Yes, another thread about team deathmatch.

[xBluntxForce]

Ive noticed that when someone brings up team death match and brink in the same sentence, people think that their brink disk will burst into flames if tdm was ever to become a reality. But I have a few questions to those who oppose a TDM in this game.

1. Exactly how will TDM push current Brink fans away the game? Its not like your FORCED to play it, its just another available mode.

2. There is an obvious want for this mode and i know brink prides itself in being different, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have to throw away one of the major reasons FPS became popular in the first place. How do you justify denying this obvious demand?

3. Why do you feel the need to make people who want TDM feel inferior for their opinions?

Yes yes yes I understand Brink is a class based OBJECTIVE based FPS. But that does not mean that TDM is taboo or in any way game breaking. A little contradictory yes, but so is having a class that cannot do parkour in a game that was marketed on being able to do so.

Im not saying that SD should put team death match in the game. That decision belongs to the people who designed the game, and know far more about it than I do. Im just saying that we don’t need to be so adverse to the idea.

[Rockhound]

Taking a seat before the first guy comes in and cries about nooooo, this is not COD it`s a objective based game. We do not need variety!

Just said the same in the Bethesda forums, change the timer with a count on kills and youre done. Oh noes! Yes its just that simple. Maybe in the near future the people here will check that Brink at least is the same as COD, BFBC2, …

Yeah i know, but huh im only going for the objective! No you dont! In order to fullfill your mission you need to shoot people otherwhise you would loose every round. Thats why its called a FPS, first person shooter, because you`re shooting people.

[Kingcole225]

[QUOTE=xBluntxForce;329921]Ive noticed that when someone brings up team death match and brink in the same sentence, people think that their brink disk will burst into flames if tdm was ever to become a reality. But I have a few questions to those who oppose a TDM in this game.

1. Exactly how will TDM push current Brink fans away the game? Its not like your FORCED to play it, its just another available mode.

2. There is an obvious want for this mode and i know brink prides itself in being different, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have to throw away one of the major reasons FPS became popular in the first place. How do you justify denying this obvious demand?

3. Why do you feel the need to make people who want TDM feel inferior for their opinions?

Yes yes yes I understand Brink is a class based OBJECTIVE based FPS. But that does not mean that TDM is taboo or in any way game breaking. A little contradictory yes, but so is having a class that cannot do parkour in a game that was marketed on being able to do so.

Im not saying that SD should put team death match in the game. That decision belongs to the people who designed the game, and know far more about it than I do. Im just saying that we don’t need to be so adverse to the idea.[/QUOTE]

It would take time when they should be creating more interesting DLC. Also they would need to balance some of the abilities since they were created solely with the purpose of objective based gameplay.

[Nefarious]

I think it would be really cool. Alot of sections on the maps go unexplored bc you are always on route to the objective.

And with TDM you wont be hindered by crappy teammates who dont do the job they are supposed to do.

[wolfnemesis75]

I’d rather have the Devs focus on optimizing and adding interesting DLC, Customization, and Weapons to keep the game fresh rather than add modes that are counter to the design and goal of Brink being a Objective Team Based Shooter. Exactly as I stated on the Bethesda Forum. TDM just devolves in to kill streaks and camping.

Why not try to get better at what Brink is all about? Plus TDM been done to death in other games.

[xBluntxForce]

[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;329953]I’d rather have the Devs focus on optimizing and adding interesting DLC, Customization, and Weapons to keep the game fresh rather than add modes that are counter to the design and goal of Brink being a Objective Team Based Shooter. Exactly as I stated on the Bethesda Forum. TDM just devolves in to kill streaks and camping.

Why not try to get better at what Brink is all about? Plus TDM been done to death in other games.[/QUOTE]

And objectives haven’t been done to death in other games? What is “repair the crane” but a king of the hill battle? What is “deliver the hydro” but a capture the flag run? Don’t you camp the objective in this game? And why can’t they do all that stuff you mentioned, and add a team death match? Im not saying they should, im just curious as to why people don’t see the obvious potential to do team death match FAR BETTER THAN ANY OTHER GAME. The potential is there, but the will is not and that sucks. they could even make TDM maps, with less choke points, but more opportunities to explore the smart system with more open movement.

[SphereCow]

And objectives haven’t been done to death in other games? What is “repair the crane” but a king of the hill battle? What is “deliver the hydro” but a capture the flag run? Don’t you camp the objective in this game? And why can’t they do all that stuff you mentioned, and add a team death match? Im not saying they should, im just curious as to why people don’t see the obvious potential to do team death match FAR BETTER THAN ANY OTHER GAME. The potential is there, but the will is not and that sucks. they could even make TDM maps, with less choke points, but more opportunities to explore the smart system with more open movement.

Why shouldn’t Splash Damage work on non-linear campaigns and objectives that switch depending on the victory or loss circumstances of previous maps?

Why should they work on gametypes that they specifically avoided?

[xBluntxForce]

[QUOTE=Luddens Desir;329967]Why shouldn’t Splash Damage work on non-linear campaigns and objectives that switch depending on the victory or loss circumstances of previous maps?

Why should they work on gametypes that they specifically avoided?[/QUOTE]

Because the reasoning that “we’ll avoid this specific game type for the sake of being different” is weak. But your first idea is actually a great one, and Brink would be a much better game in my opinion if that was the route they went.

[brbrbr]

if someone want CoD/UT/BF - go there.
Brink/QW/RTCW is about teamplay, not stats/frag-whoring.

[SphereCow]

Because the reasoning that “we’ll avoid this specific game type for the sake of being different” is weak. But your first idea is actually a great one, and Brink would be a much better game in my opinion if that was the route they went.

But why would you develop a specific type of game play, only to end up working on the opposite, when they do not have an infinite amount of time to work?

[xBluntxForce]

[QUOTE=brbrbr;329980]if someone want CoD/UT/BF - go there.
Brink/QW/RTCW is about teamplay, not stats/frag-whoring.[/QUOTE]

Right Team play. What is the first word in TDM? And I love brink too much to ever go back to CoD any time soon.

[wolfnemesis75]

Wanting TDM added to Brink is like Blake Griffin wanting to be in Rage.

“Does Blake know that Rage is a FPS?”

[brbrbr]

Right Team play. What is the first word in TDM? And I love brink too much to ever go back to CoD any time soon.

first and only [meaning]words in TDM is “its contradict Brink idea and disgusting by nature, harm kids and kittes and forbidden by God himself !”.

[wolfnemesis75]

In my opinion, it’d be cool to see some more maps added rather than TDM.

[xBluntxForce]

But why would you develop a specific type of game play, only to end up working on the opposite, when they do not have an infinite amount of time to work?

Thats just a simple false dichotomy. Why should you have to pick one or the other? Its not like team death match and objective play are opposites, even though it seems to be that way. the same way people view cats and dogs as opposite even though they are just two different animals. In objective play, you still have to kill the other team. In team death match, the objective becomes killing the other team. If you follow competitive gaming, you’ll the teams that win the most use the best team strategies, they don’t just lone wolf it. Brink encourages team play, and team play in a death match environment is possible with this game. As for the infinite amount of time thing, I don’t know what kind of schedule they have, or how they decide to spend their time, and i don’t think you do either.

[SphereCow]

Thats just a simple false dichotomy. Why should you have to pick one or the other? Its not like team death match and objective play are opposites, even though it seems to be that way. the same way people view cats and dogs as opposite even though they are just two different animals. In objective play, you still have to kill the other team. In team death match, the objective becomes killing the other team. If you follow competitive gaming, you’ll the teams that win the most use the best team strategies, they don’t just lone wolf it. Brink encourages team play, and team play in a death match environment is possible with this game. As for the infinite amount of time thing, I don’t know what kind of schedule they have, or how they decide to spend their time, and i don’t think you do either.

I don’t need to know what they do with their time to know that when they’re working on one thing, they’re not putting that manpower towards something else. You never answered the question, either.

Why would they work on something that was specifically avoided, when they could make what they worked on better?

[brbrbr]

ie, turning Brink into CS. what a “wonderful” feature it can be. hint: you can write mod 4 this.
but thats contradict to both Valve and ZM strategy too.
there was different products for such niche/consumers.
and no, you don’t get the point of SD games backstory/teamplay too.
they not “just different animals”, but completely/somewhat/notable separate/individual/different[by design/gameplay] played/portayed.

[xBluntxForce]

[QUOTE=Luddens Desir;330011]I don’t need to know what they do with their time to know that when they’re working on one thing, they’re not putting that manpower towards something else. You never answered the question, either.

Why would they work on something that was specifically avoided, when they could make what they worked on better?[/QUOTE]

I didn’t answer your question because you presented a logical fallacy, but you fixed that with this question so I’ll answer this one.

Because one results in an over all better game, and one results in a better, and less redundant game.

And you act like multi tasking is impossible, or simply taking more time on the game isn’t an option.

[QUOTE=brbrbr;330012]ie, turning Brink into CS. what a “wonderful” feature it can be. hint: you can write mod 4 this.
but thats contradict to both Valve and ZM strategy too.
there was different products for such niche/consumers.
and no, you don’t get the point of SD games backstory/teamplay too.
they not “just different animals”, but completely/somewhat/notable separate/individual/different[by design/gameplay] played/portayed.[/QUOTE]

Whats with the fear of Brink being slightly like other games?

Different=/= good.
But on the same token, I acknowledge that popular=/=good.

However, there are things that can be learned from popular games, and ignoring those things for the sake of being different doesn’t help at all.

[SphereCow]

Because one results in an over all better game, and one results in a better, and less redundant game.

This is so subjective, I’m not even sure which condition would be tdm and which would be non-linear campaigns.

And you act like multi tasking is impossible, or simply taking more time on the game isn’t an option.

It’s not impossible. It’s just the idea of dedicating resources to doing something you avoided.

Splash Damage would be better off improving the type of gameplay they created by making non-linear maps/campaings and dynamic objectives, as they would already have the foundation for improving on that concept even further in games they create in the future.

Creating contrived gametypes to appeal to the people who want them is a waste of time, because they specifically went out of their way to avoid them. That is why TDM/CTF did not exist in W:ET/ET:QW.

They’ve been trying to combine the single player experience of good narrative and battling through a map with the multiplayer experience of interacting with other players in order to complete an objective.

Creating the regular game modes would just return to the paradigm of simply completing the objective, which is the interaction with your opponent, rather than the interactions with your environment and opponent.

[Rockhound]

[QUOTE=brbrbr;329980]if someone want CoD/UT/BF - go there.
Brink/QW/RTCW is about teamplay, not stats/frag-whoring.[/QUOTE]

rofl, you really dont know anything about shooters seriously. BFBC2 is also a team and objective based game as Brink. No it isnt? Lets have a look at rush. People need to defuse/activate the mcom. To do so you need a working team of players the only difference is the counter. In Brink you have a timer and in BFBC2 they count the kills. So its just simple to change this one thing and now Brink will not be any more teambased or otherwhise change BFBC2 and it will be a complete other game? Oh dear …

You and all the other lalalalas out there dont realize that Brink is working as any other FPS. Adding some content,k/d stats, etc wont change anything beside more players.

Really, if you want a teambased game without shooting go and play farmville.