Jump to content

Brink


MetalCaveman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, Hottie, you know what that means...

 

We gotta Power Level these Americans. I'll get the bumper bag of Earl Grey, you get the 20 litres of milk.

 

Oh, wait, you meant...

 

I will say that I don't like games that reward mob mentality.

 

I'm pretty sure Brink's trying to do the opposite- it's about getting everyone to work as a team and it emphasises filling in gaps in the team's classforce. Almost no points rewarded for kills, significant points for helping teammates. The more precise and effective you are (not a mob), the more you'll win.

 

Unlike most other team games- even in Killzone 2 and Team Fortress 2, which require objectives for winning, you can get to the top of the leaderboard simply by killing.

Edited by kenshi_ryden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Brink's trying to do the opposite- it's about getting everyone to work as a team and it emphasises filling in gaps in the team's classforce. Almost no points rewarded for kills, significant points for helping teammates. The more precise and effective you are (not a mob), the more you'll win.

 

Unlike most other team games- even in Killzone 2 and Team Fortress 2, which require objectives for winning, you can get to the top of the leaderboard simply by killing.

Most definitely. I get much more points for buffing my allies' health and reviving them than I get when I go shooty-shooty and pop a few in some bastard's head.

 

Also, I love the customization options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever floats your teabag, mate!

 

Hey, at least it's not... "Cream".

 

 

 

@Duke: That sounds good! I'd really like to get Brink, but it's just too low on my priorities list for games. The top 10 are like things I'd love to get, and Brink's somewhere there, but there are far too many above it. Still, we'll see how the Summer goes.

Edited by kenshi_ryden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't argue with other people about whether the GT review is accurate. :P

So you just trust it without checking other review sources?

BAH!

 

No, I look at other review sources, I've just found based on my own experience that GT reviews tend to provide me the best information for determining whether I will like a game or not. Frequently GT will rate a game highly, but by their review I will be able to determine that it's not for me, or vice-versa.

 

Also, what I'm saying is, unless I've played the game, I don't go arguing about whether GT knew what they were talking about, because unless I've played the game I don't have a fucking clue if they knew what they were talking about. This is unrelated to whether or not I look at other review sources. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading a few more reviews I think that Joystiq might have a point. Other people have made the exact same complaints or gripes about the bad AI and frustrating single player experience of this game. Others have said that the multiplayer isn't quite there yet. If the reviewer really hated this game then why shouldn't he have quit it and just given it a bad rating? Honestly, I wish game critics were harsher in their reviews because it seems like 90% of games are in the 70-80 range and I'd rather know which games really are fun and which are not (subjective I know).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not very interested in multiplayer-only type games. I mean, I wasn't even aware that Brink would try to attempt single player. :unsure:

 

Still, the point being that unless you can become the next Halo or Team Fortress 2, games that heavily focus on multiplayer have a brief moment of activity and therefore a brief moment of entertainment. As an example, how many gamers are still playing M.A.G.?

 

So, the question being is whether Brink will be just as active a month from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading a few more reviews I think that Joystiq might have a point. Other people have made the exact same complaints or gripes about the bad AI and frustrating single player experience of this game. Others have said that the multiplayer isn't quite there yet. If the reviewer really hated this game then why shouldn't he have quit it and just given it a bad rating? Honestly, I wish game critics were harsher in their reviews because it seems like 90% of games are in the 70-80 range and I'd rather know which games really are fun and which are not (subjective I know).

At the same time, many of their complaints make it sound like they aren't getting the point. I got the vibe that he wasn't happy with his inability to "lone gun" his way through the game, a la Call of Duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. It's like giving Left 4 Dead a bad review for its single-player experience; that's not the point. At the same time, I believe some of the promotion for this game focused on the single-player a little, so that could be a valid complaint if someone thought he was purchasing a full-on single-player campaign.

Edited by p4warrior
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, the point being that unless you can become the next Halo or Team Fortress 2, games that heavily focus on multiplayer have a brief moment of activity and therefore a brief moment of entertainment. As an example, how many gamers are still playing M.A.G.?

Last time I played Shadowrun, at which point it was 3 years old I think, there were still people playing and the game was panned by critics. Even though a game isn't attracting the big numbers, there'll probably be enough people playing that if you enjoy it enough to come back to it, you can.

Edited by Mr W Phallus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, the point being that unless you can become the next Halo or Team Fortress 2, games that heavily focus on multiplayer have a brief moment of activity and therefore a brief moment of entertainment. As an example, how many gamers are still playing M.A.G.?

Last time I played Shadowrun, at which point it was 3 years old I think, there were still people playing and the game was panned by critics. Even though a game isn't attracting the big numbers, there'll probably be enough people playing that if you enjoy it enough to come back to it, you can.

Even the new Medal of Honor still has people playing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, the point being that unless you can become the next Halo or Team Fortress 2, games that heavily focus on multiplayer have a brief moment of activity and therefore a brief moment of entertainment. As an example, how many gamers are still playing M.A.G.?

 

So, the question being is whether Brink will be just as active a month from now.

 

 

That's really not too true. Sure, some games die out, but especially on PC most games retain a sufficient fanbase for many years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...