What Ideas do you have for Brink, if it was upgraded?

(Je T´aime) #41

NigelDocker is right, i also have crysis2 and I play the default version of it on pc all maxed out at constant 60 fps, (amd / ati) while in brink its always around 30 fps and even with more fps feels a bit choppy.

But back to topic we kinda all agree on the main stuff so thats a good sign, devs only will change stuff that the majority of pplayers agree on.

And NigelDocker good improvement list you got there i agree with all points : )

I would also add the ability to make the red halos thing over the enemy enabled or disabled client side

(Bittermetal) #42

[QUOTE=Je T´aime;350694]NigelDocker is right, i also have crysis2 and I play the default version of it on pc all maxed out at constant 60 fps, (amd / ati) while in brink its always around 30 fps and even with more fps feels a bit choppy.

But back to topic we kinda all agree on the main stuff so thats a good sign, devs only will change stuff that the majority of pplayers agree on.

And NigelDocker good improvement list you got there i agree with all points : )

I would also add the ability to make the red halos thing over the enemy enabled or disabled client side[/QUOTE]

i SEE. Its that AMD issue. Wow can’t believe that’s still in there. Again, I don’t have that issue. the game runs well beyond 30. More like 4x30.

(Zarel) #43

NigelDocker’s got great points. Except(and only) for the bots part. Well, of course hell yeah on improvement. But to create separation on the singleplayer and multiplayer aspect of the game? Mmmm, no. I think this is one of the game’s point that totally appeals to me. Having total equal accessibility for both online and offline players, I kinda like that concept.

If the solution in strengthening the narrative of the game is to create a few hours worth of linear campaign? Sure. But if that solution is followed of taking out the inclusion of bots/offline play (as seemed most FPS developers tend to do, why can’t we have both worlds?)? Then no. I’d rather have a highly replayable “pretend multiplayer” than a few hours worth of “interactive movie”.

Besides, I think you can remedy that by setting the minimum players per faction to zero in freeplay. But then, given this games current state, have fun waiting…alone.

(Je T´aime) #44

I get the point of the bots kinda, if you go alone in a server and need to wait for people to join it can get really boring, with some bots you can play the game while wait for other players to join.

But whats the poit of having 16 bots by default and 1 bot drop whe 1 player connects, i find a lot more fun playng 5 vs 5 all humans rather then 1 team with 7 bots and 1 player vs 8 humans if your on the bot team you kinda already have lost the game and that happens often because the way it works now is you join 1st the team with humans for some reason.

The solution that would keep both sides happy would be maybe put the bots to 10 max default so that way you would never had that situation happening but ofc make it possible for server owners who want 16 bots to have that option but i suspect the majority of the servers just use default settings.

(Zarel) #45

Again, I think they pretty much solved that problem with minimum players settings. If one find the bots annoying, one may use the minimum player settings, really. I think the problem doesn’t lie in the bots, but rather the thought that it’s not really played(liked) by so many people, giving it a very rare(and difficult) opportunity to have an all-human match.

And I also think it’s now the problem with the human players, I mean, wow that’s unfair, why aren’t they switching teams to even out the match?

(Verticae) #46
  • Far less spread
  • Weapons restricted to classes
  • Preset playermodels per class
  • Asymmetric teams
  • Vehicles
  • Strafejumping
  • Open maps
  • More dynamic objectives
  • Deployables
  • Tripmines

Hm, that reminds me.

(Je T´aime) #47

Zarel I dont understand why you are talking about the minium player settings, you could always see the number of players in a server since day 1.

I try to avoid servers with less then 10 human players anyway.

And people balancing teams, in pratice that does not happen.

If you disagree with my core idea i hope that at least you agree with some sort of way to make both teams have the same amount of bots not 1 team with 7 bots and 1 human and the other team with all humans.

Verticae btw whats tripmines : ? and what you mean with asymmetric teams im just kinda against the weapons restriction to classes in that list : D

(Zarel) #48

Je T´aime, I mean not in the searching servers part. You can set maximum number of bots in a server. Setting it to zero means you can create a match with no bots at all. And i’m just pointing(and clarifying) this out, especially for NigelDocker since it seems that guy got some irk with the bots.

Hmmm…well, as for your point, i’m wondering how could that be sorted out? I’m thinking forced team switch, though I think some folks would not like that. Difficulty increase for bots? The more humans join one side, the more difficult bots become on the other side.

(Bittermetal) #49

Are you all playing on consoles or something? Because on PC I just join no-bot servers and then add them to my favorites so I rejoin at anytime.

(tangoliber) #50

I’m on console, first of all.

The main thing I would like is a server browser for consoles. This would really bring the community together. There are too many people trying to find games through matchmaking, and just playing against bots all day… matchmaking just isn’t bringing people together. A server browser would make it easy for anyone to find a match…it would allow for custom game types…and it would also help grow a clan community.

There are a couple of weapon types that I would like to provide different play styles for people who take the time to learn them .

I’d like a pistol that a light can wield as a primary (with one of the current pistols as a secondary.) I love pistols, and would love to use them as a main. It should be very accurate…fire slower than the Sea Eagle…and maybe take 3 hits to kill?

I’d like to have a light rifle that has pinpoint accuracy when crouching and firing from the hip.
Here is an example video of the rifle from KZ2… It takes two hits to kill. In Brink, you might require it to take 3-4.


Notice how he crouches whenever he takes a shot, and the accuracy becomes pinpoint

I’d like to have an assault rifle that is made for tap-firing. The way you do this would be to have the initial accuracy very good, but have the spread expand very rapidly. At the same time, the spread needs to shrink very quickly as well… So you can keep the accuracy low by tapping fire, instead of bursts.

Finally, I’d like an LMG that is also a crouch + hipfire gun. You would need to crouch and either tap-fire or burst fire from the hip for it to be accurate enough.

I’d like more operative abilities. Here is an idea: Maybe when they are disguised they can “poison buff” and enemy medic. The medic wouldn’t receive any notification, and 10 seconds after he buffs his teammates, their health begins to drain. (However, if he buffs the operative, then the operative will get poisoned by his own stuff…so he would want to run off after poison buffing the medic.) Maybe if the medic tries to revive someone, it just finishes them off.
I guess I’d like more complex stuff like that to give the game even more depth.

Instead of marking mines slowly by aiming down sights, it might be cool, and faster if the operative had a flag that he could quickly throw at the mine. (He could do this on the run…and it wouldn’t take a pip but would take an active ability slot.)

(Tandem) #51

Upgraded?
Fix the game, then lets talk.

(unvee) #52

[QUOTE=Tandem;350903]Upgraded?
Fix the game, then lets talk.[/QUOTE]

fix the damn lag so i can actually play the game–about 2 out every 5 games i play lag bad–and no its not my connection as i play online all the time and its only this game that does this.

create a lobby-so i don’t have to have more than half of my team being bots- i would actually love to play 8 vs 8 all humans-hell ill even take 6 human players and 2 bots-but its always like 3, 4 at the most who are actual players. I mostly always have about 5 bots.

i tried playing old skool mode (or whatever where there are no bots) but the most human players ive seen are like 4 including me on my team.

i would just like to play an lag free 8vs8 objective multi player mode–that can’t be too much to ask for can it?

this is for the xbox 360

(Verticae) #53

The joke is that I listed ETQW’s features. Just grab it somewhere and play it, you’ll love it.

(Je T´aime) #54

I´m pretty sure ETQW is great i love the vehicles stuff on bfbc2 and the stuff on Brink and it looks kinda a mix of those so i bet its fun, personally i just kinda dislike the quakish looks of the weapons and stuff : p