What would you change or add in Brink 2?

(nick1021) #21

Shurikens should replace the seagle.

(Seiniyta) #22

More spread on weapons

(wolfnemesis75) #23

[QUOTE=AmishWarMachine;348499]Operative + Sea Eagle + Katana + Throwing Stars.

I like where your head’s at. :stroggtapir:[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I meant Katana but my brain’s dead. I think such blades were in the E3 Trailer of the Anger jumping on the rooftops.

(nick1021) #24

Those are no where close to katanas. Wtf are you smoking?

Those are just knives.

(wolfnemesis75) #25

[QUOTE=kilL_888;348496]heres a suggestion for the female heavy body type. i see lots of people playing as this…

source: google[/QUOTE]

…Ok, that’s worse case scenario. but i get your point. restrict female to light or medium or is that wrong?

(SinDonor) #26

[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;348484]Ok you forced me into it…

-More blood.
-Female Character Models
-More flanks out of Spawn[/QUOTE]

Yeah, where’s the gore? I like gibs. Even if you gibbed someone in Fallout3, you could still loot the piles of meat. I guess then Assault and Ops classes could still do their abilities on the gibs.

Females: YEAH!

Flanks out of spawn in CC is a must.

(kilL_888) #27

no comment. :rolleyes: need sleep.

(wolfnemesis75) #28

A panel that can be hacked that activates a series of lasers to slide through a room a la (Resident Evil Movie) on Terminal to kill those ****s that set up shop in front of the hack box. Just a simple switch to activate after it is hacked to fry em all like toasty bacon. Then I can walk in there clean and hack away.

(SinDonor) #29

HAHAHAHAHA! YES, nice avatar!

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

(DarkangelUK) #30

A proper linear single player portion, the Ark is an absolutely fantastic setting for a single player campaign in the traditional style, and I think having that would flesh out the game and the story itself, and give you a better connection to the setting and the Brink universe. It doesn’t have to be huge, games seem to be getting away with 4 - 8hrs these days.

I’d open the maps up instead of sectioning them off into objectives, I’d make a rule of a max of 2 primary objectives per map and bring more tactical focus on securing secondary routes/spawns and make them much more desirable. Make the objectives non-linear RtCW style, making map tactics more important rather than the defence only having to converge on a single point… it’d drop the overall map rounds to 10-15mins per game, rather than per objective. (yes yes I’m living in the past, but hey it’s what I like)

I’d make it so different gametypes can be incorporated into the current map layouts, such as S&D/CS style round based bomb plant mode, CTF mode using docs or missile codes etc, KotH/Domination style mode… could possibly resurrect RtCW’s checkpoint mode where the 1st team to control all flag points wins.

As much as I hate to say it (and as much as you’ll hate me saying it), I like the positive and negative aspects brought with CoD weapon loadout. 1 attachment for your gun, or 2 depending on the ability chosen. Not a fan personally of having a hundred attachments on my gun, but that’s just me.

Lower the amount of abilities and stick to universal abilities only with a lower limit, class specific abilities have had a negative impact on how people play the game. Leave the classes as they are at their core and let the player tweak how they want to play in general without impacting their role in the game.

Have set visual styled characters for the classes in look and silhouette and get rid of bodytypes and full customization. I want to be able to look at my enemy or team mate and instantly identify their class without the need for icons and text above their head. Have a core colour scheme for the 2 sides (red/blue) but still allow the player to customize small portions like knee pads, facial gear/scars, tattoos etc, but still retain the core class look.

De-clutter the screen, there’s far too many icons and text on the screen. Let ME learn the game for myself, I don’t want a constant running commentary of everything that’s happening on the screen. If I want to know my team mates health situation, I’ll look at him with my xhair and find out, if the class silhouette is fine, I’ll know simply by his player model what class he is. I’ll learn where the objectives are and what they look like, I don’t need a big outline around the enemy to know who to shoot at. The icons i want to see on the screen are the basics, health, ammo, round timer, mini-compass for general direction of the objective or class specific function (medic looking for downed team mates). If It’s not in my line of sight or area of view, don’t show me it… I don’t want to see a fullsized team mate icon on my screen from the other side of the map… LET ME LEARN IT MYSELF!

Make sure that todays games standards are met. If it’s console, include a lobby system, if it’s PC, have numerical ping output and a proper server browser from the get-go. Demo recording is a standard in this day and age, so is first person spectating. Treat each platform as it’s own platform, each has their own requirements that must be met, some things work across all platforms, a lot of things REALLY don’t.

Have a proper closed (open if you must) beta to get rid of the technical niggles before release, and also get map/weapon/game feedback early on.

I think that’s about it for me…

(Codine) #31

I would make it play more like ET and actually playable on ati cards.

(Kendle) #32

Everything DarkAngel said :wink:

(MorsTua) #33

why not fix brink 1 that has 1 month of life insthead make brink 2?
(do u think sd will be paid to make other games?)

(DarkangelUK) #34

[QUOTE=MorsTua;348652]why not fix brink 1 that has 1 month of life insthead make brink 2?
(do u think sd will be paid to make other games?)[/QUOTE]

Because this is a thread about what you would like in Brink 2… stay on topic and don’t derail this one as well please ¬_¬

(nick1021) #35

Well it’s his view. Most people would rather they fix Brink so they get their moneys worth. Instead of making a functioning Brink 2 which they will have to BUY again.

(DarkangelUK) #36

We know it’s his view, but the point of this thread is to get what people would like to see in Brink 2, what’s difficult about this? I want to know his view on that, not the current game… we already know his view on the current game.

(Humate) #37

My advice to SD would be to take off the rose coloured glasses, before doing anything.

(zenstar) #38

Gender selection. Female heavies would simply be buff women. Look at female bodybuilders if you need to get a good example of what a heavily muscled woman would look like (noone on the ark looks fat… noone playable that is).

Different publisher that allows SD to talk to the community more and doesn’t cut stupid exclusivity deals (yes. still bitter).

Maps with multiple games happening at the same time. 2 teams of resistance and 2 teams of security doing 2 different sets of missions on the same map (maybe 1 attacking and 1 defending team each side?) allowing, effectively, 16 v 16 player games but still keeping the 8v8 feel (since each team has different objectives).

A third faction and 8 v 8 v 8 games or 8 + 8 v 8 games.

(H0RSE) #39

  • A buff system that mixes Brink with past SD titles - It can use the “one button does it all” approach from Brink, but without the need to lock on, like in past SD games.

  • Much more customization options, for both weapons and characters. Even if it had the same number of options from Brink, but with the ability to tweak or fine tune more in-depth.

  • On the RPG side of things, more in depth ability system. Perhaps an option to specialize characters, instead of just picking abilities.

  • Remove all recoil and random spread from all weapons.

  • Make ADS a game option. Choosing to play with ironsights enabled, changes the mechanics of the guns to more cater to players who prefer ironsights, and will only allow players to join games that have ironsights enabled.
    Disabling ironsights makes guns behave like how they did in RTCW and W:ET. There are no ironsights, and players can only play on ironsight disabled games.

(BiigDaddyDellta) #40

I would add more depth to the environments, high and lower ground buildings roofs ditches trenches more SMARTable interaction in transit and also as more of a tactical advantage using high ground as cover and so forth.