What needs to happen in Brink 2

(Ruben0s) #61

maybe tokamak should put big sarcasm spoilers around his posts, so people would understand it.

(gold163) #62

yes, that would be a big help.

(Breo) #63
  • Remove the bots from the multiplayer!
  • No automatic (F) button
  • More settings for the user interface (hud)
  • Release a beta
  • Bigger maps (flank the enemy)
  • Character customisation/bodytype is not a must for a shooter
  • No bulletproof glass
  • Remove animations (plant bomb)
  • Escort missions shouldn’t have a path that get in front of the enemy spawns
  • Vsays?
  • Last but not least… a setting to shut up cpt Mokoena and brother Chen J-.-L
(Stormchild) #64

Looks like someone want a new Quake wars, not a new Brink.

I think most of these changes are way too much for a Brink 2. Only more freedom to place turrets and mines (on walls, in corners/don’t care about clipping, etc). Rework the class system is a good point (tie weap selection to class, even if they got some common choices). Tune the SMART, rework the bodytypes balance, and overall add a beta. Be more ready at release with clan support, as well as VOIP and Vsays…

(Humate) #65

[QUOTE=Stormchild;395940]Looks like someone want a new Quake wars, not a new Brink.
[/QUOTE]

Really? What gave that away.

(Patriotqube) #66

This…yes this

and ofc the ability to edit the crap out of our servers

release it so it can be modded from day one

loose the SP, make a console game with that, but loose it for PC
give me back all the customization i could do in etqw and wet

etc etc

(zenstar) #67

What SP?
You mean multiplayer with bots? ET:QW had that. They just didn’t sell it as “blurring the lines between single player and multipleyer” back then. They called them bots.

(Chaologic) #68

I loved a lot of stuff that some people had problems with, like animations for hacking and planting bombs, etc. Even having bots to a degree. If you’ve got three people ready to play, I’d rather have bots fill in the gaps than wait a half hour for other players to be found. I thought the way they built purpose for each class was incredible and it made having a team that was paying attention that much more rewarding. I like how the story-mode was also the multiplayer mode, but also I think they lost a lot of their dynamic that way. Having multiplayer for story missions is great, but having variety in the story missions would be great that weren’t multiplyer, giving players the sense of accomplishment they don’t need to share. Example: Security raids a Resistance bunker as they’re finishing up plans on where to strike next. For this level, you play a runner and must make use of the SMART system to get away and deliver the plans to another bunker/chapter of the Resistance, making a “Race” level if you will. I think just delving deeper into their story and exploring the lives of the sides would give much more variety. Would it be a lot of work? Yes, but Splash damage has shown that they don’t mind getting their hands dirty to put out an awesome, intelligent game. There’s a ton that I’d like to see in Brink 2, if they were to make such an amazing project, but they’ve got a good foundation and I wouldn’t want their mechanics changed too much, just the delivery. Basics like weapon balancing and more visual customization is implied, but on the whole I thought Brink was genius.

(KAS--Will) #69

[QUOTE=Zamininc;389428]1) On the subject of body typing

Delete body types. No, seriously, delete body types. The thing that really made Brink stand out in my mind was the extremely fast paced action. And a medium/heavy build just doesn’t feel right to play. I suggest that instead of using body types to use certain weapons, we use a skill point system. Which brings me to my next point.

  1. Skill points

What about, if on level up, you gained a skill point (along with an ability point) to put in several categories? Health, damage, weapon tiers (could be called strength), speed, and others. In my opinion this would help make Brink 2 the customizing legend the first Brink was supposed to be. Which again, brings me to my next point.

  1. Customolization

When Brink was about to be released we were promised it would have oodles of customolization. We were very dissapointed when we played the game. I’m sure Splash Damage has learned there lesson on this one but still worth a mention.

  1. Get rid of bots.

I challenge ANYONE to find a console copy of the game and try to join a standard match in which half the players aren’t bots. Of course nowadays you can’t find a single player on it. But even back when it was just released and had a somewhat-stable consolebase, it was impossible.

  1. Make sure your goddamn game works.

Although not the fault of Splash Damage, make sure your ****ing game works next time. Graphic errors that effected most of the PC fanbase and all of the console. Horrible lag at the start. Glitches. Etc.[/QUOTE]

No, I don’t really understand, yes, yes, and hell yes.

I think BRINK should still shoot for less competitive gameplay but have something present there for the less skilled players. Example; even when playing BRINK I still enjoy myself racking up kills, so be true to first person shooting loins and reward me/credit me for getting most kills and display my dominance, but also reward players for working as a team, especially the team players, because if there’s one thing I’ve noticed. Random BRINK players are far more cooperative and team friendly than BF3 players, who seem to boast about BF3 being team oriented.

Another suggestion, since I find this kind of a suggestion thread, BRINK 2 needs a cleaner HUD too, it felt really clustered in BRINK. On top of that I want a more immersive unlocks. I noticed OP touched base with it, but I really would like to see players have to be conservative with what skills they choose, not just collect them as they level up.

(OMGITSJASON) #70

Brink has a good structure already. The next game needs more polish on practically every facet.

(Shojimbo) #71

The whole idea of Brink still appeals to me. The execution and delivery overall was quite disappointing but there is a foundation there to build off. A Brink 2 would be very interesting. The story, background, artistic-design and objective-based/team-based gameplay was and still is a fantastic idea.

However it was all overshadowed by too many weaknesses and faults. The gamers (like myself) who were interested in the idea and the art direction of the game bought it, played it and stuck by it for a while until it unofficially died. However the more casual gamer who was just looking for another competitive FPS to play would have traded it in after 5-10mins gameplay. As a competitive FPS it’s naturally going to be compared to others like it - tbf most games get compared to COD even when they aren’t war-games or even FPS! And I personally don’t like COD and never have so I’m desperately looking for something fresh and different from it. I tried to influence some friends to try Brink but they took one look at the graphics and textures and immediately snubbed it. And people still do want something different. The success and hype for Borderlands and it’s sequel proves that. Splash Damage need to take note. There’s still life in Brink if the right improvements are to be made.

The SMART system needs to be, well, smarter. A sticky one-button runaround got boring really fast. Sprints, vaults, climbs, wall-hops, slides and all those little techniques need to be more challenging which makes it more fun and makes it more competitive. Mirror’s Edge wasn’t overly-complicated and anybody could play it, but it was exhilarating because of the little effects, timing of presses and attention to detail that made you feel like you were moving free and generating some kind of ‘flow’ in your movement. Brink’s SMART system just felt clunky and too simplistic. Besides it didn’t really give you much of an advantage either way as most high platforms were accessible by stairs or other ways and they were often far from objectives meaning that you didn’t necessarily have to go there.

I’ve always heard of Splash Damage maintaining an open relationship with their fans and players, but seem to have gone out with big, fresh ideas on Brink and yet failed to listen to half of what their community wanted, before and after release. Listen to the consumers. They know what they’re talking about in general. If half of the suggestions made by the people who’ve posted on these forums were implemented then you’d have a vastly superior game. I’m sure it’s not as easy as that, but it’s a fair starting point and if Brink 2 happens and it’s to be a success then the opinions from the SD/Brink1 community must be prioritised.

I really believe there’s room for Brink 2 in the market and I believe that SD have the ability and potential to deliver it.

(morguen87) #72

[QUOTE=Shojimbo;398008]…

I’ve always heard of Splash Damage maintaining an open relationship with their fans and players, but seem to have gone out with big, fresh ideas on Brink and yet failed to listen to half of what their community wanted, before and after release. Listen to the consumers. They know what they’re talking about in general. If half of the suggestions made by the people who’ve posted on these forums were implemented then you’d have a vastly superior game. I’m sure it’s not as easy as that, but it’s a fair starting point and if Brink 2 happens and it’s to be a success then the opinions from the SD/Brink1 community must be prioritised.

I really believe there’s room for Brink 2 in the market and I believe that SD have the ability and potential to deliver it.[/QUOTE]

The thing that’s frustrating is that at times Splash Damage seemed to honestly want to listen to fans. I give them credit for that at least. The real frustrating aspect is they left us completely in the dark. SD should fire and replace their public relations department. Other than the horrible game play, it’s another reason why fans left the game so fast.
It’s all fine and dandy to create a thread asking for input or even create a forum section dedicated to weapon balance feedback.

But you can’t just do that stuff then shut off communication with the community for months on end. A lot of people put time and effort into giving feedback and when a month or two or three passes with zero response, it’s understandable for people to get frustrated and move on.

Not to mention after months of feedback in the “weapon balance feedback” forum, the one with multiple thread tags for different platforms, they finally said the only platform getting any tweaks was going to be the pc. Meaning everyone who provided legitimate feedback for xbox 360 or ps3 for months on end basically just wasted their time after being misled.

Either listen to the community or don’t pretend to. Don’t make threads or even separate forums asking for feedback then not be active in the community or make false promises.

Even weekly updates like “we’re working on this, we’re testing this, we’re hoping to implement this, etc…” would have gone a long way. If you were around these forums since Brink was released, you would know how frustrating going without any patch or update feedback for months on end was.

Give Splash Damage and Brink fans credit, a lot of us hung in there. Splash Damage are the ones who let us down and they deserve no sympathy after they handled community relations as poorly as they did.

(zenstar) #73

There is lots and lots of speculation that that was due to Bethesda’s involvement. Obviously none of us know what contracts were signed and it’d be unproffessional of SD or Beth to come out and point their finger at the other party (not to mention any NDAs signed).

Going off the histories of general SD communication and general Bethesda communication I’d say SD deserve some slack.

(wolfnemesis75) #74

I wonder how much of a chance there is for future Brink games since Bethesda owns the rights? Would they ever allow SD to do a sequel. I’d buy it.

(SockDog) #75

Who says SD would have to develop it? Bethesda could contract it out to someone else.

(wolfnemesis75) #76

[QUOTE=SockDog;398406]Who says SD would have to develop it? Bethesda could contract it out to someone else.[/QUOTE]That is certainly true. It would be cool to see Brink created with the Unreal Engine. One of my favorite games, Gears of War was created with that engine. Brink would look sick with Unreal. I know Bethesda has the power; they did not exactly add much to Brink, imo. They ultimately hurt it. Too bad the rights to the IP could not be had …

(SockDog) #77

Not a great fan of the Unreal engine myself, I’ve always felt it has a certain lag to it (perhaps that is a design choice though). I also find Epic (at least publicly) is totally out of touch with PC gaming and as such I wouldn’t trust them to put a great deal of effort into the PC features that the consoles can’t take advantage of.

Personally I hope SD isn’t working on anything Brink or Bethesda based, they can do better without the confines that sort of deal would bring. Still Brink pulled in numbers and that’s sometimes all it takes to greenlight a sequel.

If it wasn’t SD who would you like to develop a sequel and what do you think they’d bring to the table over SD?

(wolfnemesis75) #78

[QUOTE=SockDog;398420]Not a great fan of the Unreal engine myself, I’ve always felt it has a certain lag to it (perhaps that is a design choice though). I also find Epic (at least publicly) is totally out of touch with PC gaming and as such I wouldn’t trust them to put a great deal of effort into the PC features that the consoles can’t take advantage of.

Personally I hope SD isn’t working on anything Brink or Bethesda based, they can do better without the confines that sort of deal would bring. Still Brink pulled in numbers and that’s sometimes all it takes to greenlight a sequel.

If it wasn’t SD who would you like to develop a sequel and what do you think they’d bring to the table over SD?[/QUOTE]As far as Brink (if it wasn’t SD) ) then I would like 2K Boston to work on it. (Bioshock). I think they could bring depth to the story, flesh it out. Obviously, I think SD could do a good job too and also add features to improve it based on what they’ve learned from Brink 1. But, 2K Boston would be my choice otherwise. A single player game with multiplayer like a 50/50 mix or even a 40/60 mix in terms of focus. I also think CDProjekt Red (Witcher) or Gearbox might be able to pull it off. Not sure how it works with Bethesda publishing; they seem to have a staple of developers that they use. Rock Star does such a good job with story based games. But they develop their own games. Ubisoft does good stuff.

(OMGITSJASON) #79

First off make a better campaign. Make a true single player campaign and a separate true multiplayer component either co-op or competitive matches. Brink was a good game just rough around the edges.