[QUOTE=BioSnark;349369]Have you played the game, nick? If you view the maps as a series of empty rooms and passages and the props as having no bullet clipping then I assume you have not. You’re like about security’s pc twin and as good at ignoring facts that don’t fit your argument even when they’re repeatedly stated. In what way can “random crates” be more obvious other than sticking some console sticky cover on them and writing “hide here” on their sides? You are not someone who should be calling other people “dumb” or telling them they aren’t using their brains.
It’s my impression that SMART is underused in level design because combat areas are predominantly only one to two levels in height. Container city is an obvious example where passage walls are made out to look like shipping crates and ship hulls but there are lots of invisible walls and no fully realized ships and crates for players to climb on. Contrast this level design with a Quake Wars like refinery where the buildings around gdf forward are all designed to be climbed and jumped around on even if there is practically no reason for players to ever be there post-warmup. Brink level design is built on traditional shooter mapping like corridors and invisible walls when perhaps it would be better served with a more open and fully three dimensional design that you get in ETQW with all the flying vehicles and arty. In the latter, you’re at least forced to consider the level as actual buildings lining a street rather than urban textured walls lining a corridor. I don’t mean that Brink should have actually had open quake wars maps, rather it needed the same design mentality of building up, not carving out.
ps. that aquarium jump never ever struck me as anything but designed.[/QUOTE]
Couldn’t put it better myself