Something went wrong. Try again later

ninjatuned

This user has not updated recently.

37 58 12 4
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

What Brink Gets Right

So this is probably going to be more controversial than the "What Brink Gets Wrong" list.  Apparently some people don't like the game in any aspect.  I politely disagree.
 
1) Classes - The perks for the classes are great and for the most part appropriate for the class.  From the typical "speed up my actions" to the more original "holy crap somebody is looking at me" the perks are fun and keep you playing.  The game does a good job breaking them up and giving the appropriate powered perks across the board.  It's also nice to not be confined to a limited weapons selection per class. More on the weapons.

2) Weapon balance - While I will be the first to admit it's almost impossible to tell the difference between an assault rifle and a SMG in Brink (or the difference between any other fully automatic weapon) is that such a bad thing?  I've never played a game where the weapon load-out felt more fair.  I may have a shitty gun but nobody else has one that's better.  Somehow I find that comforting.  While the assault rifles and SMGs largely feel the same the shotguns feel like shotguns and the pistols feel like pistols. (Except for that fully automatic one that feels like a SMG with a smaller clip.  God I love that gun.) 
 
3) Points for actions not (as much for) kills - This is where I think Brink really shines.  In a team based game to make points tied inherently to objectives seems like a no brainer.  But from team buffs, to a constant trickle of points for escorting a target or defending an objective Brink takes it one step further and even makes things around an objective worth doing.  Also no KDR at all.  The most you get is at the end of a match you get to see who was the best overall, best for each class and who had the most kills.  And guess what - the best in class is tied to the objective points.
 
4) Buffs for teammates - Want points?  Why not toss your teammate a health buff?  There's virtually no excuse in this game for not earning a constant stream of points.  It also encourages groups to travel together.  One of the funniest things I've seen in the game has been when there's a lull in the action a group of teammates standing in one place buffing each other in a circlejerk while the enemy took their time getting their act together.  It keeps players busy and gives you something to do on those long slogs across the map.
 
5) SMART - I hesitate to put this in here as it's so under utilized.  But the fact is that it's cool and it works.  Too bad only one body type can use it.  And the maps don't fully exploit the potential.  And it's impossible to tell in the maps where you can use it.
 
I've enjoyed my time with Brink but still feel it's lacking content for a full retail release.  I'd really like to see a follow up with many of the issues in my last post and this one cleared up.

1 Comments

What Brink Gets Wrong

 




To fend off any potential haters - I don't have (much of) a problem with the mechanics of Brink - as a class based multiplayer shooter it's pretty good - it does a lot of things differently than other games and it manages those things pretty well.  I've played about 16 hours of Brink and I've had a pretty good time with it.  I'll do a "What Brink Gets Right" post sometime after this one.  Now to the meat.
 
Narrative
As a campaign based game it's laughable at best .  The cutscenes only purpose, it seems, is to hide the matchmaking going on in the background.  It's a hollow shell of a story with no life or characters to fill it out.  They only other story telling happens in audio logs that you can choose to listen to if you feel like it while you're customizing your character.  It seems like the plot is so disposable that you can not even be aware of half of it unless you go searching for it.   It seems more like the idea was to cut production time (in an interview with the developer they say they've been working on Brink since BEFORE the first left 4 dead) by not really including a single player campaign than to try and have a well thought out coherent story.  So ultimately anyone looking for a good single player experience is going to be left wanting.  More annoyingly, anyone looking for a good multiplayer experience is going to be hampered by the confines of the objectives of the "story" within the mission.  But more on this later. The only other thing i can say about the story is that it's entirely disingenuous to say that we're seeing "both sides" of a conflict when each side's campaign has missions that the other doesn't have.  If you play as the resistance you don't shoot a missile at the ark founders tower as it happens in the security campaign.  (You do get to do it in a "what if" mission outside of the normal resistance campaign) You essentially have two slightly different stories where the side you play as is clearly good and the other side is clearly bad.   No shades of gray that were hinted at in the pre-release hype-train.  What a sad half assed cop-out in a sad half assed campaign.  It is a shame as you can see the promise in the back story but the developers failed to deliver.

This would have been a much much better game if three or four things would have been done:

1) Ditch the story altogether - set it up, give a back story but don't try and tell any real narrative outside of mission objectives. That way they could have been randomized and given fresh life to maps that will age very quickly.  Anyone familiar with Killzone's Warzone mode will know what I'm talking about.

2) No campaign = lower price - For all intents and purposes there is no single player campaign in this game.  I think expectations would be in the right place if this were cheaper at launch - $45 - $40 seems about right to me.

3) More maps - 8 maps? Really? and that's for both "single player" and multiplayer.  Even for a downloadable multiplayer only title that's a little thin much less for a $60 disc title.

4) Integrate the systems - This is one of my only mechanical beefs with the game.  The character customizations are great - too bad once i start a game i can't change anything more about my character other than his class and guns (only guns, not attachments).  I'd love the ability to change my weight since that has such a big impact to gameplay - or to give me the option to tie together certain weapon sets with certain classes so I'm not wasting valuable time dicking around with that stuff in game.  Or even let me switch characters around in game so that if i need to switch to an engineer i have my engineer character all customized and ready to go. There are really great systems in Brink but it's like they don't talk to each other or are just layered one on top of the other with nothing that breaks through and combines them in some meaningful way.

I'm very much of a split mind on Brink.  It has issues but it's pretty fun to play.  But I still feel like a sucker paying $60 for it.
9 Comments