So name a "real" competitive game for me plz

Yes they do.

......But then again I might just be saying that because I am a sniper and I am meant more for sneaking around and one hit killing everyone, bullet sponges are not good for us, as we are rarely in the others cross hair, in affect, this is making our prey, harder to take down, and It pisses me us off xD

Seriously, i'm a CS gamer, don't tell me OHK are real in CS. Then explain me why some pistols, o even the FUUUU scout doesn't ?


About realism, some Terros, don't have helmet in their models, could please explain me why the you can't OHK them with headshots with some guns ?

First off: There are almost no one shot kills in this game, the devs wanted to take out frustrating mechanics like sniping, OHK guns, and skill-less kills.

That said, it takes a while for a smg/pistol to take down a buffed heavy unbuffed. All the damage and time to kill is relative to weapons, active buffs and what you are doing at the time. You can 1 shot a light with a bolt action rifle shot to the head if you can shoot him while he's running around and sticky grenades an operative has can 1 shot someone, but it takes 5 to 6 seconds to detonate and can be disarmed. Mines can also 1 shot some body types when unbuffed, but they can be disarmed while you are standing on it to avoid this. The game is very well balanced and if you have skill+teamwork you can ROCK the opposite team.

There are a bunch of options for public games, but no preset hardcoe mode. You can toggle stuff like team damage, hud elements, time limits, allotable classes and much more. The damage system is constant, if its too high for you you can get kevlar vests and health buffs... if its too low you can get engineer weapon buffs and use the heavy body type for more powerful weapons like miniguns/semiauto shotties/semiauto GL's.

It's more of a mix of many games than different. It has incredible art style, customization, balancing and a new take on the way you play online vs most games. If you like it then you like it, if you don't then that's fine. If you are unsure about what's in the game use the fragworld.com brink compendium thing to see all the dynamics of the game.


All games have ups and downs, you are putting too much hope in this game being the best game of all time. No game can live up to those standards, and even if they do to some people... they usually aren't the best games, just the one that a niche of people LOVE.

The game is competetive, it's very well balanced and a "hardcoe mode" would just screw with the balancing they did. I'd personally like a "hardcoe mode" where it hides most of the hud but changes nothing to the damage/weapon system as it is very carefully balanced. There is a moderate skill curve to this game, and when playing against a good team it spikes because humans will do things that bots don't usually do. If you like what you hear, buy the game... if not, don't let someone talk you into it because neither you nor the community want someone playing that doesn't like the game and takes it out on the forums or against the people he's playing with.

Hope that answers most of your questions.

There are games for realism out there, take project reality, arma, and virtual battlespace for example. For a casual/competetive online shooter to survive on consoles it must be fun and well balanced. Don't bring realism into games because too much of it is only fun for those who like simulators. Personally I love them, but I don't want to play them all the time.

erm... Deagle, m4a1,ak47,awp 98% of the players in a competitive match will have them and they all will OHK what are you talking about? no1 said that all the guns OHK

Your example was a pro vs a noob, so was mine. Stop changing the rules of the argument. The point was that in a game like CS or COD it is a lot easier to kill people with the corner sitting tactic than in a game like Quake, where movement is actually considered a tactical element.

A real competitive game is Quake Live, where there are no insta gibs even on spawnees, because they spawn with a little over 100 hp and even a direct hit from a rocket is only 100hp. And in QL you constantly collect armor and health pickups, so the damages are technically low when compared to the durability of the players.

Another real competitive game is Enemy Territory, where the consistency of your aim and how well you play together with your team is everything.

Please present an argument for your claim that the higher the damages are the more skill it takes to play? Are you saying that insta-gib is the most skill demanding game mode there is?

I'm talking about situation where no matter how skillful you are you can't win because the damage is too low to take out 3+ guys and thus lowering the skill ceiling


Yes instagib will require skill to win, the more skillful player will always win no matter what, no1 is talking about "most skill demanding game mode"

Are you sure it's good gameplay design? No, it is not. It is fun for you and ridiculous stupidity for the others that are trying to have fun. Pointing a zoomed sniper rifle at someone far away is not hard, it is actually one of the easiest things to do in modern games. If it only requires one hit to kill, it is completely absurd. Sniping in a game like RTCW: Enemy Territory, now THAT takes skill. The recoil in the sniper is insane and it doesn't come back on its own not to mention that it takes around 3 chest shots to kill with it, even a head shot is not an instant kill.


Instagib might be the most reflex and flick aim requiring mode there is, but it is definitely not the most skill demanding mode there is. That is effectively a similar argument of to "which requires more skill, Counter-Strike or Quake?" The point being that in CS the damages are very high and in Quake they are low.

The discussion started with the goal of determining whether or not Brink requires a lot of skill, right? Well given that the damages are low and low damages automatically mean that the skill required is high. Not to mention that there is a tactical element of working as a team and utilizing the movement system to your advantage.

This is a team game, in the sense that you actually have to work as a team to get stuff done. Not a team game in the sense that CS or COD is a team game, where you can easily kill everyone in the enemy team and win the game/round if you get lucky.

with my class, hmm... I've got it. Throw a caltrops in the general area. Sticky nade the biggest dude or the medic. stun lock with autonade AGL. throw an EMP to stop the timer for thirty seconds and give my team enough time to respawn. I win and the other three dudes defending are all " OMGWTF A HEAVY OPERATIVE [censored] IS OP" :celebration:

You threw the nade and the other dudes know your location pew pew pew you are dead.

Although good post made me lol ^^

The caltrops prevents them from holding skill and creates panic, and my heavy status prevents the easy killing you suggest.
EDIT: I also realy should just throw the EMP grenade and stop the timer for 30 seconds... noted.

Red Snake >> Come on, you know that sometimes it's just about luck, not skill. In CS if you shoot randomly with burst, you can get lots of headshots, just take the example of people doing 5 frags headshots in a row with a glock 18. Even when i did that, i was like " wtf i just did". Moreover, CSS is just lottery spray, stick to 1.6
About competitive games, 1 hour playing quake equals 5 hours of CS.

I thinks Mr. Red Snake never understood that skill is not only about a aiming but a combinaison of multiple skillset.

In short, we should just let him have fun with his dreams.

So yeah, Im slowly thinking about picking this title, kinda tired of playing Quake or Team Fortress right now, This seem like a little mix of both ( Movement / Team Based) while excluding the beautiful damage adjustment from quake but I guess I will deal with it. And like someone say, there is Armor / HP boost I believe so that could maybe make up for it depending of how available thoses "upgrades / boost" are.

which is easier to head shot a moving target once or three times? enough said

Should of just made a poll on who is more right in this argument.

ShaZe or Red Snake

Beats the rest of the polls out there that constantly pit Security vs Resistance when there is a sticky thread right above all the other threads in the General Board.
Hell I'm enjoying this topic fight. Especially when other outsiders try to jump into it like some sort of WWF Royal Rumble deal.

there have been many gameplay videos where they have (then again i think they were fightting AI's) but still

they make the best gameplay. the best shooters let you take two maybe three hits tops and if its a singeplayer game i mod them so that i can die with one shot. having bullet sponges where you can run up to someone and pump a full clip into them is just asinine. STALKER isnt a war simulator but has one hit kills at low levels when your armor svcks and even when you have the exosuit if the enemies are using armor piercing rounds you will still die quickly. STALKER beats the hell out of pretty much any other shooter out there for singleplayer. for multiplayer battlefield 2, which is probably still my favorite, was also unforgiving when it came to bullets. how on earth is it good gameplay when you can run around and get shot and NOT die from it. might as well just mod the game to give you 1000 hit points or put it on easy mode so you only take half damage.

Done just for you! Hmm and also for the lulz

I thinks however that the fight is pretty much over, unless...... oh no, I don't even want to imagine the worst possibilies.

And..... I bought the game, all the games cannot have an incredible amount of skill required and the ones we have already fulfill perfectly their role so, I guess that as long as it is a bit challenging and have some good gameplay, I should be fine, it should be fun at least, I hope!


Edit :
Oh My God :



Hey dude, we are talking about Competitive Multiplayer FPS that require skills, where the hell did you come from to arrive here with your singleplayer stuff ?




I know, that sound simple right, but you have to understand what Red Snake is trying to teach us ; Against 3 other targets, you are supposed to be able to eliminate all three targets before they can destroy you, of course, none of these tree targets can eliminate another person until you are finished.

So following that statement, we won't ever be able to do that since it take too much time to eliminate them and therefor, shooters where players only has 1 HP require more skill since you need to be faster!

Oh.... I might have forgotten to mention that we are not allowed to have the following special treatment in a game were players has 100 times more HP than a usual game : None of these tree targets can eliminate another person until you are finished.

lol :hugs:

This is single-handedly the most misinformed comment I have EVER read about competitive gaming. I knew a competitive CoD really devoted fan would come strolling in here eventually.

First off, it is not hard to 1v3 in CoD unless you are playing a good team. I do it just about every night in SnD. You can add my gamertag and I will gladly show you proof. Now, a 1v3 situation in Halo(more similar to the health in Brink) compared to a 1v3 situation in CoD is an absolute joke. The skill required to actually win that matchup is actually near impossible against even an average team. I have played 3 years of competitive Halo(mostly H2). From my experience in BOTH competitive CoD and competitive Halo, Halo required much more teamwork/strategy/individual skill than CoD ever did, coincidentally halo has way more health. Coincidence? I think not.

So, your logic is telling me because when the game gets harder the skill ceiling drops? LOL. Please look at what you are writing before posting.

Call of Duty is a solid game but if that's your only FPS "experience" then I highly doubt you have any clue what you are talking about as far as competitive gaming is concerned.

Also, you obviously know nothing about something called "team-shooting". A term that COD players are not familiar with, because the lack of teamwork that is involved in killing someone(2bullets lul). In great competitive games you actually have to shoot the enemies as a team!!! Oh em gee? What is that??? Shooting the enemy with teamwork??? NO WAY!!11!! All jokes aside, team-shooting allows you basically to kill people at the same time as you could kill someone like in COD. Example:

Player 1 shoots Enemy 1 with two bullets.
Player 2 shoots Enemy 1 at the same time with two bullets.
Player 3 shoots Enemy 1 at the same time with two bullets.
Result = Enemy 1 dead.

I know it's hard to understand with your CoD background, give it some time and try to learn to play a more challenging game or just leave and go back to you're "zomg 1v3 is so hard COD". Enjoy.

Where is my position that the game DOES already require skill and that changing it for hardcoe would ruin the game. On one hand, more damage is skill, in the other, more health is skill,
where is my tactical position that says we don't need more damage, just a better strategy? :spotted owl:

You cannot have both, they contradict each other. More damage usually equal = "Hide N Seek" or more Tactical, but thats about it.

On a side note..... what the hell is wrong with these votes lol, 1 vote for TF being the game requiring the highest amount of skill? really? I never expected that. And three votes for these FPS begineers? :poke: There must be much more random voting than expected lol.



Awaiting for more votes, hopefully the results will get sharper lol. :frog:

I will explain where skill fades in this game for example,

You are a beast quake 3/live player you go player css,cod, or w/e the skill will transfer because no1 else is better at taking out people than you and no random stuff that would limit your skill, like a low skill ceiling like in this game, I will repeat myself because some of seem don't seem to understand why the skill ceiling is lower in Brink:

I HAVE 3 bullets, 1v3
If I'm more skillful with 3 bullets I can take them out if I'm not, the first guy that I will see will take me out.
In Brink I can have 10 bullets but that's not going to be enough to kill them since I need more than 1 bullet to kill and it will create this situation where no matter what I do I can't win AND THAT MAKES A LOW SKILL CEILING. No matter how much time and effort I invest in this game it is just impossible to win and that equals low skill ceiling.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2nrpTK1I7o Look here a css montage of top eu vs us teams playing competitively, when you see a video like that it makes you think if you'd put the time to learn/practice you can take out 3 guys with 3 bullets in Brink you can put 1000 hours you're still not wining that 1v3 fight and that makes the game limited.

Here a concusion:
Put time in a game to learn and you can deal with impossible situations that makes the spectators go "WOOOOOWWW!!#%$" there is no such factor in Brink

I'm yet to see a valid argument that Brink takes more skill than CSS

Never played a single match of CoD in competitive scene, on the other hand I have played css for 2 years competitively. You are trying to explain to me that 3 guys ganking on 1 guy is more skillful? Don't get me started on how I feel about the competitive scene on consoles

I never said 3 guys ganking 1 guy is more skillful anywhere in that post. Please quote me on where that was said. I said this game will require team-shooting, something that CoD or CSS completely lacks. It requires a great amount of teamwork to have a so called "good" team-shot. That's all I was pointing out in my last statements of that post.

Oh and please do get started with the console vs PC because I can guarantee I have had way more success than you as far as total money earned/prizes/free gifts playing console competitively. I guarantee it.