I think it was all more in reaction to TychoCelchuuu's post, as opposed to Pokemon Master.
Yes. This.
I dont remember Pokemon Master being half as much of a silly goose as Tychocelchuuu with his "Everyone who plays like this etc.. is retarded". And no he didnt say retarded. Im PARAPHRASING. But he basically put down a whole group of people for no good reason.
Thats the "[strike]as[/strike]silly goosery-ishness" i was referring to.
And im not RAGING. Jesus christ, calm down yourself. Its me making a point that inflammatory statements and "silly goosery" dont make for a very friendly thread, nor very friendly discussion.
I like the implication that people who play for unlocks and achievements are somehow wasting their time in a worse way than people who play for what appears to be a more abstract version of "fun" with no particular direction. Especially referring to achievement-hunters as lacking intelligence.
I hate achievements. They bore me. That doesn't make it okay for me to go WELL YOU STUPID PEOPLE AND YOUR STUPIDITY HAVE RUINED MY GAME AND YOU ARE SO DUMB FOR ENJOYING WHAT YOU ENJOY.
Grow up.
No, no, no, I never said people who like unlocking stuff or who like achievements are dumb. I said that the achievements are either designed for those people (the ones who like unlocking stuff) or for the people who are so stupid that they can't figure out a video game unless the game teaches them, slowly, by doling out little unlocks every 5 minutes for each thing they do right.
My argument is that for the first type of person, the whole "unlock stuff" thing is fine with me, as long as it's a a CHOICE. If I want to turn that off, please let me. For the second kind of person, they're an idiot and will probably leave unlocks turned on because they can't work the menu.
So please stop raging at me for wanting to play a game without wading through 20 tedious hours of "oh shit, do you want that scope? Well sorry you have to use a succession of five slightly worse scopes until you get to use the scope you want, but we're going to act like it's good because you're PROGRESSING when you get a new scope!!"
I think it was all more in reaction to TychoCelchuuu's post, as opposed to Pokemon Master.
Yes. This.
I dont remember Pokemon Master being half as much of a silly goose as Tychocelchuuu with his "Everyone who plays like this etc.. is retarded". And no he didnt say retarded. Im PARAPHRASING. But he basically put down a whole group of people for no good reason.
Thats the "[strike]as[/strike]silly goosery-ishness" i was referring to.
And im not RAGING. Jesus christ, calm down yourself. Its me making a point that inflammatory statements and "silly goosery" dont make for a very friendly thread, nor very friendly discussion.
Sheesh.
I feel like i need a drink now.
If you say so.
Look, if you're going to tell other people to cool it, I'd suggest you take some of that advice as well. I really don't want to have to explain myself in detail here, especially with regards to Tycho's posts or yours, because like I said, people are reading views on unlocks as being outright personal attacks against each other when they are neither designed nor intended that way.
EDIT: And it looks like I'm beaten to post because I'm slow at editing.
Yeah, to put it in extra short terms, because my long posts have been entirely misread: unlocking stuff for fun is fine, as long as it's an option. I don't find it fun and I should not be forced to unlock things any more than people who play football should be forced to use running plays until they unlock passing plays. Brink is a competitive multiplayer FPS, and I like my competitive multiplayer FPS games to be competitive multiplayer first person shooters ONLY, rather than RPGs on top of it.
Yeah, to put it in extra short terms, because my long posts have been entirely misread: unlocking stuff for fun is fine, as long as it's an option. I don't find it fun and I should not be forced to unlock things any more than people who play football should be forced to use running plays until they unlock passing plays. Brink is a competitive multiplayer FPS, and I like my competitive multiplayer FPS games to be competitive multiplayer first person shooters ONLY, rather than RPGs on top of it.
Afraid your anger (though I fully understand it) is wasted in this thread. The RPG element you loathe is how they add depth, whether you or I or anyone else likes it is irrelevant. Enough people like it that we can't change it, not with letters to our congressmen or with posts on message boards.
Therefore, enough people like it that you should probably be less curt in your proclamations.
Yeah, to put it in extra short terms, because my long posts have been entirely misread: unlocking stuff for fun is fine, as long as it's an option. I don't find it fun and I should not be forced to unlock things any more than people who play football should be forced to use running plays until they unlock passing plays. Brink is a competitive multiplayer FPS, and I like my competitive multiplayer FPS games to be competitive multiplayer first person shooters ONLY, rather than RPGs on top of it.
Afraid your anger (though I fully understand it) is wasted in this thread. The RPG element you loathe is how they add depth, whether you or I or anyone else likes it is irrelevant. Enough people like it that we can't change it, not with letters to our congressmen or with posts on message boards.
Therefore, enough people like it that you should probably be less curt in your proclamations.
Lots of people like it, so I should act like I like it? Unlocks don't add depth, they subtract depth at the beginning and force you to dig your own depth. Deep games are ones that have lots of options, not ones that take all their options and hide them from you until you've played long enough. And I think I've been the opposite of curt.
Yeah, to put it in extra short terms, because my long posts have been entirely misread: unlocking stuff for fun is fine, as long as it's an option. I don't find it fun and I should not be forced to unlock things any more than people who play football should be forced to use running plays until they unlock passing plays. Brink is a competitive multiplayer FPS, and I like my competitive multiplayer FPS games to be competitive multiplayer first person shooters ONLY, rather than RPGs on top of it.
Afraid your anger (though I fully understand it) is wasted in this thread. The RPG element you loathe is how they add depth, whether you or I or anyone else likes it is irrelevant. Enough people like it that we can't change it, not with letters to our congressmen or with posts on message boards.
Therefore, enough people like it that you should probably be less curt in your proclamations.
Lots of people like it, so I should act like I like it? Unlocks don't add depth, they subtract depth at the beginning and force you to dig your own depth. Deep games are ones that have lots of options, not ones that take all their options and hide them from you until you've played long enough. And I think I've been the opposite of curt.
Here is an idea. If you dont like it... PLAY SOMETHING ELSE.
Yeah, to put it in extra short terms, because my long posts have been entirely misread: unlocking stuff for fun is fine, as long as it's an option. I don't find it fun and I should not be forced to unlock things any more than people who play football should be forced to use running plays until they unlock passing plays. Brink is a competitive multiplayer FPS, and I like my competitive multiplayer FPS games to be competitive multiplayer first person shooters ONLY, rather than RPGs on top of it.
Afraid your anger (though I fully understand it) is wasted in this thread. The RPG element you loathe is how they add depth, whether you or I or anyone else likes it is irrelevant. Enough people like it that we can't change it, not with letters to our congressmen or with posts on message boards.
Therefore, enough people like it that you should probably be less curt in your proclamations.
Lots of people like it, so I should act like I like it? Unlocks don't add depth, they subtract depth at the beginning and force you to dig your own depth. Deep games are ones that have lots of options, not ones that take all their options and hide them from you until you've played long enough. And I think I've been the opposite of curt.
Where did I tell you to act like you like unlocks? All I said was to be less curt. You've been abrasive, I haven't been the first to mention it.
Whether or not we like unlocking things, it's in this game. You've made your point about it, now if you don't have anything else to discuss you should find a new game to discuss, as you're detracting from the conversation in this thread.
Here is a really informative Q and A with Splash Damage community relations manager Steve (badman) Hessel. It is is from a fan site and blows most of the "game journalism" shit out of the water. There is real no bullshit speculation information here about some things people have been asking about-- unlocks, load-outs, fireteams, hitboxes, etc.
DouglasDanger on
0
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
I am a little disapointed that they don't have a pc demo at pax.
He didn't really care for it, but he is a hardcore COD guy. He had trouble with the controls. He said they felt clunky. Who knows what the senstivity was set at. Which I guess is a thing that will take some getting used to. COD and most other FPS games are really 2D, you move on planes. You move three-dimensionally in Brink. You can climb walls and mantle and all kinds of stuff. Most of the clips we have of Brink don't showcase SMART.
DouglasDanger on
0
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
He said the controls felt "clunky and slow to respond like a battlefield or bad company game".
Neither of which had clunky controls or were slow to respond. That confused me.
I guess people who play a lot of COD (multiple games) have strong feelings that it controls "tighter" than Battlefield or Bad Company. I have only played Black Ops, and while it was fun for a few months, I don't think I will buy another COD game.
I don't play a lot of games, and I don't play a lot of shooters. I played Goldeneye, then Perfect Dark, then Timesplitters 2 and 3, and then Halo and Halo 2, and now I play Black Ops. All of these games are very different, I always have a lot of adapting to do. So controls aren't really a big deal for me.
Eh, don't care what someone who played on a console thought about controls. That's like someone who watches a pirated version of a movie that came from a video camera snuck into the theater, and then complains about the picture quality. It's like, well, sure, some shitty copies will be better shitty copies, but I don't care what you think about the picture because I'm going to watch the actual movie.
Eh, don't care what someone who played on a console thought about controls. That's like someone who watches a pirated version of a movie that came from a video camera snuck into the theater, and then complains about the picture quality. It's like, well, sure, some shitty copies will be better shitty copies, but I don't care what you think about the picture because I'm going to watch the actual movie.
Brink is being developed for xbox360, ps3 and PC. There are teams for each platform. Splash Damage wants to deliver the same experience on all three platforms. The PC has kb+m input and I think it will have dedicated servers, but everything else is going to be identical, last I heard.
Your "I'm a PC" elitist attitude and your abrasive attitude is very off-putting.
FPS games on consoles almost always feel 'clunky and slow to respond' compared to PC games, unless the PC version was ported from the console version (in which case, the control scheme is virtually the same as the console, proving the point that console controls feel bad to PC users).
I don't care what some BLOPS famous dude feels about the console controls of a game that I'm only going to be playing on PC. He spent more time talking about whether or not he would buy it if he were someone that only bought x games per year or 'whoa man, it's got classes!', I'd prefer a reason other than 'my pet game is better!' and I'm sure that the devs would love to know what he means by 'clunky'.
ETQW (which used idTech4) felt fine to me, responsive and smooth. Brink is also using id4, so I really doubt they've gone backwards with the feel of the game, especially given how SMART is one of their biggest selling points.
Consider that the Doom 3 and Quake 4 regular ol'multiplayer used idTech 4. Those two were blasts from the pasts, in terms of not being clunky. Just fast, light-footed, high octane shooting fests. Granted, neither had any sort of mantling and grappling, but it's not like CoD had any either (asides from jumping over knee-high walls), and it runs on idTech 3.
I've been looking forward to Brink, but I don't know if I can really bring myself to pay for a title that is strictly MP. It's something I'll definitely want a piece of when the price drops, though. I've had the worst craving for MP FPS ever since I stopped played F.E.A.R. Combat years ago, I hope this can scratch the itch.
It's not really strictly MP. If by that you mean that the MP and SP portions play alike, then yeah, I guess.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
I don't care what some BLOPS famous dude feels about the console controls of a game that I'm only going to be playing on PC. He spent more time talking about whether or not he would buy it if he were someone that only bought x games per year or 'whoa man, it's got classes!', I'd prefer a reason other than 'my pet game is better!' and I'm sure that the devs would love to know what he means by 'clunky'.
I don't care either, but I'm sure there will be a lot of COD afficianados who will ignore Brink because if this guy's report. Then again, maybe fewer of those type of COD players is a good thing in this case. They can have their bland killing box treadmill game, I'll take the one that rewards tactical thinking and teamwork moreso than just shooting dudes.
Eh, don't care what someone who played on a console thought about controls. That's like someone who watches a pirated version of a movie that came from a video camera snuck into the theater, and then complains about the picture quality. It's like, well, sure, some shitty copies will be better shitty copies, but I don't care what you think about the picture because I'm going to watch the actual movie.
Brink is being developed for xbox360, ps3 and PC. There are teams for each platform. Splash Damage wants to deliver the same experience on all three platforms. The PC has kb+m input and I think it will have dedicated servers, but everything else is going to be identical, last I heard.
Your "I'm a PC" elitist attitude and your abrasive attitude is very off-putting.
It's really annoying when this argument comes up. Yes, you may prefer using a controller, but a keyboard and mouse are objectively "better" in terms of how easy it is to aim and shoot precisely where you want to.
I don't care what some BLOPS famous dude feels about the console controls of a game that I'm only going to be playing on PC. He spent more time talking about whether or not he would buy it if he were someone that only bought x games per year or 'whoa man, it's got classes!', I'd prefer a reason other than 'my pet game is better!' and I'm sure that the devs would love to know what he means by 'clunky'.
I don't care either, but I'm sure there will be a lot of COD afficianados who will ignore Brink because if this guy's report. Then again, maybe fewer of those type of COD players is a good thing in this case. They can have their bland killing box treadmill game, I'll take the one that rewards tactical thinking and teamwork moreso than just shooting dudes.
I don't know that the guy in the video was specifically a major CoD-head or anything, it was only a 1 minute clip and all he said was that it wouldn't make his cut and the controls felt floaty to him. Neither of which really tells us all that much to be honest.
But yeah, in a more general sense if a group's of the attitude that CoD is the pinnacle and all things are judged according to those standards, then yes, it's probably best if they stick with CoD. Apples, Oranges etc.
EDIT: Re: The PC vs Console arguments. Drop it. Seriously. His opinions on the console version of the game are only irrelevant if he's natively a PC player, which I doubt is the case. More to the point, arguing over the Superiority of one control scheme over the other is pretty irrelevant here unless Brink is incorporating cross-platform play, which it's not.
I don't know that the guy in the video was specifically a major CoD-head or anything, it was only a 1 minute clip and all he said was that it wouldn't make his cut and the controls felt floaty to him. Neither of which really tells us all that much to be honest.
But yeah, in a more general sense if a group's of the attitude that CoD is the pinnacle and all things are judged according to those standards, then yes, it's probably best if they stick with CoD. Apples, Oranges etc.
Woody(sGamerTag), one of the Youtube Heroes for Black Ops, played it and made a little vlog thing about it.
<snip>
He didn't really care for it, but he is a hardcore COD guy.
He is a console man as well, you can see the buttons in his youtube videos. Nearly all of those videos are about BLOPS or Painkiller.
His control complaints are only relevant to people who are playing on consoles. Even then, I doubt that it's more than 'I'm used to this other game, that game is different so I don't feel comfortable'. Especially if he can't give any details.
I just watched his Homefront review, 2 minutes long and his two complaints are that reloads take too long and the graphics are worse than BLOPS ('it is bad', he says about the whole game). I don't think we have to worry too much about his bad reviews.
You know. This crap on the previous page really turned into an ugly argument over the semantics of what kind of carrot you guys like on the stick above your heads.
ALL GAMES MANIPULATE YOU. Its the god damn purpose of it. All MEDIA manipulates you. Its the god damn purpose of it. To make you think, to make you react, to keep you reading, to keep you playing, to get you to purchase it, to get you to make a decision.
If you dont like the carrot on the stick, thats fine. Its not your taste in carrots. But dont think for a second that any game, from Pong to whatever is produced 5 years from now wasnt meant to manipulate you into playing it.
Yes some forms of manipulation are less subtle than others. But its a commercial business, and the stick and carrot WORK. If they didnt it wouldnt be a multi billion dollar industry.
This is why i consider video games to be ART. Because ART manipulates the viewer. The whole point of ART is to engage someone, and make them pay attention to it. Otherwise its just a meaningless expression.
This is why i wish there was some new news on Brink. Or new footage. Or something. Instead we are getting bitchy over something we havent even gotten to experience yet.
I remember when this thread ( for about 20 pages or so ) was friendly enthusiasm.
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
You know. This crap on the previous page really turned into an ugly argument over the semantics of what kind of carrot you guys like on the stick above your heads.
ALL GAMES MANIPULATE YOU. Its the god damn purpose of it. All MEDIA manipulates you. Its the god damn purpose of it. To make you think, to make you react, to keep you reading, to keep you playing, to get you to purchase it, to get you to make a decision.
If you dont like the carrot on the stick, thats fine. Its not your taste in carrots. But dont think for a second that any game, from Pong to whatever is produced 5 years from now wasnt meant to manipulate you into playing it.
Yes some forms of manipulation are less subtle than others. But its a commercial business, and the stick and carrot WORK. If they didnt it wouldnt be a multi billion dollar industry.
This is why i consider video games to be ART. Because ART manipulates the viewer. The whole point of ART is to engage someone, and make them pay attention to it. Otherwise its just a meaningless expression.
This is why i wish there was some new news on Brink. Or new footage. Or something. Instead we are getting bitchy over something we havent even gotten to experience yet.
I remember when this thread ( for about 20 pages or so ) was friendly enthusiasm.
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
You know. This crap on the previous page really turned into an ugly argument over the semantics of what kind of carrot you guys like on the stick above your heads.
ALL GAMES MANIPULATE YOU. Its the god damn purpose of it. All MEDIA manipulates you. Its the god damn purpose of it. To make you think, to make you react, to keep you reading, to keep you playing, to get you to purchase it, to get you to make a decision.
If you dont like the carrot on the stick, thats fine. Its not your taste in carrots. But dont think for a second that any game, from Pong to whatever is produced 5 years from now wasnt meant to manipulate you into playing it.
Yes some forms of manipulation are less subtle than others. But its a commercial business, and the stick and carrot WORK. If they didnt it wouldnt be a multi billion dollar industry.
This is why i consider video games to be ART. Because ART manipulates the viewer. The whole point of ART is to engage someone, and make them pay attention to it. Otherwise its just a meaningless expression.
This is why i wish there was some new news on Brink. Or new footage. Or something. Instead we are getting bitchy over something we havent even gotten to experience yet.
I remember when this thread ( for about 20 pages or so ) was friendly enthusiasm.
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
I dont know where "addiction" came into this.
okay, take out "addicted" then, my point still stands
i'm not necessarily against some aspects of levelling and unlocks in shooters but, as we all know, a lot of the reason these things are becoming so common is that they light up the bit of your brain that gets hooked on pressing the buttons that make the shiny lights turn on, just like pigeons pecking buttons for food pellets
and this is more to do with making sure you keep playing their multiplayer game and paying them money, not because it's art. schindler's list doesn't need to give the audience sweeties to keep them in their seats, so you can't imply that this is how all art and media works, or should work. art doesn't manipulate in this deceitful kind of way
You know. This crap on the previous page really turned into an ugly argument over the semantics of what kind of carrot you guys like on the stick above your heads.
ALL GAMES MANIPULATE YOU. Its the god damn purpose of it. All MEDIA manipulates you. Its the god damn purpose of it. To make you think, to make you react, to keep you reading, to keep you playing, to get you to purchase it, to get you to make a decision.
If you dont like the carrot on the stick, thats fine. Its not your taste in carrots. But dont think for a second that any game, from Pong to whatever is produced 5 years from now wasnt meant to manipulate you into playing it.
Yes some forms of manipulation are less subtle than others. But its a commercial business, and the stick and carrot WORK. If they didnt it wouldnt be a multi billion dollar industry.
This is why i consider video games to be ART. Because ART manipulates the viewer. The whole point of ART is to engage someone, and make them pay attention to it. Otherwise its just a meaningless expression.
This is why i wish there was some new news on Brink. Or new footage. Or something. Instead we are getting bitchy over something we havent even gotten to experience yet.
I remember when this thread ( for about 20 pages or so ) was friendly enthusiasm.
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
I dont know where "addiction" came into this.
okay, take out "addicted" then, my point still stands
i'm not necessarily against some aspects of levelling and unlocks in shooters but, as we all know, a lot of the reason these things are becoming so common is that they light up the bit of your brain that gets hooked on pressing the buttons that make the shiny lights turn on, just like pigeons pecking buttons for food pellets
and this is more to do with making sure you keep playing their multiplayer game and paying them money, not because it's art. schindler's list doesn't need to give the audience sweeties to keep them in their seats, so you can't imply that this is how all art and media works, or should work. art doesn't manipulate in this deceitful kind of way
This is where i bow out.
As someone else said, in DnD you wouldnt start at level 20 with all the gear. The thing about progression like this, is it DOES press the right buttons for some people. But somehow thats deceitful?
Under that light, RPG elements in general are deceitful. Any sort of reward system in a game is deceitful.
It paints a whole hell of a lot of things in a negative light when you put it that way.
Ok, so I talked with the guy who got to play Brink at PAX, and here are some things I found out:
- overall, he was really impressed.
- The game feels really polished. For anyone familiar with Splash Damage games, he said he feels like what Quake Wars should've been.
- SMART really works. He is a PC gamer and not really good with controllers, so he only used the SMART button to do maneuvers and he said it works really well. It doesn't feel cumbersome, it doesn't get in the way or feel annoying and in every case where we wanted it to work, it worked just how he wanted it to - no misfires.
- The weapons felt really satisfying.
- hip-firing is extremely effective - he said up to around mid range, and you don't have to burst fire to make it effective. He said we was owning guys by running in rooms and just spraying them with an SMG. He said hip-firing felt like what you would expect from an SD game. This is good news to me.
- Walking with the Medium body type is a bit slow, but sprinting was pretty quick. He said the sprint speed was comparable to the sprint speed in W:ET. He said that the Light body types must be ******* flying around the map.
- There is no limbo menu - no menu to change class. Command Posts replace it, meaning command posts are the only place you can change class. This adds even more importance to capturing them.
- Said the customization was ******* amazing.
- As far as damage goes, he said grenades did ****. They were more used as a tool for for crowd control, knocking players down, and dealing some damage on the side.
- The main thing he was impressed with was that nothing annoyed him about the game. He said he plays COD a lot, and although he enjoys it, it can annoy the **** out him - this was not the case with Brink. He said in the game he played, his team was getting owned, and he still wasn't getting annoyed.
Some bad things:
- said he witnessed some lag spikes - and they were only playing over LAN. The system they played on was PS3, so this could either be a netcode problem or a problem with PSN.
- when I mentioned above that his team was getting owned, he said they were getting practically getting spawn camped. When I asked him if there was any anti-spawnkill mechanisms, like turrets or whatnot, he said he doesn't remember seeing anything like that.
You know. This crap on the previous page really turned into an ugly argument over the semantics of what kind of carrot you guys like on the stick above your heads.
ALL GAMES MANIPULATE YOU. Its the god damn purpose of it. All MEDIA manipulates you. Its the god damn purpose of it. To make you think, to make you react, to keep you reading, to keep you playing, to get you to purchase it, to get you to make a decision.
If you dont like the carrot on the stick, thats fine. Its not your taste in carrots. But dont think for a second that any game, from Pong to whatever is produced 5 years from now wasnt meant to manipulate you into playing it.
Yes some forms of manipulation are less subtle than others. But its a commercial business, and the stick and carrot WORK. If they didnt it wouldnt be a multi billion dollar industry.
This is why i consider video games to be ART. Because ART manipulates the viewer. The whole point of ART is to engage someone, and make them pay attention to it. Otherwise its just a meaningless expression.
This is why i wish there was some new news on Brink. Or new footage. Or something. Instead we are getting bitchy over something we havent even gotten to experience yet.
I remember when this thread ( for about 20 pages or so ) was friendly enthusiasm.
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
I dont know where "addiction" came into this.
okay, take out "addicted" then, my point still stands
i'm not necessarily against some aspects of levelling and unlocks in shooters but, as we all know, a lot of the reason these things are becoming so common is that they light up the bit of your brain that gets hooked on pressing the buttons that make the shiny lights turn on, just like pigeons pecking buttons for food pellets
and this is more to do with making sure you keep playing their multiplayer game and paying them money, not because it's art. schindler's list doesn't need to give the audience sweeties to keep them in their seats, so you can't imply that this is how all art and media works, or should work. art doesn't manipulate in this deceitful kind of way
This is where i bow out.
As someone else said, in DnD you wouldnt start at level 20 with all the gear. The thing about progression like this, is it DOES press the right buttons for some people. But somehow thats deceitful?
Under that light, RPG elements in general are deceitful. Any sort of reward system in a game is deceitful.
It paints a whole hell of a lot of things in a negative light when you put it that way.
I know you've bowed out, but the relevant comparison here is not DnD, it's football. You don't unlock anything in football because the fun part of football is the competition and the strategy, not progressing up the treadmill. You certainly can design a competitive multiplayer FPS to also have the leveling treadmill, which is what most games do these days, but that's grafting something else onto the game, and not everyone finds that part fun, especially because it wrecks the competitiveness until everyone has unlocked everything.
It's not really strictly MP. If by that you mean that the MP and SP portions play alike, then yeah, I guess.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
Wait, what do you mean it has SP? It has an actual campaign or do you just mean it has bots?
Enemy Territory, if I recall, could be played in a campaign style or with bots or something, but it was entirely boring, because everything was designed for MP, it wasn't fun to do the same things by yourself.
It's not really strictly MP. If by that you mean that the MP and SP portions play alike, then yeah, I guess.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
Wait, what do you mean it has SP? It has an actual campaign or do you just mean it has bots?
Enemy Territory, if I recall, could be played in a campaign style or with bots or something, but it was entirely boring, because everything was designed for MP, it wasn't fun to do the same things by yourself.
It's basically the same in Brink, although they promise that it won't be boring because the bots are awesome.
Ok, so I talked with the guy who got to play Brink at PAX, and here are some things I found out:
- overall, he was really impressed.
- The game feels really polished. For anyone familiar with Splash Damage games, he said he feels like what Quake Wars should've been.
- SMART really works. He is a PC gamer and not really good with controllers, so he only used the SMART button to do maneuvers and he said it works really well. It doesn't feel cumbersome, it doesn't get in the way or feel annoying and in every case where we wanted it to work, it worked just how he wanted it to - no misfires.
- The weapons felt really satisfying.
- hip-firing is extremely effective - he said up to around mid range, and you don't have to burst fire to make it effective. He said we was owning guys by running in rooms and just spraying them with an SMG. He said hip-firing felt like what you would expect from an SD game. This is good news to me.
- Walking with the Medium body type is a bit slow, but sprinting was pretty quick. He said the sprint speed was comparable to the sprint speed in W:ET. He said that the Light body types must be ******* flying around the map.
- There is no limbo menu - no menu to change class. Command Posts replace it, meaning command posts are the only place you can change class. This adds even more importance to capturing them.
- Said the customization was ******* amazing.
- As far as damage goes, he said grenades did ****. They were more used as a tool for for crowd control, knocking players down, and dealing some damage on the side.
- The main thing he was impressed with was that nothing annoyed him about the game. He said he plays COD a lot, and although he enjoys it, it can annoy the **** out him - this was not the case with Brink. He said in the game he played, his team was getting owned, and he still wasn't getting annoyed.
Some bad things:
- said he witnessed some lag spikes - and they were only playing over LAN. The system they played on was PS3, so this could either be a netcode problem or a problem with PSN.
- when I mentioned above that his team was getting owned, he said they were getting practically getting spawn camped. When I asked him if there was any anti-spawnkill mechanisms, like turrets or whatnot, he said he doesn't remember seeing anything like that.
Everything sounds great except for the Spawn Camping thing. That said, its really easy to corner people in a game they are new at.
It's not really strictly MP. If by that you mean that the MP and SP portions play alike, then yeah, I guess.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
Wait, what do you mean it has SP? It has an actual campaign or do you just mean it has bots?
Enemy Territory, if I recall, could be played in a campaign style or with bots or something, but it was entirely boring, because everything was designed for MP, it wasn't fun to do the same things by yourself.
It's basically the same in Brink, although they promise that it won't be boring because the bots are awesome.
Brink has 8 or 10 levels, which play completely differently for each faction. You can play these levels with with just bots, with bots and people, or all people.
It's not really strictly MP. If by that you mean that the MP and SP portions play alike, then yeah, I guess.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
Wait, what do you mean it has SP? It has an actual campaign or do you just mean it has bots?
Enemy Territory, if I recall, could be played in a campaign style or with bots or something, but it was entirely boring, because everything was designed for MP, it wasn't fun to do the same things by yourself.
It's basically the same in Brink, although they promise that it won't be boring because the bots are awesome.
Brink has 8 or 10 levels, which play completely differently for each faction. You can play these levels with with just bots, with bots and people, or all people.
So yeah, basically the same as ET:QW except you can mix bots with people.
Posts
Yes. This.
I dont remember Pokemon Master being half as much of a silly goose as Tychocelchuuu with his "Everyone who plays like this etc.. is retarded". And no he didnt say retarded. Im PARAPHRASING. But he basically put down a whole group of people for no good reason.
Thats the "[strike]as[/strike]silly goosery-ishness" i was referring to.
And im not RAGING. Jesus christ, calm down yourself. Its me making a point that inflammatory statements and "silly goosery" dont make for a very friendly thread, nor very friendly discussion.
Sheesh.
I feel like i need a drink now.
No, no, no, I never said people who like unlocking stuff or who like achievements are dumb. I said that the achievements are either designed for those people (the ones who like unlocking stuff) or for the people who are so stupid that they can't figure out a video game unless the game teaches them, slowly, by doling out little unlocks every 5 minutes for each thing they do right.
My argument is that for the first type of person, the whole "unlock stuff" thing is fine with me, as long as it's a a CHOICE. If I want to turn that off, please let me. For the second kind of person, they're an idiot and will probably leave unlocks turned on because they can't work the menu.
So please stop raging at me for wanting to play a game without wading through 20 tedious hours of "oh shit, do you want that scope? Well sorry you have to use a succession of five slightly worse scopes until you get to use the scope you want, but we're going to act like it's good because you're PROGRESSING when you get a new scope!!"
If you say so.
Look, if you're going to tell other people to cool it, I'd suggest you take some of that advice as well. I really don't want to have to explain myself in detail here, especially with regards to Tycho's posts or yours, because like I said, people are reading views on unlocks as being outright personal attacks against each other when they are neither designed nor intended that way.
EDIT: And it looks like I'm beaten to post because I'm slow at editing.
Afraid your anger (though I fully understand it) is wasted in this thread. The RPG element you loathe is how they add depth, whether you or I or anyone else likes it is irrelevant. Enough people like it that we can't change it, not with letters to our congressmen or with posts on message boards.
Therefore, enough people like it that you should probably be less curt in your proclamations.
Lots of people like it, so I should act like I like it? Unlocks don't add depth, they subtract depth at the beginning and force you to dig your own depth. Deep games are ones that have lots of options, not ones that take all their options and hide them from you until you've played long enough. And I think I've been the opposite of curt.
Here is an idea. If you dont like it... PLAY SOMETHING ELSE.
Where did I tell you to act like you like unlocks? All I said was to be less curt. You've been abrasive, I haven't been the first to mention it.
Whether or not we like unlocking things, it's in this game. You've made your point about it, now if you don't have anything else to discuss you should find a new game to discuss, as you're detracting from the conversation in this thread.
The compendium in the OP by the way has a link to how guns/unlocks work (to our knowledge so far): http://www.fragworld.org/frag/community-blogs/brink-info-pt-3-weapons-and-customization.html
Here is a really informative Q and A with Splash Damage community relations manager Steve (badman) Hessel. It is is from a fan site and blows most of the "game journalism" shit out of the water. There is real no bullshit speculation information here about some things people have been asking about-- unlocks, load-outs, fireteams, hitboxes, etc.
I imagine it is much easier to demo something on a console than it is on a PC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMmH-CZOP9s&feature=feedu
He didn't really care for it, but he is a hardcore COD guy. He had trouble with the controls. He said they felt clunky. Who knows what the senstivity was set at. Which I guess is a thing that will take some getting used to. COD and most other FPS games are really 2D, you move on planes. You move three-dimensionally in Brink. You can climb walls and mantle and all kinds of stuff. Most of the clips we have of Brink don't showcase SMART.
Neither of which had clunky controls or were slow to respond. That confused me.
I don't play a lot of games, and I don't play a lot of shooters. I played Goldeneye, then Perfect Dark, then Timesplitters 2 and 3, and then Halo and Halo 2, and now I play Black Ops. All of these games are very different, I always have a lot of adapting to do. So controls aren't really a big deal for me.
Brink is being developed for xbox360, ps3 and PC. There are teams for each platform. Splash Damage wants to deliver the same experience on all three platforms. The PC has kb+m input and I think it will have dedicated servers, but everything else is going to be identical, last I heard.
Your "I'm a PC" elitist attitude and your abrasive attitude is very off-putting.
I don't care what some BLOPS famous dude feels about the console controls of a game that I'm only going to be playing on PC. He spent more time talking about whether or not he would buy it if he were someone that only bought x games per year or 'whoa man, it's got classes!', I'd prefer a reason other than 'my pet game is better!' and I'm sure that the devs would love to know what he means by 'clunky'.
ETQW (which used idTech4) felt fine to me, responsive and smooth. Brink is also using id4, so I really doubt they've gone backwards with the feel of the game, especially given how SMART is one of their biggest selling points.
Steam
I've been looking forward to Brink, but I don't know if I can really bring myself to pay for a title that is strictly MP. It's something I'll definitely want a piece of when the price drops, though. I've had the worst craving for MP FPS ever since I stopped played F.E.A.R. Combat years ago, I hope this can scratch the itch.
I hate shooters that have silly script triggers and 'go down that corridor, haha, you totally didn't expect to be trapped and have things behind you, we're so clever', so I think I'll be quite happy with Brinks SP style offering. Especially if the bots have been improved since ETQW.
Steam
It's really annoying when this argument comes up. Yes, you may prefer using a controller, but a keyboard and mouse are objectively "better" in terms of how easy it is to aim and shoot precisely where you want to.
I don't know that the guy in the video was specifically a major CoD-head or anything, it was only a 1 minute clip and all he said was that it wouldn't make his cut and the controls felt floaty to him. Neither of which really tells us all that much to be honest.
But yeah, in a more general sense if a group's of the attitude that CoD is the pinnacle and all things are judged according to those standards, then yes, it's probably best if they stick with CoD. Apples, Oranges etc.
EDIT: Re: The PC vs Console arguments. Drop it. Seriously. His opinions on the console version of the game are only irrelevant if he's natively a PC player, which I doubt is the case. More to the point, arguing over the Superiority of one control scheme over the other is pretty irrelevant here unless Brink is incorporating cross-platform play, which it's not.
He is a console man as well, you can see the buttons in his youtube videos. Nearly all of those videos are about BLOPS or Painkiller.
His control complaints are only relevant to people who are playing on consoles. Even then, I doubt that it's more than 'I'm used to this other game, that game is different so I don't feel comfortable'. Especially if he can't give any details.
I just watched his Homefront review, 2 minutes long and his two complaints are that reloads take too long and the graphics are worse than BLOPS ('it is bad', he says about the whole game). I don't think we have to worry too much about his bad reviews.
Steam
no, not all games/media manipulate you. or at least, they shouldn't. the bold part is where you're confusing "manipulation" with "affecting".
skinner box style manipulation does not have anything to do with making good art, but everything to do with good shallow snack food media to be gorged on
real art doesn't need to make you addicted to playing it. real art compells you to see it through because you care about the characters or the environment or the gameplay or what is to come
I dont know where "addiction" came into this.
I'm guessing they're trying to build up hype for PAX, considering the game's not out for another couple of months yet.
okay, take out "addicted" then, my point still stands
i'm not necessarily against some aspects of levelling and unlocks in shooters but, as we all know, a lot of the reason these things are becoming so common is that they light up the bit of your brain that gets hooked on pressing the buttons that make the shiny lights turn on, just like pigeons pecking buttons for food pellets
and this is more to do with making sure you keep playing their multiplayer game and paying them money, not because it's art. schindler's list doesn't need to give the audience sweeties to keep them in their seats, so you can't imply that this is how all art and media works, or should work. art doesn't manipulate in this deceitful kind of way
This is where i bow out.
As someone else said, in DnD you wouldnt start at level 20 with all the gear. The thing about progression like this, is it DOES press the right buttons for some people. But somehow thats deceitful?
Under that light, RPG elements in general are deceitful. Any sort of reward system in a game is deceitful.
It paints a whole hell of a lot of things in a negative light when you put it that way.
Wait, what do you mean it has SP? It has an actual campaign or do you just mean it has bots?
Enemy Territory, if I recall, could be played in a campaign style or with bots or something, but it was entirely boring, because everything was designed for MP, it wasn't fun to do the same things by yourself.
It's basically the same in Brink, although they promise that it won't be boring because the bots are awesome.
Everything sounds great except for the Spawn Camping thing. That said, its really easy to corner people in a game they are new at.
Brink has 8 or 10 levels, which play completely differently for each faction. You can play these levels with with just bots, with bots and people, or all people.
On console? Who knows. I wish there was a larger adoption of dedicated servers for console games.
Yeah, on consoles, specifically ps3. I don't have the option of playing on PC.
I guess we will probably get some new stuff, maybe a new trailer/movie after PAX East winds down. When everyone gets back to their offices.