I just wanted to applaud the DEVS of this game. It's the first game where I can sit around and play this with my parents in the room (my dad is a minister). Hardly any profanity, I don't have to worry about wangsters blaring rap music over VOIP and the usual slurs of gaming profanity.

Also anytime I've joined a fireteam I have had quite the enjoyable time. People are fairly nice, funny, and are having a good time. I've never had this experience in any online game. Usually it's just obnoxious smack talk in CoD, nerd ragers on 2D fighters, and pretentious queers on WoW. This game BUILDS community, teamwork, and fun. Things the DEVS promised us. Now if only there was away to join as a party I'd be content.

I love this game and have had a slight addiction to it since release.
LONG LIVE THE UNDERDOG

thepushpull88

What happened with the rapture?

As far as building a community, it's down to less then 10% of it's original player base.

While it's great that it's a friendly, non-aggressive sort of game, it lacks depth, which is what keeps most people playing. The teamwork and camaraderie you enjoy exists in many games, but since they also have more to them than BRINK, they prosper where this game is struggling.
The community is degrading, the teamwork building this game does is there, but it's not the type of teamwork that actually works ideally, and the fun, well, that's speculative. Not trying to poop on your post, but you are in the minority about your feelings on this game. But I do see where you are coming from, the lack of skill required for this game makes it even playing field alongside skilled and unskilled alike, it's a great a family game!

No, they all misread it...

The RAPTOR is coming, silly.

But actually ON-topic...

Cool post, well-approved-of by me (just because I'm a vampire crazy, doesn't mean I can't appreciate other people's beliefs)... If you care about your gaming community that way, I'd almost recommend Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. It's slowly fading though, so it's probably worth waiting for the next game - they're planning to give it a more thorough announcement soon - all we know so far is that it will be called "Revelations" and will include multiplayer. Hoping it lives up to the initial release of Brotherhood instead of being what the last update turned it into.

I'm a huge AC fan, but I don't really enjoy the current implementation of the gameplay into multiplayer. It doesn't feel right or fun; to me at least.

Just seems to get boring REALLY quickly, and the matchmaking was terrible last time I played.

I concur OP! Brink's only been out a couple weeks and I've already made as many, if not more friends than I have in my entire time playing other games previously. Heck, if I join a friend's fireteam and they have friends in there, and we get along, more friends!



I'd disagree with that, the only thing a game like from the BF or BC series has over Brink is larger maps and vehicles, really. Brink has more for classes to do, better weapon personalisation, better graphics on PS3, more to do every match, relatively-well balanced weapons and skills, and minus the elitist over-competitive KDR-waving [censored] bag minority that was somewhat present. And recent CoD has [censored]-all depth at all, all it consists of is the exact same 5-minute game a thousand times over with cheap tactics, exploiting anything over-powered, and a terrible community, just with different maps and guns each game around. But it's still obscenely thriving. They also both have boring campaigns.

It's because Brink is so different that it's not doing so well, standing up to IPs that dominate the market by a mile was a risky thing from day 1.

Well, lets pick BC2 as an example since you said BC, and BC2 is the only one of the two I've played. It has twice as many weapons as BRINK, not as much weapon customization though (thought BRINK's weapons are all more or less like each other), so that's valid. Classes in BC2 are much more specific and have more to do than in BRINK by a huge margin, so you completely missed the boat on that one. The weapon system in BC2 has a much higher skill ceiling than BRINK's (The more skilled you are, the more you can get out of a weapon, rather then learning them early on, and then remain bottle-necked by them, since you've already mastered them and all their nuances.). BC2 maps allow for much more diverse play than BRINK easily, the destructible terrain and buildings offers incredible gameplay, while the size and terrain offer a huge amount of play options, easily dwarfing corridor based play like BRINK has. The BC2 point system is better balanced and more complex than BRINK's. BC2 was like no FPS I've ever played before (it was a first in the FPS PC market, nobody knew about it, or it's new style of gameplay.), BRINK feels like a poorly actualized knock off of TF2 and Dystopia (Dystopia is not a console game, so that explains why you are clueless about it.) among others. Also, game's like Section 8, TF2 (Yes, despite being a sequel), Dystopia, Savage, Tribes, Counter-Strike, Natural Selection, etc (I could go on), were all hugely unique games that resembled nothing before them and were successes that quickly garnered large and dedicated player bases. All in all, I don't think you realize how diverse BC2 is, unfortunately, or just the FPS market in general for that matter.

Man I'm sorry, but you are basically wrong on every possible front. While BRINK is a good game, it's simply not great like other titles, regardless of whether you like those titles or not. The FPS genre is diverse, and once you gain experience in all it's facets, you'll realize how BRINK failed.
CoD, while having small maps, fast respawns, and basically pandemonium gameplay, has a weapon system that still requires skill, it's actually offers a lot more learning room then BRINK's, which has weapons that generally are inaccurate and simply deteriorate in effectiveness after a few shots (the spread is massive). I don't know, I'm not used to talking to console players. Maybe it's because you are a console player this is all not obvious to you?

Brink is an aquired taste. For the Team Fortress Classic/Quake ET/BFBC2 types its a great TEAM game.

Yes it has its current flaws and yes its not everyones style of play, but for those looking for proper co-op team play it has potential to be awesome.

TF2 has limited gameplay yet I still pop in the orange box and play a few rounds every now and again.

I'm in it for the long haul with Brink. See you all online

It's a casual semi-tactical shooter, it's not bad, I was just expecting something my friends and I could really bite into, BRINK just doesn't offer enough to skilled FPS players imo.

We'll see what SD does with it's first mega-patch I expect in about a month's time.

I like BRINK >:L
I take all souls that hate on this game to Basemant Cat bliviongate:

From my experience the more simplified the game the better it is for fast paced, back and forth competative gameplay. There's a lot of potential for clan based gaming with Brink. The strategic options in well co-ordinated teams are there but just not used very often in public matches.TF2 and QW:ET were the same.

Brink has nice varied missions, its not just destroy the target or capture the flag. Its more a shifting goal where strategies need to constantly change as your objectives change or as the enemy retake positions.

This wins over TF2 in my opinion and also humps QW:ET for pure fun.

But hey I love playing Grifball so I'm probably too simple lolz

I'm not gonna quote the whole thing to prevent a wall-o-text thing going on.

BC2 may have twice as many weapons, but only half of them are frequently used... that's because some of them are blatantly trash and out-performed by others of their class, some are even just insanely good to the point of being annoying. I feel dirty when I use the AN-94, I only let myself get away with it because due to my connection I'm 1-2 seconds behind US so sometimes I need an edge. Your point about the "skill ceiling" is invalid because Brink weapons take skill to use too. Heck, they take more skill because they're harder to use, and unlike BC2 no one weapon is really better than any other. I played BC2 for a good couple solid months before Brink and I'm STILL trying to adjust to the handling, where on BC2 it was near-instantaneous.

BC2 is essentially "everybody cluster[censored] towards this objective". Rush is just go here, blow this up, progress; whilst Conquest is just go here, sit around, take flag, then camp or move onto the next. That's about as interesting as the game gets in regards to tackling maps. Whereas Brink presents class-specific objectives to make sure everybody takes on a specific role for the good of team. For example, in BC2 as a medic you can throw around a magical healing box or fry people back to life, but in can often feel aimless. In Brink you can actually assign yourself the designated job of reviver, you can keep your team-mates health topped up a LOT easier, you can even buff your own to give yourself some more lasting time, or you can assign yourself the mission of protecting an escort to win the match. The fact that each class is essential to winning a match in Brink, or can otherwise play an important role, and that they are explicitly presented with more to do than in BC (and you also aren't forced into any one area of weaponry), leaves me with the impression that Brink handles classes a lot better.

And yes, with the exception of BF: Vietnam & 2142, infrequent casual Counterstrike & various internet cafe shooters, I'm a console gamer, everything I'm talking about is geared primarily towards the genre on console. And personally, I've never seen anything on console play out or look like Brink. Even this Dystopia you mention doesn't present itself in the same way.

And seriously, I lol'd when you said CoD requires skill. I have CoD4, supposedly the series at it's peak, and as with MW2 (and I assume also the other games, which I haven't touched yet), 99% of the time it's basically grind until you get the OP perks & weapons, then stomp all over the other newbies. It's a mindless cluster[censored] with nothing more beyond "spawn, kill, die". Even the objective modes are a joke. The only reasons I wasn't dominating in that game is because: I was wired into MAG at the time, and couldn't bothered fully adjusting to the handing; I refused to use the OP weapons and preferred to go with the ones I liked; and the fact that I have the worst connection I have ever seen in my entire life and frequented 1-2 bar connections, with the odd 1/100 3-bar game. And if you aren't for being trampled, there is absolutely zero fun to be derived from that series.

I love how some folks call the gun-play in CoD skillfull. :facepalm:
3-6 shots is all you need to kill someone. A dead rat could land that many hits.

Here are the reasons I love this game.

No STATS. Makes gaming fun again. And yes, I have a + ratio on games that track this.

Objectives/team actions pay out more exp. than kills. Great for keeping people focused on THE WIN!!!

SMART is really cool and I'm finding more ways to use it every day

Classes are sweet. Being able to combine body types with class just opens up so many more options than most class based games. (fat medic Sniper?!)
More in depth than, oh he looks like that cause I have ..... for perk 2 :shakehead:

No killcam

No "press X to spawn behind person who just killed you"

No OHK melee

Character Customization is sweet. If you can't find something that looks cool then you just don't know what's cool.(and that's not SDs fault)

Seeing the campaign from two sides is a really cool Idea and it helps to reinforce the "pick a side" aspect.

There's many more but I guess that the best thing is that it makes CoD fans cry. They are so hung up on everyone trying to copy that game that it
just blows their little minds that someone doesnt want killstreak rewards, K/D comparison wars, or hmy: NO TDM!!!!!

CoD 4 was fun at the time but looking back, that game RUINED FPS games for years to come.
Now if a game doesn't have 70 levels, prestige mode, and 12 gametypes it's a fail. And that's simply not true.
I applaud SD for making a game that doesn't try to draw in the sheep.

I like Brink. I like the gameplay, I like the classes (although Soldier and Operative combined have probably only seen about a fifth of the time I give to Engineer or Medic individually), I like the lack of swearing, and I like the visual style. I'm even beginning to learn that the guns are not as ridiculously disproportionate in power as I had originally assumed.

However, the lack of a lag free server (9/10 times I play online, I get debilitating amounts of jumpiness), LAN connection (something that would solve the lag problem), and the infuriating difficulty of bots as you level up (after I beat all the Resistance missions, I started onto the Security campaign. I still haven't beaten the first level) stops me from loving Brink.

But to get back to the original topic of this thread ("Brink is the family friendly FPS"), allow me to just point out that any family that is friendly to furious paced shotgunning, SMGing, and grenading is a family that I'm not really sure I want to be part of :teehee:

i love smack talk and hate messages. Most of the time I make friends with those I talk the most shlt on. It's a nice bonding experience.

The CoD weapon set does take skill, the weapons have more to them then BRINK's, same with BC2's. If anyone honestly does not understand why, you either don't have the experience or the talent to feel and understand the difference. It's quite blatant.

Prediction of a weapon's projectiles equates to a higher skill ceiling, allowing players to use the weapons with more control (The higher the amount of control, the more skill you can invest controlling said weapon.). The spread on the weapons in BRINK is a bottleneck on the amount of control you get out of the weapons. This is a fact, not an opinion. The spread on the weapons in BRINK is much more substantial than in other games. This alone is an indicator of how BRINK's weapons have a lower skill ceiling. If you are still believe I have no clue what I'm talking about, think about increasing the spread on the weapons until they become unusable. Now, reduce the spread slowly until you get firing patterns like in BRINK, now lower it more, and you get firing patterns like that in BC2 and, yes, the much dreaded MWs everyone loves to hate. If this does not illustrate my point, I have to call it quits.

I am confused. Apparantly the easier it is to use and get kills with a weapon equates to it taking more skill?
So if I have an EZ-Nade launcher that shoots nukes, that would be the most skillfull weapon ever, 'cause I'd be able to predict that when I press this trigger,
everyone will die.

Sure bud.....I have 28 days played on CoD4, I KNOW those weapons take NO SKILL.

I agree with GLUGLUG here, I know what you're trying to get across Kalabalana but I don't at all see how weapons with better accuracy and more damage-per-bullet take more skill to use.

Brink weapons have terrible spread and damage with lower ammo capacities, which means not only do you have to be careful with when & where you shoot but you yourself have to become more mobile in a fire-fight to avoid being bested in a face-off. It's not like CoD where you pretty much look at a person, ADS with an AR, tap the trigger, and blam they're dead. The person who died may have been the more skilled individual, but they weren't even given a chance to use their skill because it's so easy to kill in the games. Controlling whilst sustaining your fire, knowing your surroundings and those of your enemy, and keeping on your toes are all essential to success in Brink, which can also be said for BC to quite an extent in the game's more close-quarters areas, but cannot be said for CoD.

I like how every post turns into an argument debating the validity of this game. I wish haters would abandon their trolling and leave us be. The game is just clean fun. Game are just like music, food and art. Yes perhaps more skill has been used in the design, but at the end of the day peoples opinions (or their inherit ability to blindly follow huge companies) start to get mushed up in their mind noggins as facts. People believe this game is awesome, people believe this game blows. They are just opinions, some based on facts others, alas, are not.

Everyone wants to be told that they are right... yes validity. They want for someone to agree with them and join on in the ostracizing. That is what the internet does. Gives some wimp a barrier by voicing their opinions without getting their ass kicked for being stupid... oh... I... I guess I fall under that caa..... categgg.... category.

I disagree about the guns taking no skill. you CAN spray & pray, true, but ive found its only really effective at close range. At long or even med range youre very likely looking at a loss. & I find each gun handles subtly different. The direction & way they shift with the recoil, their spread pattern, ranges, power, clip size; these all cater to diff playstyles, never mind that you can buff certain aspects of the weapon to further improve a desirable stat or help bolster a weakness. Learning how a scoped rhett will react after two secs holding the trigger takes some getting used to & would mark a skilled player getting the most outta his gun. Im not trashing other games, whatever floats your boat, but I do not believe Brink lacks skill.