To be completely honest, I’d rather they make 2 different versions of the game. 1 for the consoles with SP and everything, and then a MP-only PC game (for $20 or $25) dollars with just the MP portion that launches with an SDK and actually has the things needed to create a competitive community. My post really only concerns the PC side of things.
I really hope for BRINK 2 they stop with the massive amounts of weapons. It created a huge, huge problem in this game, in my opinion. We had a bunch of useless weapons, and 3 (carb-9, sea eagle, richie revolver) that were even worth using. If it was me, I would make 4 guns: 1 sniper, 1 shotgun, 1 assault rifle, and 1 pistol. This would let the developers spend time making sure the balance for each of these guns is perfect instead of trying to balance them against a bunch of weapons.
It isn’t like you’d be losing customization, either; they would actually be able to make the guns even more customizable if you take off adding attachments to your gun and instead just let you change colors, add decals, add text, or switch the skin on it. This would allow the guns to actually be different instead of everything looking the same on each side. I’d prefer that layer of customization than having all these attachments on my gun that increase/decrease stats. I’m totally against stuff like that in FPS games, because it has the possibility to not be balanced.
It’s obvious how unbalanced the stuff was when everyone was using a Carb-9 with drum, front grip, etc. So, zenstar, that’s a pretty good reason to not have stuff like that. Plus you can look back at all the PC FPS giants and see that none of them had custom weapon attachments. QUAKE didn’t, W:ET didn’t, RtCW didn’t, CS didn’t, CS:S didn’t and even TF2 with its 100+ weapons doesn’t have attachments.
I think the next thing they need to look at is actual gunplay; it doesn’t reduce teamwork, it just promotes it. CoD will eventually be brought up in this discussion and I’ll already say the reason CoD doesn’t have teamwork isn’t because the guns are so deadly, but because the game isn’t set up to require it. There’s only like 1 gametype that requires the least bit of teamwork (search and destory) while the rest are pretty much just fling yourself at the objective/camp in a room and hope it works out. RtCW/ET style games always require teamwork, or at the very least meat shields.
Having accurate guns is a must; no one wants to lose because the spread is spread out across a giant circle. Little circle with little spread would be amazing; it worked before, why won’t it work now? It isn’t like PC gamers became dumb over the years, we just haven’t had a game that lets us play with our preferred aimstyle. Make it and people will buy it.
Oh, and bring strafejumping back. It beats the heck out of your S.M.A.R.T. system for sure; leave in parkour for some things, but have the emphasis on the PC at least be strafejumping. Heck combine the two somehow and make smart-jumping. It could be all the rage.
Lately, I’ve kind of been thinking that maybe 1 objective maps might be a better idea for this style of game. Think about a map where the only thing you have to do is build something, hack something, or blow something up. There’d be little story behind it, yes, but for the PC community this might be a good thing. The matches would be quicker, objectives wouldn’t have to be skipped in maps, and the maps could be extremely detailed around strafejumping, trickjumps, etc. This might actually draw the pub community into competitive gameplay because the full map would be played and there’s not really much to do to “fix” the maps like what happened in ET:QW and BRINK. They could always have the bigger maps, but then take out pieces of the map to make these mini-maps. Like imagine having aquarium and then mini-aquarium where you only play the bomb part. Kind of like how you have duel maps in some games that take the set pieces of the major maps (like the spire or mid in badlands on TF2, for example, is an arena in the duel mod).
