ET games had actually motivated themselves to test the patch, but I guess it’s too late for most. I doubt the patch would be enough for me too considering most of the meta game was permanently ruined, but I am just curious as to what SD actually changed after all the feedback they received.

Or maybe anyone that still plays sees a value you don’t and isn’t bitter that it’s not ET3.

Making a Brink 2 would be a massive mistake though, if it retains it’s original altercations from the older titles. I can guarantee that something that sells well and then loses nearly its entire player base is not going to produce a successful sequel. To be perfectly honest it’s either going to have to be a completely mainstream game or go back to its roots, because the current population that supports Brink would put a developer on the streets.

Yea look at the street fighter series. Since street fighter wasn’t all that great absolutely no one bothered to play street fighter 2… Oh wait. That sequel to a largely ignored game pretty much defined a genre.

By the time Brink 2 comes out, in most people’s minds it’s going to be “oh I heard of that game” and as long as it looks like something they want to play, they’ll buy it. As the saying goes, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

(Fetter) #82

Perhaps the game was less complex in “competitive” play because of all the abilities/dynamics that were unnecessarily restricted?

The “comp scene” had already failed to develop by the time the DLC and update came out, so it stands to reason that it never adapted to those changes, since it no longer really existed.

Someone who actually plays BRINK.

(INF3RN0) #83

Obviously you guy’s don’t pay attention to the consistency of posts in this forum and around the net as to why people stopped playing… It is silly to argue that the game isn’t immensely underplayed at this point… I mean really your going to argue against that? Thousands of offline player… are you high?! You do realize that aside from the mainstream population (probably more so on console), there was the Wolf:ET and ETQW player bases that bought into Brink pre-release, which accounts for a fairly large sized chunk of pre-orders, and a common reason of dislike. I am going to say that someone is completely wrong when it HAS been proven with mathematical FACT multiple times on this forum, and to say that personal experience overrules fact is a pretty bold statement. The DLC update changed nothing lmao… and for the record they played on DLC at QCon. Adapt? Why do you keep saying that, like you figured out something no one else did? Your completely wrong and if you wanted to prove it, I have seen Apoc offer to play you and your highly developed understanding crew in a clan match while they play the standard “comp” style; so why don’t you take him up on that offer and prove your point already? I pre-ordered months in advance and had about 200 hrs in the first 3 weeks of release and tested the DLC, so I’ve played the game plenty.

(ArchdemonXIII) #84

The forum can’t be used as a microcosm of the entire player base, as it’s heavily biased towards players of previous SD titles, and any forum is not going to be accurately representative of the total player base. Try going to the Bioware forums. Mass Effect 2 outsold the first game by a large margin, but you wouldn’t even guess that was the case by the general forum consensus.

Also, neither of us was arguing that the player base was low. Not sure where you pulled that from unless you either weren’t reading or were actively searching for a straw man.

Also what mathematical fact are you citing? That you and your friends all agree? as the saying goes correlation does not imply causation. Unless you provide a poll that agrees with your findings, it remains speculation on your part. I can state the lack of players is due to the absence of brightly colored ponies and if fifty people agree with me, it still doesn’t make it fact, except in regards to those fifty people and I.

(INF3RN0) #85

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385538]For that matter, there may be thousands of people playing offline. Those people paid their money, and their opinion would be just as valid.

You absolutely have the right to express your opinion regarding the game. That’s kind of what the forum is for. But telling people that disagree with you that your opinion is MORE valid is an absolute crock of BS.

Or maybe anyone that still plays sees a value you don’t and isn’t bitter that it’s not ET3.
[/QUOTE]

Your implying that there’s a chance that there’s enough people who like the game to warrant its continuation? If you can’t find a server with people in a MP game that sold millions of copies so soon after release and those people were previously playing online, that proves something. This forum is obviously not the only source… I am connected with hundreds of people who bought Brink, and so are they and so forth; so I almost have had my own micro-survey 99% of which share the same reasoning. It’s not too difficult to understand that when a game is deemed a sequel to a genre and then doesn’t deliver, it’s going to demotivate the customer who received a product with misleading advertising. Sure there’s the mainstream TDM group, but then that’s because they would rather play TDM and not a Team Obj Shooter; so why would they ever want to play a TOS with that mentality??? Point is that there was already a substantial base from two past games who would have supported a worthy sequel, but the failure to do so and the result being an extremely low population should tell you something. If you can’t put two and two together, then that’s your problem, but I bet if you did conduct a survey with every person who purchased Brink they would either completely dislike team objective shooters or you would get very similar feedback to that of veteran players.

(INF3RN0) #86

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385597]
Also what mathematical fact are you citing? That you and your friends all agree? as the saying goes correlation does not imply causation. Unless you provide a poll that agrees with your findings, it remains speculation on your part. I can state the lack of players is due to the absence of brightly colored ponies and if fifty people agree with me, it still doesn’t make it fact, except in regards to those fifty people and I.[/QUOTE]

I was referring to factual debug tests that explain the mathematics of the game mechanics… hurrr durr. Debunking the folks who argue that 2+2 does not equal 4 because in their experience it equals 10. And when you refuse to accept the facts and blame it on a lack of adaptation, it’s called being delusional.

(ArchdemonXIII) #87

I’m saying enough people were interested in the concept to warrant a continuation. Plenty of people bought the game. Where we agree is that clearly they didn’t find whatever it is that would make them stay.

You seem to only respect the views of the hardcore players, so it’s not unlikely you hang out where you’re likely to hear the opinions of other core gamers. 99% of the people at a Justin Bieber concert think JB is awesome. That doesn’t make it a statistical fact. If what you are saying is true then 99% of the people who come to the Brink forum hate the game and you wouldn’t feel the need to tell the fans they are wrong and live in fear of the devs listening to them.

Also it seems that you think the majority of people that bought Brink were SD/ET fans. Yet the most copiies were sold on console where ET had much less of an impact. And being that is was marketed as a TOS. It’s highly unlikely that the majority of people who bought it were either veterans or didn’t know what they were buying.

I was referring to factual debug tests that explain the mathematics of the game mechanics… hurrr durr. Debunking the folks who argue that 2+2 does not equal 4 because in their experience it equals 10. And when you refuse to accept the facts and blame it on a lack of adaptation, it’s called being delusional.

Well, once you post a screenshot of the debug info that states that people left because it wasn’t suited to comp play, I won’t have a leg to stand on. I’m aware of the “mathematics of the game mechanics” but cold hard numbers don’t define fun factor. Look at the games that are doing well: CoD (no comment necessary) and WoW (basically a chat room with spells compared to any other MMO). I doubt their success is hinged upon competitive play. For every tourney player, there’s at least a hundred people who play because they just want to “kill stuff”. The lack of a competitive scene didn’t kill the game, the lack of a player base killed the competitive scene.

Also stating hurrr durrr in a post where you quote me and then try to debunk someone else’s point doesn’t make me feel like I am the stupid one.

edit for typos

(Humate) #88

Perhaps the game was less complex in “competitive” play because of all the abilities/dynamics that were unnecessarily restricted?

Nope. Even if one plays the game with all the abilities on, its not a complex game.
Each layer, each ability, each mechanic - is [over]simplified by design for it’s target audience.
Whether you keep each layer, or ban a select few - the end result is the same.

(tangoliber) #89

It doesn’t need to be complex. The teamwork just needs to 1) feel good (coordination feels effective and rewarding, as opposed to more chaotic games where coordination feels like it isn’t helping much.), and 2) it should feel dynamic (different viable ways to approach an objective…and you actually find pub players adapting to the other team,such as during the bridge objective on Resort.)

The only recently-released or beta’d games I’ve played that have better teamwork than Brink are NS2 and Nuclear Dawn…which isn’t really fair since they are FPSRTS. The teamwork is why I keep playing Brink…even if nowadays I’m only trying to adapt to whoever is on my team in pubs. It doesn’t have the individual skill ceiling of other good class based games like Team Fortress 2 or Killzone 2…but communication and coordination feels a lot more effective to me than in those games. (Its true that it just inherits this quality from the Enemy Territory games.) In most games coordination is just a romantic ideal that nobody ever really achieves because it isn’t practical in chaos…but in Brink (and NS2 and Nuclear Dawn) it is practical, and it feels good to see the results of your ideas.

(INF3RN0) #90

The concept isn’t new… it’s been done already. No duh the concept has appeal, but it’s the execution that failed here, which if you haven’t noticed is what I have been advocating on here. Why do you think people dislike Brink? It’s because it made horrible design choices that replaced those that had already been refined. I guess I would have to ask the age old question… have you ever played an ET game? Brink is like taking the core concept of ET, objective game play, and then squeezing out every bit of complexity/skill/balance/actual meaningful game content and replacing it with customization, unlocks, awards, and an overall ezpz learning curve so the kids would stop crying about how everyone aimbotted them or the game was too complicated…

I’m not gonna go dig up the debug info, you can use the search feature. And are you misunderstanding what I am even referring to with that? It gives the details on how the weapons function for example, ie the misinformation from those making non-factual remarks. The player base and comp scene died for the same reason… the game is not suited for serious play. If you don’t care about a well designed/organized/balanced game, then your left with the remaining population who just like smarting over stuff, making a kewl char, and spraying guns like a tard. There was plenty of potential for a comp scene, but the game was so awful to play that nearly everyone involved lost interest. They even had to cancel the ESL tournaments with cash prizes because no one had the desire to play; you can’t even bribe people into playing, and that says a lot.

(INF3RN0) #91

Something to add that I think really fits Brink as a game title. According to a statistical sales site Brink sold 1.3million copies, 10% on PC, 40% on PS3, and 50% on Xbox. Now it is clear that MP wise, every platform has suffered more so than is standard for such a well-publicized title. The moral of the story is that with the right publisher (Bethesda) and flash, you can make bank on console platforms with any quality of game. It’s the quick money scheme that Activision is infamous for. It’s appealing to developers business wise, but also they assume that sales represent like for the game. Regardless of how well Brink sold, it is most likely not to sell as well a second time. The question here is does SD want to satisfy the mainstream, or do they want to return to their roots and bring back the classic quality of “real games”. PC is being quickly abandoned these days because you can get away with a lot less on consoles and get a lot more money from doing it. In my opinion if SD wanted to make a name for themselves they should have just stuck with the original formula because it has been proven to actually keep people around. It was an obvious attempt at spoon feeding their style to consoles with more emphasis on flash content and less on actual meaningful game play, but who is to say that a Brink without all of the oversimplifications, and instead the original recipe wouldn’t have done just as well, retained the majority of it’s player base, and given consoles something new to think about? Sadly, I guess we will never know.

(Fetter) #92

I never said that the game wasn’t underplayed. In fact, in other threads I’ve repeatedly said that the game is essentially dead at this stage and needs some sort of major reboot to even stand a chance of retaining a long-term playerbase, even as a niche title. I personally did not see any revitalization following the latest update, despite the improvements to the game. I think many people feel screwed by BRINK and are reluctant to come back.

Actually, even disregarding the new content, there were several major balance changes, which I guess you don’t know about because you don’t play the game.

Simple. Generally, when the rules of a game change, the best tactics/loadouts change too. :tongue:

I don’t have a BRINK “crew.” If the game gets revitalized, I might take that sort of challenge up, but tbh practicing BRINK as a serious game is a very silly idea right now.

[QUOTE=Humate;385620]Nope. Even if one plays the game with all the abilities on, its not a complex game.
Each layer, each ability, each mechanic - is [over]simplified by design for it’s target audience.
Whether you keep each layer, or ban a select few - the end result is the same.[/QUOTE]

You’re literally objectively wrong.

(Humate) #93

[QUOTE=Fetter;385632]

You’re literally objectively wrong.[/QUOTE]

Nope. :infiltrator:

(zenstar) #94

hmmm… what? Weapon guides you say? Not since about the 2nd post on page one (hyperbole).
I think we’re a little off topic and neither one of you is going to convince the other that they’re wrong.

(Runeforce) #95

Arguing is for sissy’s. Fire up and game of Brink and prove that you are the greater man…(and take some video of different weapons while you’re at it!)

(ArchdemonXIII) #96

To sum up: 99% of the people dislike the game because it isn’t up to the standards of games 90% of the people who bought it have likely never played. Furthermore, the solution is to cater to the 10% of the audience.

…Yea. Excuse me while I back away slowly from this debate.

On topic, my rig isn’t suited to taking vids, sorry.

(Humate) #97

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385667]To sum up: 99% of the people dislike the game because it isn’t up to the standards of games 90% of the people who bought it have likely never played. Furthermore, the solution is to cater to the 10% of the audience.

…Yea. Excuse me while I back away slowly from this debate.

On topic, my rig isn’t suited to taking vids, sorry.[/QUOTE]

You should check out the metacritic scores for all three platforms. The user reviews are pretty interesting imo.

PC - 70
PS3 - 72
Xbox - 68

(zenstar) #98

[QUOTE=Humate;385676]You should check out the metacritic scores for all three platforms. The user reviews are pretty interesting imo.

PC - 70
PS3 - 72
Xbox - 68[/QUOTE]

First user review I see on metacritic: “I’m giving it a 10 to boost it to 8 where it deserves…”
:frowning:
Morons! that’s not how average score is meant to work at all. Now someone is going to put in a score of 1 to pull it down to where they think it is.
Put in the score you think it deserves!!! RAGEFACE

And that’s why user scores are stupid. true story

(Ruben0s) #99

[QUOTE=Humate;385676]You should check out the metacritic scores for all three platforms. The user reviews are pretty interesting imo.

PC - 70
PS3 - 72
Xbox - 68[/QUOTE]

Or these 15000 user reviews

xbox360 - 5.1 : http://www.gamefly.com/game/xbox-360/Brink/138885/CriticAndUserReviews/userreviews/ 10000+
ps3 - 5.0 : http://www.gamefly.com/game/ps3/Brink/138890/CriticAndUserReviews/userreviews/ 4500+

That’s certainly not good for a new IP.

(INF3RN0) #100

[QUOTE=ArchdemonXIII;385667]To sum up: 99% of the people dislike the game because it isn’t up to the standards of games 90% of the people who bought it have likely never played. Furthermore, the solution is to cater to the 10% of the audience.
[/QUOTE]

Add up the numbers of Wolf:ET and ETQW on PC.There is a substantial amount of interest on PC for these types of games, but the standards are much higher. A lot of PC folks saw Brink as a console port in preview, and I guess they were pretty much right; I blame myself for trusting SD loyalty to their original supporters. It’s a lot easier to sell out to consoles than to attempt to make a good game on PC and then carry it across platforms, but of course this isn’t about quality it’s just about numbers. Seriously play the other games and you will find the longer-lasting appeal where Brink fails to deliver. In retrospect, all of the older games were much more successful as games than Brink could have ever been, but if it’s about money then I suppose there’s a more fail safe way to go about it.

And Fetter… your just a nab in a game no one plays.