A recent comment made me think about this. I wanted to see how other people would respond.

Would You Ask For Additional Gametypes To Be Added To Brink?


I wouldn't want addition gametypes. I think what Brink is planning to have is going to be great, and shouldn't be ruined by additional gametypes. That would probably cause boosting, glitching, and griefing, as well as demolishing the "Lone Wolf Team Play Thingy Idea" with the objectives, and it would allow people to be completely lone wolves while not helping whatsoever. Brink's campaign multiplayer is going to be really good, even if it's the only gametype. I'll probably find it hard to go back to other games because of this.

I love the uniqueness of this gametype but I would also like additional playlists to play once in a while, I don't want them to remove the multiplayer campaign but i would like for them to add atleast a small playlist for Deathmatch and CTF at least.

not happening. SD makes class based, team objective shooters, and I don't see them making any compromising anytime soon.

Yea, I would like to see this, but I really don't think it would happen because they wanted to make this game player friendly. They wanted you to be able to move from single player to multiplayer without any trouble. They are also trying to make the AI more human like in the way that they think, so it is easier on people to move to multiplayer

When need more than 1 game type. look at battlefield bad company 2 . that game is dying slowly to. i dont even play anymore because i got bored doing the same game types over & over again. Aslong as they stop players from boosting & spawn camping i'll be happy

Imagine a game with class-based objective gameplay like Brink....now take away the single player and co-op, the body types, character customization, 2 faction storymode, persistent characters abilities and other unlocks, no SMART button, dated graphics, and imagine if guns were tied to classes...oh, and it's a WWII themed game. That is basically what Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is. It is one of SD's previous games, it was released in 2003, and today is like one of the top 3 shooters played online for PC.

The moral of the story - If a game is done right, less is more....you don't need 4 or 5 different gametypes.


Oh, and I play Bad Company 2 practically everyday. It never feels old or boring to me.

Less is more. Oh yes your team loses a ballgame 3-2 but less is more? not trying to disagree just proving a point

The less is more saying fits very good on quake 3. I still rank it as the number one FPS of all times.

And sorry for going off-topic, quake has a lot of gametypes but it's not what makes it so great.

What does that have to do with adding multiple gametypes? Like if they were playing soccer or football they would have won? The thread has nothing to do with winning or losing, it is about adding multiple gametypes. All your post is saying is that a team lost a game - nothing to do with anything about adding gametypes. On top of that, the discussion is on video games, and you add in a real life event...

id like just a TDM and CTF ....oh and way to fail with the poll

Atm "NO" is leading at 10 votes and "NO" is 2nd with 5.

Yea, I was just looking at that. I guess he changed his mind.

Less is more. Ok how about a 3 minute story 2 on 2 multiplayer deathmatch with no respawns and lets call it done. Oh yes less is more. :whistling:

Let's recap what I said:


The moral of the story - If a game is done right, less is more....you don't need 4 or 5 different gametypes.

I don't think 2v2 DM with no respawns constitutes as 'done right.'...and whats with the 3 minute story?

"Less is more" isn't meant for scores. It describes how someone can have more fun with less things than someone who has a lot of things.

who said it was ment for scores?

control point gametype please......

If they can be created without altering the release timeframe, properly tested, and implemented well it is hard to see a downside for adding more game types and providing players with more ways to enjoy the product. Having more variance and more selection should lengthen the life of the game for people. On the other hand cramming more game modes in that are of a lesser quality than the core product doesn't make sense. Unless they are balanced properly, the maps are good, and they feel "finished" I would rather see just one game type that works exceedingly well.

The devs have said, no CTF, DM, TDM, or KOTH, they feel it's better to move forward than backwards in regards to gameplay. Not every game needs to be hiding behind a crate till someone walks into your crosshair

Ok H0RSE, why is this thread still up if you think that the game is good as is WTF?! man i mean really people should be able to voice their own opions obout a f**king game!
who says that the devs are going to stick with just one game mode becuze u said so? i mean really man, let others enjoy have their "voices" heard even if the game keeps it's "one game mode" type of co-op-ness... it makes them feel good. But when a peice of s**t like you comes by and "says" nope, bad idea, hate it, i said so and that means they won't do it... it makes feel like they have no vocie in anything that a game can do, when in reality game devs look at these posts and think "oh, that would be a great idea, we should add that!" or "errr... maybe not that something else."

I personally think there should be more than one game mode so that the game does not get repetative like spore or other games.

but really man lay off the harshness of being a bully-like figure to others, it's mean and i am surprised people don't find something to report you for. Try complimenting others on their ideas instead of says "no not good, etc...."

just sayin...
also why are both polls NO???

To die on the battlefield is to rise above!
-Bishop, Unreal Tournament 3

Perhaps you'd like to direct all this hostility to the devs, since they also said no....

"There are CTF-like mechanics in some places of Brink, but we won't ever do 'pure' CTF because it'd be like taking a step backwards from what we're trying to do. "

I think the same can be said for DM, TDM, and any other run of the mill gamemode. SD makes team objective based games - that's what they do. I used to play ET all day every day, and played a lot QW as well. I said what I said because I have a lot of history with the games this company makes. And I wasn't saying, "no not good," I was saying, "no, not happening." Even if I thought it was a great idea, I still knew it wasn't going to happen. Here's the link to the thread with that dev post. It's post #15.

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20964

[quote name='H0RSE' date='12 April 2010 - 12:28 AM' timestamp='1271046526' post='15842047']
Perhaps you'd like to direct all this hostility to the devs, since they also said no....

I have hostility towards the fact that you have to say what you about everything people have to say, I woudn't mind as much if you didn't say "won't happen, nope" about ALMOST EVERYTHING that people have to say i've looked at these posts, and you've commented on most of them evr though this isn't your thread, shouldn't the starter of the thread comment on these topics?

also I have no need to talk to the devs for i have no quaral with them.

[quote name='sportan' date='12 April 2010 - 12:47 AM' timestamp='1271047629' post='15842072']
[quote name='H0RSE' date='12 April 2010 - 12:28 AM' timestamp='1271046526' post='15842047']
Perhaps you'd like to direct all this hostility to the devs, since they also said no....

I have hostility towards the fact that you have to say what you about everything people have to say, I woudn't mind as much if you didn't say "won't happen, nope" about ALMOST EVERYTHING that people have to say i've looked at these posts, and you've commented on most of them evr though this isn't your thread, shouldn't the starter of the thread comment on these topics?

also I have no need to talk to the devs for i have no quaral with them.
[/quote]

A majority, of the times I say something like, "no, won't happen," it's because it actually isn't going to happen - I am informing them, not 'crushing their hopes.'

A majority, of the times I say something like, "no, won't happen," it's because it actually isn't going to happen - I am informing them, not 'crushing their hopes.'
[/quote]

I understand what your saying about "informing them" I never said u crushed their hopes I said that it makes them feel like they don't have a voice or opinion in what a game can have even though devs look at these forums and try to find ideas for their games, unless the company is stubborn and if so, why start forums in the first place that let people ask ideas for games? why not shut those topics down? That is wat i am saying and read the entire posts not just parts.

I would rather let them know that the idea they suggested is not going to be in the game, then just have them wondering until the game comes out, and then possibly being upset that it's not there - perhaps I should candy coat my responses?


If devs look at forums for ideas, and find one they like, do you really think they are going to think twice because I didn't like it? And if I am telling these people that things they suggest aren't going to be in the game, then devs already came to a decision on the matter....because it's not going to be in the game.

Not trying to toot my own horn, but I am one of the most knowledgeable members on this board about the game. I try to share the wealth and keep people up to date, answer questions, and whatnot. If you don't like my methods or appreciate my help, then go elsewhere.