Figured I'd ask for the sake of conversation...

Do you think a large percentage of people will go after ratio and other trackable stats rather than complete the objectives?

Some co-workers seem to think its what some competitive people will be going after despite what is assumed to be less xp in the long run.

I know one of the reasons for my anticipation of BRINK is to get away from this mentality but some habits are hard to break.

There is no K/Dr in Brink, only how much XP you gained.

No since the game doesn't track KD.

K/D is not a trackable stats in Brink there are no leader-boards ect showing K/D so there is no real incentive for people to camp and go after kills instead of objectives. That was one of the primary focuses they had for brink to entice players as much as possible to play the objectives and help there team.

With that said however there will always be those that simply go for kills because thats what they want to do no matter what game it is.

Edit: Dam ninja's :ninja:

*points at signature*

No, not the secret that I'm the tenth doctor of the brink boards.

I mean the fact that lone wolfs who are in it for themselves. K/D is not the famous thing to hold high in this game. It's the amount of wins you achieve in matches that count. Give me a high win/loss ratio then a high k/d any day. At least the high win/loss knows how a game should be played and can adapt and or even win the game altogether with the tactics they have learned from won and or lost games. No disrespect to anyone who can do both, this is a personal preference.

I'd like Win Lose ratio.

and I like you
:foodndrink:

I have ninja'ed THE Wraith.

Haha! I have revenge! REVENGE!

So people keep switching to the winning team?



Don't make me destroy you. bliviongate:

Well, with bot filler they could just lock teams instead.

But aren't operatives technically lone wolves <_<

no they are not. an operative might not hang out with the rest of the team, but everything they do, or should do, will not only aid the team, but in most cases will rely on the team in order for it to be done successfully.

Example
Operative objectives typically require that enemies be no where around for the best results. When hacking, an Operative can't defend themselves unless they stop the hack, and if someone sees the device on the objective, it's a dead giveaway. When disguising, an Operative cannot be seen. And when disguised, if the team isn't shooting in thier general direction at least, then someone might notice they are in a disguise. Pretty much everything an operative does is made easier and moe productive by the team helping them, whether it is intentional or not.

If operatives are wolves, then wolves travel in packs.

+1 good point!

I seriously doubt it will make much difference. People like to win but they like to kill and survive far more. Its happened in countless objective games...no matter how easy or difficult the objective is, there are still people lone wolfing it for the purpose of killing others.

Look at Red Dead Redemption actually, GREAT example. The slowest way to rank in that game is killing folks (save picking flowers, literally) but what is everyone doing in that game when I enter free roam? Not taking out hideouts, not completely challenges, not of hunting or being a NPC murderer...they are killing each other.

Each kill nets you like 10xp where as if you compelety even the simplest mission you get a minimum of 300-400xp.

Ill say it again and stick by it...people (in general) like surviving and killing more than anything else in a game, its the ultimate means and ends reward system to any PvP game. The ranking that will be done will simply go towards netting rewards that help you kill better, ie, sights and guns and the occasional "clothing" for an ego boost.

On rare occasions and who knows, maybe the enitre Brink community are these folks gathered, you have objectively based and win=onlygoal individuals...but I find these folks to be few and far between in the sea of online gamers.

I would like to see something that tracks the amount of Time / Match as each class, and objectives completed per class. And maybe an overall objectives completed of each objective type

Thats why I'm a fox. Who needs a pack when you can do most of it yourself?

AnarchyyFox, the reason everyone killed each in RDR was because it was FUNNY AS HELL!!! I myself got involved in a massive horseback shot out in a large depression. mindless violence for almost an hour! i really miss that game...if/when a goty edition cmes out i will get it.

Point still stands however.

Precisely.

...foooooooxxxxxx :wavey: :hehe:

Download and play the demo of Enemy Territory: Quake Wars to roughly see how some gameplay elements might work. Although I'm not sure what the online tracking kept up on, the end mission/ awards screen always displayed most valuable players through exp earned, not k/d.

And also, the reason there's a "lone" in the phrase "lone wolf," is because that particular one isn't in a pack, whereas others like it (engineer, medic, soldier) are.

There's still a difference between being a "lone wolf" and being seperated from your pack.

@Fox, might want to check the spelling in your sig.

just cuz you can't see him, doesn't mean he isn't part of the pack. a lone wolf has no pack, where as the operatives are the scouts and assassins of the pack. they are meant to keep their distance, while still being part of the pack by leading the prey into the ideal position and/or situation, thus ensuring the pack's victory and gorey feast of wolfyness

A good operative will still be in the pack, but how many of you really believe that's how it'll be for the majority?

Either way, wasn't commenting on how operatives should or shouldn't be part of the pack, just on how someone said 'lone wolf', and it directly went to 'if he's a wolf, then he should be in a pack', completely negating that the main focus was on the 'lone' aspect, not the species. If you want to troll, go elsewhere, and if that's not your intent, then at least take in the context of what people say.