I have seen acouple of difrent trailers, and interviews. I noticed that some of the weapons are based on realistic, and some are kinda fictional. What kind of weapon do u think wecan expect? I perfer using exsiting weapons. Also what kinda attachments and weapons perks will there be.
:armadillochase:
I feal difrently, realistic weapons in games tend to be very balanced, example Battle Field Bad Company 2, ModernWarfare 2. I found good balance between perks and weapons in both of theese games.
Erm… nuubtubes being pointsticks(point at what you want dead) and snipers camping on a hill killing with 1 shot is balanced for you?(taken examples from games you provided)
We really have a misconception here. For me a game is balanced when you can’t kill anyone because you saw him first and where a skilled player kills a weaker player 90%+ times.
Also, not to mention that most “real-world” weapons feel like copies of eachother in games. Just look at quake3 for variation in weapons, making the choice for the correct weapon vital in a given situation. Each weapon is not only different by its name/model/sound-fx, but by how it works.
what weve seen so far i guess were fictional weapons based on real weapons. just like the overall artwork. realistic with artistic look.
but what im really excited about is that you can actually earn more weapons when leveling up. i think it was mentioned in one of the last interviews by richard ham, xbox360 magazine or something like that. i just hope there will be a ton of different looking guns and additionally unlockable modifications just for the look the each gun.
perks would be laser pointers maybe or attached knifes (bayonet). maybe even attached grenade launchers, i dont know. not much information there and i cant think of that many weapon attachments personally. maybe rate of fire modifications, burst fire gadgets or stuff like that. lets brainstorm here 
[QUOTE=murka10;219675]Erm… nuubtubes being pointsticks(point at what you want dead) and snipers camping on a hill killing with 1 shot is balanced for you?(taken examples from games you provided)
We really have a misconception here. For me a game is balanced when you can’t kill anyone because you saw him first and where a skilled player kills a weaker player 90%+ times.
Also, not to mention that most “real-world” weapons feel like copies of eachother in games. Just look at quake3 for variation in weapons, making the choice for the correct weapon vital in a given situation. Each weapon is not only different by its name/model/sound-fx, but by how it works.[/QUOTE]
Have you even played any of those games, or are you just working off of gross missconceptions. In the new BadCompany it is imposible to campand snipers cant kill u with 1 shot, and the skilled player dose often win. Sticking to the topic, the weapons in both of those games are very balanced. Rate of fire, range and ammo capicity are all things u need to take into acount. As far as all the weapons fealing the same, well a m4 is a m4, if it feals the same in both games then dosnt that mean that both devolpers did a very good job creating this real world weapon, if they both have simalar results.
Difficult question. I would say it depends on the game. If it is skill based gameplay has to be more important than realism. Like murka says Q3 shows how a perfect variety in weapons looks like. Realistic weaponry can provide a great athmosphere though. Hearing a heavy machine gun thunder in the distance in Day of Defeat Source or getting shot by the biggest sniper rifle in World at War HC makes an awesome impression.
I hope Brink will mix the best of both worlds.
BFBC has terrible balance. The big 3 are the 40mm, the Carl Gustav and the M60.
Both games are also examples of faux-realism. They’re both highly unrealistic but like to pretend otherwise and even have “hardcore” modes to try and prove it. If you actually wanted realism you’d be playing ArmA or RO.
Short answer:Yes
Long answer: How can i resist at least trying out what the hype is about. I can’t really form an opinion w/o playing it, right? MW2 is the worst example of a multiplayer game ever, and bc2 is also overhyped and doesn’t play well.
Just look at how tanks can bring down m-coms by never being near them. Camping on hill and leveling everything…
Snipers, last time i played hs=kill. Tho most of those nubs on hill can’t aim for shit and nobody notices the potential in these weapons. But for me, a 1shot=kill weapon is already trouble. Just take a sniper to close range(omg, not realistic, thinking outside the box) and quickly pull up the scope and hs the bastards. Becomes a very powerful and unbalanced gun.
Lets also look at the noobtube, a weapon that needs not much skill to operate. Point at an approximate area of what you want dead and it will be. What fun is for the other guy if he barely saw the enemy and he’s dead?
Weapon variation. Different dmg and different spread won’t give much variation imo. A weapon with less spread is 90% cases better than a weapon with more, but has more damage. Why? Because i can be sure those hits register and not go to waste. Translation:weapon requires skill.
Of course you don’t see people running around with railguns only(unless you play instagib). There are weapons that counter them. A good one vs sniper is anything with splash damage. Thus a low hp hit will move the enemy in unexpected ways leading to a miss. Thus, there is no diff between an ak-47 and an m4 in-game. They are both mid-spread weapons with approx same dmg.
Oh dear, not sure if you know what you are talking about. Now I love BC2 the balance is really bad, EVERY one plays sniper or medic.
Dont want your version of the game SD seem to be doing a great job as it is.
it would be pretty cool to see security with some hi-tech weaponry, and resistance making custom scraps, in the fallout3 style.
But overal I do not really care, its not which gender the weapons belong to, its whether they are balanced and seem useful
what should do “real-world weapons” objects in fantastic/futuristic game ?
how about consistency and commons sense ?
p.s.
except trusty/rusty but working flawless AK47, maybe.
I don’t think the world will ever see a day when there isn’t a couple thousand AKs doing business
it’s funny how do they make polls on stuff already decided/made
PS: real weaponry, voted 
I have noticed when players see a game with real world weapons in it, they instantly think the game is going to behave “realistically,” and if you put completley made up guns in the game, players think the game is going to be the shooter eqivilent to NBA Jam - of they just think, “that game is stupid.” It appears that a lot of players are so caught up in the Modern Combat craze of shooters nowadays, that they laugh at anything else.
I would prefer fictional guns in the game that resemble real world guns, this way you have a “real world feel,” without limiting game design - what I mean by this is, if you put an M16 in a game, people are expecting to behave like an M16, whereas if you put a fictional gun in that kinda resembles an M16, it can behave however they want it to. Also, the real world gun thing has been done to death - I’d rather Brink have its own flair.
but what more importantly, all BF games - lack of really challenging gamemodes/tasks.
boring “squad-based campint”? or just firefight exchanges over ridiculously not serious/nonsense “objectives”/reason ? with bunches of idleers/campers/exploiters ?
no, thanks.
RO ?
Ragnarock Online ?
sure.
and further AK improvements underway[and acomplished ones]will help thats.
[QUOTE=brbrbr;219930]sure.
and further AK improvements underway[and acomplished ones]will help thats.[/QUOTE]
I’m not sure “help” is the correct word, with over 90 million produced, it can easily be attributed to causing over 3 million deaths over 50 years, not something that needs any help