Um... yay?
[quote]Splash Damage[/quote]
Yeah that's really... hmmm. Who keeps giving money to these guys?
I would've preferred a coop challenge mode. The idea of a gun-focused multiplayer in a batman arkham game doesn't seem like a good sign to me.
splash damage is a p.goode studio, then again they did make the travesty that was brink (which may i remind everyone I knew it was shit from the first trailer)
[QUOTE=Qwerty Bastard;41660326]
Yeah that's really... hmmm. Who keeps giving money to these guys?[/QUOTE]
Didn't they supply the multiplayer for a bunch of newer id Software games
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41661144]splash damage is a p.goode studio, then again they did make the travesty that was brink (which may i remind everyone I knew it was shit from the first trailer)[/QUOTE]
Good design, bad execution.
Splash Damage made Wolf-ET right?
[QUOTE=Generic Monk;41661144]splash damage is a p.goode studio, then again they did make the travesty that was brink (which may i remind everyone I knew it was shit from the first trailer)[/QUOTE]
I don't understand all the hate on Brink
The only thing I thought was legitimately bad is the "story mode", the actual gameplay was a lot of fun
[QUOTE=superstepa;41665154]I don't understand all the hate on Brink
The only thing I thought was legitimately bad is the "story mode", the actual gameplay was a lot of fun[/QUOTE]
Brink only had 2 major problems. Bad AI and awful net code. Sadly that made both the singleplayer and multiplayer unplayable. If the game ran better only and had bot that weren't braindead it would have been fantastic.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;41665538]Brink only had 2 major problems. Bad AI and awful net code. Sadly that made both the singleplayer and multiplayer unplayable. If the game ran better only and had bot that weren't braindead it would have been fantastic.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget that the parkour was a bit stiff and not fluid like advertised.
[QUOTE=ToastedTea;41665705]Don't forget that the parkour was a bit stiff and not fluid like advertised.[/QUOTE]
It worked fine for the mostpart. Occasionaly you'd run face first into a wall but it was rare enough.
[QUOTE=superstepa;41665154]I don't understand all the hate on Brink
The only thing I thought was legitimately bad is the "story mode", the actual gameplay was a lot of fun[/QUOTE]
AI wasn't too good, it had initially poor optimization, maps didn't make the best use of their SMART system, and the devs barely supported it at all after the Agents of Change update.
The game also had a bit more hype leading up to it than it deserved so it couldn't live up to expectations. Which is kind of a shame because over all it wasn't a bad game, just not a great one.
[QUOTE=BloodFox1222;41660930]I would've preferred a coop challenge mode. The idea of a gun-focused multiplayer in a batman arkham game doesn't seem like a good sign to me.[/QUOTE]
Allot of things about this game arent good signs, different developers and not having Paul Dini as the writer (he wrote the last two games and the 90's classic Batman The Animated Series)
Brink fell short in three ways: overmarketing, unfinished release, and too niche of a game to ever have sold particularly well.
The overmarketing was more in respect to the "singleplayer" compontent of the game. In almost every preview or interview I saw the lead developer was telling us how amazing the story was going to be and how much choice you had during the campaign. What we got was bot matches with [I]horrible [/I]AI. They shouldn't have marketed it as a singleplayer game at all if they weren't putting in the effort to make it decent. Everyone knows why you buy FPS games these days and putting so much of a marketing focus on singleplayer, then failing to live up to expectations during the release is disastrous.
Brink was also blatantly unfinished. It had been delayed serveral times and still felt raw, atleast on PC. Netcode wasn't the greatest and there were tons of bugs. The server browser didn't work for weeks either. It was clearly pushed out the door to finally make a return.
Finally, even if the game had been a decent multiplayer shooter that released in a playable state, it never would have sold well or done well critically. It just required more teamwork than a lot of people would have put up with. Day of release I saw several reviews from professional outlets trash the game for being too difficult: Maps were too hard, objectives were too difficult to complete. This is because Brink builds off of W:ET and ETQW as a game that requires actual genuine teamwork. Gamers went in expecting Battlefield-style "just throw boxes on the ground and roll your face across the keyboard until you get the MCOM" style strategies and quit in droves once they realized you actually needed to coordinate to take down objectives and make pushes.
Brink did some neat things though. The singleplayer was kinda shitty but it did have 8 player coop. The AI you fought was terrible at doing anything but it's still a unique feature. The SMART system was decently executed and mostly let down by the map design just not letting you use it. I liked that most of the unlocks could be earned in a few hours of gameplay and that I didn't need to play a certain class for 40 hours to be competitive. I enjoyed the game for what it was and what it tried to do, but will admit that in terms of quality it was one of the worst released in the last few years.
It's sad because I'm a classic Wolf ET player and competitive Quake Wars player and I feel like Splash Damage's talent was managed poorly in Brink. Up until then they had made genuinely great shooters, competitive ones at that. I really do wonder what went wrong.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.