From the looks of it, there seems to be a lot of similarities from other games on this one; just wondering if any of you guys
think the same or can think of other major influences on Brink!

I can think of:

Team Fortress 2 (character models, class-based gameplay)
Bioshock (Dystopian society, revolution)
Mirror's Edge (easy one: the SMART system)
Killzone 2 (some of the weapon models in the trailer)

Also, I really want to think of Shadowrun (!!!), imo Shadowrun's multiplayer would have been
fantastic if it weren't for the rushed production, and the art direction really looks similar.. your thoughts
on this as well!

Some of your similarities are real and others imagined.

TF2 and Brink have a common ancestor in the form of Team Fortress for Quake World. The oldest part of Splash Damage were modders who made a TF mod for Quake3. Hence some class similarities.
Mirror's Edge is a clear influence.
The art style of TF2, Bioshock and Borderlands didn't directly influence Brink I suspect, but the realization that your game does better if people can look at different screenshots and know that they're from Brink just by the art was likely important.

I agree with alot of all these I do believe that all games have a some sort influence on each other the ones that do well other games that are being made ahead of that because they see what works and what does not by sales number (this idea is true for hardcoe games) and they know how to what to improve and what to copy form other games that they now work that were made before them because they make games for them to sell and to somewhat to be good in final thought all games influence each other even the bad one's

Don't know about 'gaming' influences, but I totally love the 'Freerunning' style of character movement - I guess the next closest thing to that could be some moves in the 'Prince of Persia' series, but that's not even close to the 'Wow' factor of locomotion I've seen in Brink's trailers.

The 'Freerunning' character animations are another reason I think Brink would benefit from a 3rd person view (ala Prince') - seeing obstacles, rooms, enemies, etc. in direct relationship to your character, I feel facilitates movement and allows players to better realize what his character can or cannot do; 'Is that roof ledge too high to reach?", "Does that divider call for a simple hop or do I need a hand-spring, a flip?".

I assume Beth' has addressed the POV issues through level design; perhaps if you can see it within a few character feet you can climb, reach, jump, hurdle it? Won't know until a demo, but worst case; we'll see a bunch of players trying to run around jumping to grab unreachable things - least case - we don't get to see the awesome character animations unless someone else performs them.

la

The reason why I'm so pumped about this game is because it takes the great things that have been done by a handful of games that I've played and at some point, really enjoyed.

Here's what I'm seeing so far:

Environments remind me a lot of Borderlands.
Character models are close to FT2.
Modular guns and gunplay itself remind me of MW2.
SMART system seems to be inspired by Mirrors Edge.
The sounds and effects seem to take cues from BFBC, giving you a harsh realistic battlefield feeling.

If Bethesda can really put all of these great ingredients together and whip up an amazing experience, this game will be incredibly successful.

Jagged really hit the nail on the head here, I think exactly the same way.

The Venus Project,.. kinda

This.
I feel the same way... And I like your way of seeing things. ^_^

[quote name='lilalex' date='18 March 2010 - 09:00 AM' timestamp='1268917258' post='15768850']
Don't know about 'gaming' influences, but I totally love the 'Freerunning' style of character movement - I guess the next closest thing to that could be some moves in the 'Prince of Persia' series, but that's not even close to the 'Wow' factor of locomotion I've seen in Brink's trailers.

The 'Freerunning' character animations are another reason I think Brink would benefit from a 3rd person view (ala Prince') - seeing obstacles, rooms, enemies, etc. in direct relationship to your character, I feel facilitates movement and allows players to better realize what his character can or cannot do; 'Is that roof ledge too high to reach?", "Does that divider call for a simple hop or do I need a hand-spring, a flip?".

I assume Beth' has addressed the POV issues through level design; perhaps if you can see it within a few character feet you can climb, reach, jump, hurdle it? Won't know until a demo, but worst case; we'll see a bunch of players trying to run around jumping to grab unreachable things - least case - we don't get to see the awesome character animations unless someone else performs them.

lquote]

The free-running aspect is what got me interested. At first I was think it was just another generic shooter, with some neat cartoon graphic style to make it seem like it wasn't. But I saw the demonstration of free-running and SMART, and I was like " O.O This looks hella cool."

Shadowrun was the first thing that I thought about after seeing the clean precise blue/gray/green soldiers fighting the raggedy reds, browns and greens.

I definatly think of Borderlands, I can't put my finger on it, but I just think of it too.

Yeah there are 2 main things that remind me of Borderlands when I see this game in action. 1, they are able to take what used to be a clean and inhabited environment and make it look desolate, abandoned, and destroyed. The art style is similar to what Borderlands was supposed to look like before they changed to the concept art style. 2, the thing that I almost noticed right away is once you gain experience whether it be through killing enemies or completing objectives, the numbers "bleed" off whatever you're getting XP for. But then again I could be imagining things since I play BL waaaay too much.

We have seen only resistence maps. These from Security will be clean and nice. And Crossing of multiplayer and single player is similar like this in Valve project - "The Crossing"

it's to early for me to speculate..... at this point in the development. :mohawk:

i agree with possum

Anybody read the book Snowcrash by Neil Stephenson? The Ark kinda reminds me of the Raft...doubt it was an influence, but the concepts have similarities. Both are pretty awesome, too

im going to wait till someone tells us

the game is my next shooter after killzone 2 .....but judging from the gameplay ive seen .... when u shoot someone it doesnt look as realistic as i thought .. look at killzone 2 and copy the system .... dont get me wrong i am saying this to make the game better cause if they correct this...its gonna be one of the best shooters ever alive .....the customizations are epic and amazing like never before .... keep rockin' on bethesda ...fallout 3 is a life time experience

yea i see what you talking about when you shot someone in killzone n iv never played fallout 3

I am totally agree with you.
Realistic shooting would make this game as a monopoly of FPS.
If the development team members always check this forum,
I wish they could listen our true opinions

As a team-based shooter, realistic gunplay is important.
Parkour was invented by french soldiers.
It is for passing obstacles as quick as possible in order to gain tactical speed
(such as between moving cover to cover, different buildings, etc).
It is also a skill for mobility on an ambush, an escape or even a stealth mission.
Since running at full speed does not help a player to shoot normally,
it needs fire covers or suppressive fire from teammates so that he would not be a target practice easily.
And, it needs teamwork.

This concept was finally put into a FPS.
I am really pleased when I first saw the trailer and the gameplay.

However, I watched the gameplay on the youtube, and the submachine gun seemed to be like too weak.
The player almost had to shoot the whole ammo clip for killing an enemy.

I think there should be more recoil but higher stopping power of the bullets,
instead of less recoil but have to shoot the whole ammo clip for kill one guy.
At least, when it is in close range, it is faster and deadly.
But in medium and long range, players have to control the shooting.
(using triple shots instead of releasing the trigger non-stop.)

It might be my mistake of observation on the shooting? If it is, I will say sorry.

Anyway, in my opinion, Counter-strike is a bad example that a team-based shooter should not be.

On the another hand, shotgun in Brink is powerful. It is not as weak as the Modern Warfare 2. This is very good
The stopping power of assault rifle and submachine gun in Brink should be a bit more powerful as well.

By the way, I am new here,
but I am always looking forward to having a calm, nice and direct discussion with all of you

Brink really reminds me of TF2, with the free running from Mirrors Edge makes it look awesome.

Paul Wedgwood had the idea for the Ark for many years - a lot of the technology and backstory are based off of real world things and events. It wasn't like he saw a bunch of games and said, "hey, let's make a game like that." He had this idea brewing like back when they were making Enemy Territory - maybe even before.

You also have to remember that Brink is influenced by high-selling FPSs, such as Call of Duty.

Halo is unlikely.

Gears has a lot of interesting stuff, but maybe only an abstract basis. Note: its a TPS

Farcry2, considering they quote that as their health regeneration system, though I've only seen vid's of the game.


My only complaint is that Brink NEEDS MORE F.E.A.R.

If you are going for realism, you might as well give up and go surreal. Jk, but FEAR 1 is awesome and the demo for 2 had the best sniper ever imagined, I never actually played FEAR 2. Minus the one hit kill and non-bolt, the sniper would have been really balanced. The animation if it killed, which was always, was GoW but better, because it wasnt only for headshots. Srsly, any game that will show the red dot sight across the map while a player is scoped will have less snipers camping corridors anyday. Plus it emphasizes quick scoping/no scoping/drag scoping/etc

Happy Bethesda, now 3 pair of parentheses: now I'm getting used to it! Also ignore the lack of apostrophes/punctuation.

Btw, love Morrowind + Oblivion + Fallout 3, best at the time was Morrowind though, esp how you could get the best weapons in the first 5 hrs if you knew where they were, talk about Over Powered.

What do you think makes shooting realistic?

Most Realistic mode is that a player will be killed by 3 shots of rifle bullets on a body.
But as someone said, ultra realistic gameplay will make the game too slow and not have fun.
So that it needs balance between realistic elements and fun.

If someone has to be easily killed (by 3 shots of rifle bullets),
I think it should be the character who is chosen to have a small body in Brink.
I called it a rogue class in my mind anyway...It is extremely fast in exchange of low armor, sounds fair for me...
I think I will choose that type of body for some excitement. I am not sure the others' thought.

When I played wargame (paintball or BB guns) with some retired soldiers or experienced players,
I will try to find an unexpected angle to surprise the enemies for a short time,
and moving from cover to cover when I think no one saw me or I was covered by teamates,
instead of running straight ahead. (But I will go straight ahead if there is no other choices)

When someone wear a high class bullet-proof vest
Even in real world, submachine bullets will not kill him easily, unless a head shot.
However, when someone with bullet-proof vest is hit by a bullet, he will feel that he was punched.
So that, at least a heavy suited player in brink should be slighted shocked after being hit by a submachine gun ammo.
(but still able to shoot, but slightly unaccurate...Like in Modern Warfare 2 single player - hardcoe mode)

When a player was shot, at least he should feel the pressure of being hit or shocked a little.
However, this player does not have to be disabled after a shot. As someone said, it will lose fun because of ultra realistic.

I play Rainbow Six Raven Shield sometimes, but for me it makes me too nervous.
It is more like a practice program or a lesson of a wargame concept.
Brink is quite a fun for me as I have seen in youtube,
but I think a fair realistic will satisfy more hardcoe FPS players.

For me, recoils, stopping power, what damage can a player take, what player can do and cannot do in a game is important.
If you have played Battlefield 2 (1.5 patch), you will find that it is super unrealistic and non-sense, it is another bad example.

Anyway, I think the game developers can give players choices on hardcoe or normal.

Some players can choose hardcoe mode on single and multiplayer, in order to receive and give out more damages,
as somebodies enjoy the excitement and stress in a fun way.

Some players can choose normal mode on single and multiplayer, and they can relax and enjoy their fun.

BOTH WIN and why not?

Modern Warfare 2 players have to play a lot to unlock the hardcoe mode, which is pointless.
I bought Modern Warfare 2 and I gave it up after I had played it for 2 months...

I hope in Brink, players can choose hardcoe or normal mode directly.
If hardcoe mode has to be unlocked, please just set the requirement that players just have to finish the single player campaign in hardest difficulty.