You need to discuss gameplay.

(voidward) #1

I’m seriously considering plopping down $240 in order to be able to have a greater influence in shaping this game. But In can’t, I just can’t because SD has said precisely dick about gameplay.

This can’t be all about visuals and just the premise of class based teamplay. You did that with brink, and the game looked awesome, but then I got to play it and it was stiff, awkward, and completely bland.

I still consider Quake 3 Fortress the most fun game experience I’ve had period. I also played ET for years, great game. Quake Was decent, played that for some time also but it felt like a watered down version of ET for me. Do you see the pattern? Because I can’t ignore it, I love your studio but with every new I enjoy the experience less and less with Brink not even being worth my time.

[ul]
[li]I need to know what your goals are before I hand over any money. Especially for a free to play title.
[/li][li]If the gunplay aiming for Wolf:ET? Is it inspired by any other game?
[/li][li]What is movement like? I’d love bunny hopping and rocket jumping but that doesn’t seem realistic for this type of game. Strafe jumping maybe?
[/li][li]Is the title implying that there’s only 1 gameplay mode, all objective based?
[/li][li]What are the classes like? Can only engies plant/disarm? What special perks does each of the classes have and what role do they fill?
[/li][li]What kind of micro transactions will the game have? What can you buy? Are there seriously no credits included with founder’s packs? I can’t imagine someone paying you $320 to then need to spend more money on buying red dot sights or some other minute upgrades for guns.
[/li][/ul]

Not talking about this stuff just makes it seem like you have things to hide. Shiny visuals aren’t worth anything to me if the game plays like **** so I just can’t trust the trailers at all. You’re made some of my favorite games and you’re making it extremely hard for me to support you.

Please be up front with this if you want to attract your older communities. If you want to do this right, you’d really want to make a trailer or at least an official blog post. I have no idea how anyone is giving you money right now with how cryptic the game is.

(INF3RN0) #2

I agree with you, but you should consider the fact that the game is still in Alpha meaning that all of the above is probably still in development. I view the expensive packs as being there for the die-hards who really want to communicate directly with the devs on how the game progresses before Beta; think of it as a kick-starter almost. All I will say is that there are quite a lot of alpha testers who favor the original classics in terms of game play, so have hope until SD decide to make some official announcements- which I am sure they will once the time is right.

(potty200) #3

Why don’t you buy the $120 pack first then just upgrade if you are happy?

(voidward) #4

Perhaps, but they can still at least lay out their goals for what they want the game to be. And I would never support a kickstarter that can’t even tell me what they aim for the gameplay to be. Announcement of the gameplay when the time is right? Seems like that time would be before they start taking money from people.

Because if the game ends up being Brink 2 then I’ve wasted $120 dollars on a free game that I hate. I need to know that they learned something from Brink and are hopefully not going further down the same path.

(Dysfunkshion) #5

It’s pretty obvious to see what they’re trying to do.

They want to make a free class based, objective focused shooter. That’s the starting point.
They show that they have learned from past mistakes by trying to involve long term community members/paying customers to create a better experience. I’m confident that this game will be better than Brink, just because how much they try to involve the community. Ofcourse, they still have their own agenda. I like how they adapt the game based on statistics (The Echo system) and (I assume) Alpha player feedback.

(potty200) #6

Because if the game ends up being Brink 2 then I’ve wasted $120 dollars on a free game that I hate. I need to know that they learned something from Brink and are hopefully not going further down the same path.

If you are that concerned about buying it then just wait untill the release, or at least some sort of open beta.

(INF3RN0) #7

[QUOTE=voidward;423174]Perhaps, but they can still at least lay out their goals for what they want the game to be. And I would never support a kickstarter that can’t even tell me what they aim for the gameplay to be. Announcement of the gameplay when the time is right? Seems like that time would be before they start taking money from people.
[/QUOTE]

It’s a good point and I don’t see why only us testers get to know the general goals of the game- it definitely would sell a lot more people on the packs imo. I’ll bring it up with the devs myself, but I think they didn’t want to get into specifics as I said already. Still game play footage can sometimes cause a lot of misinformation and speculation, so I understand why this is important to you.

(badman) #8

We felt that doing a vid about Echo early on was important to show that we’re serious about player feedback and now have a great tool for visualising gameplay data to that end. More videos (including a higher level look at what Dirty Bomb actually is) are definitely planned!

(voidward) #9

Good to hear.

It’s interesting to see that you have those types of tools - though spawn locations and clip sizes were far from my primary issues with Brink, so Echo in itself doesn’t put me at ease about the direction you guys are going in. Guess I’ll have to wait until I hear some more news before I put down any money.

(Wepohn) #10

Hopefully you guys make use of the info you get with Echo, I’m sure Bungie had something similar in Halo 3, maybe even Halo 2 but they couldn’t even get the default spawn locations right.

(Brinkman) #11

It is pretty ballsy of them to throw us a scrap video and expect us to drink the kool-aid with $30-240 investments. Even Kick Starter projects provide more information when asking for cash.

Become more transparent with the game if you want support Splash Damage.

(voidward) #12

[QUOTE=Brinkman;424013]It is pretty ballsy of them to throw us a scrap video and expect us to drink the kool-aid with $30-240 investments. Even Kick Starter projects provide more information when asking for cash.

Become more transparent with the game if you want support Splash Damage.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.
I want to be on-board, but info that’s available is way too vague.

(NathanDavid) #13

I was discussing this with a couple friends earlier and we share the same sentiment. We would love to support the game, but without a more specific direction, especially in the area of weapon and movement mechanics, we can’t take the risk.

Also, I do find it odd that $240 some how qualifies you as a honest and knowledgeable partner in game design. Let those with knowledge and experience speak with their voice rather than their wallets!

+rep Voidward & Brinkman

(Kendle) #14

I’m not sure what SD could say that would satisfy you (or anyone else). They could say “we’re making this game like ET” and it could still be totally different from what you expect because their definition of what made ET fun could be different from yours. I’d say the 2 trailers they’ve released so far give a better indication of what the game’s like than any statement they could make. Besides, they made all sorts of claims for Brink that never came to fruition, so would you believe them even if they told you what you wanted to hear?

A fine sentiment, but how do you distinguish those with knowledge and experience from those without?

There are many people in the Alpha already who were directly invited by SD, due to their activity on these forums and the manner in which they’ve always conducted themselves, which when you think about it is the only way SD could ever judge who’s “worthy” to be included or not. Everyone else (me for one) has had to pay to get in, because SD don’t know me from Adam and paying to get in is the only way I can demonstrate my genuine willingness to help develop the game.

Besides, the game’s at Alpha stage at the moment. There will be a closed beta before final release that only costs $30 (half the cost of a retail game) to get in. Either wait till then, or bite the bullet and put your money where your mouth is now. Either way, you must accept that SD can’t take input from just anyone without some method of distinguishing the relevant voices from the rabble.

(en2ie) #15

I see where you’re coming from, but how else are they expected to select people. Submit your gaming credentials here --> ?

Most people willing to spend that much for whats essentially a few goodies and early alpha access would at least be committed to playing the game - which is feedback in itself.