From a interview I found on a fansite:

Q: = member of Crossfire.nu
A: = Richard “Rahdo” Ham – Creative Director @ Splash Damage



If this is true...this will be frackin fantastic....thats over 3 football fields squared! I hope we can get confirmation on this size This is more than double the size of MW2 maps...probly about the size of BF's latest games maps.


SWEET!

He also says, "Suffice to say, you don’t spend very much time far away from the enemy."

If maps are as over 3 football fields big, then something doesn't add up.

more then likely, objectives keep most players in a 50-100m square area at a time... complete and objective and move to the next zone.


And BFBC2 maps are more like 200-300m wide, and 300-1000m long. there are a few SMALL 300x300ish maps

the 16 player mode, Squad DM, is usually on a 150-300x150-300m area, and it's constant action.... though it's 4v4v4v4

I think the 300m x 300m is a game measurement rather than actually saying 300 meters. Even if it is, I suspect that most of the space is occupied by obstacles and buildings. So you won't have too many wide open spaces for this game.

well, it's a virtual world, so yah... game measurement.

but they have a scaling system. It's all relative

Characters stand ~2m tall, avg, so if you layed down 150 characters head to toe in a line, that would be 1 map edge.

Indeed, but anything to get us away from the cramped MW2 maps that were clearly made for console gamers. I calculated the Afghan map out to be about 103 meters long (C130 (97ftx3.5) about 3.5 of em can fit lengthwise in that map from topview estimations). The map sizes of MW2 have pissed me off from release...way too small.

That's also what I guess.

3 times 100x100 is something else than 300x300
Team A won't spawn in a corner with Team B spawning in the other one. And you have command posts.
Check out the container city preview and you'll see the battlefield changes as the attacking team pushes farther by completing more objectives.

he also says "dont quote me on that"

Pfah, I think he means that he doesn't know for sure the length and breadth of the maps but can give an approximation. Either that or the OP just breached an informal non-disclosure agreement.

The battlefield will obviously move forwards, think some of you got the impression it won't.

How do smaller maps favor console players? I've never played on a computer before so I don't know how the experience differs. However, I do agree that the maps were too small.

I'm confused...why would a meter in-game be any different from the real life equivalent? :huh:

I honestly have no idea however I can speculate in a very snobbish manner.

1. Maybe tighter maps lead to a greater percentage of firefights occurring at close quarters which may not emphasise precise aim, which is something that console shooters usually lack without automatic assistance.
2. Console online FPSs seem to go around with much smaller player counts, this could've originated from the lack of dedicated servers that typifies a lot of console games. A side-affect of smaller playercounts is smaller maps for obvious reasons.
3. Everything is smaller with console FPSs and those who play them; from tiny hardware (even the leviathan original PS3s and PS2s can't match a tower case for sheer bulkiness) to tiny amounts of buttons to tiny ****s. By having smaller maps the developers are avoiding the inflammation of console player's insecurities to do with size.

Discounting number three there are some plausible explanations for why smaller maps would cater to console players. Though really I'm not all that fussed about map size, it's more player counts that concern me. 12v12 pleaaaaassseee SD! As for "favouring" console players at least SD doesn't seem to be going the way of the guys who made shadowrun. I can't believe allowing PC and Console matches to overlap would count as a feature, especially when they had to compromise their game in a vain attempt to balance the two means of control in head to head situations.

Anyway Brink looks fine. I can handle 16 player servers, they're ok for TF2 if you have a good crowd playing and Brink looks like it's ticking all the boxes of a mult-platform release. I.e. not simply being designed for one and ported to the others.

Smaller maps do not favor console gamers...smaller maps are made for consoles due to the consoles limitations. The processors and video of a console is less than half of that of a low budget pc. Its very easy for any fps PC gamer to tell if a game was made for the PC or ported from a console.

Map size doesn't really matter to me. I mean it also depends on how many players there are, the weapons and how concentrated the objectives are.

I'm just not expecting massive maps that you can freely roam over with an 8v8 team. If that were true, the front line would have to stretch pretty thin to prevent being flanked.
It would only take one light going all the way around the edges to get to the enemy spawn, then he would use disguise and backstab to annoy everyone. When he's caught, he would repeat the process simply because it is so easy with such a massive map.

300 x 300, sure, but don't forget that it'll be broken up into segments based around the major objectives. All of the fighting will probably be centered around one small area at a time, i.e. the front lines, which means that the rest of the map should be empty, unless somebody is going off to find some intel.

Typical PC snobbery.

The ONLY actual reason is player count.... but there is no difference in player count between console and PC for Brink... so no difference exists


Personally, I have no problem getting 800m headshots in BFBC2.... and I turn off aim assist ALWAYS.

Even with aim assist off, there is still some degree of aim assist - this is true for a lot of console games.

MW2 tends to follow targets ever so lightly even with aim assist off... I have tried sniping around a riot shield only to find my crosshairs following the bastard as he travels back and forth between me and my target. Aim assist was off, so I can only assume "off" means "turned down slightly" in IW's dictionary.

?
lol

um, no

Aim Assist barely does anything as is most of the time.

2 versions I've seen.
1) It lowers sensitivity as you pass over enemies. Basic and straight forward
2) it "follows" a target... not if they are running, but if they strafe walk left/right while shooting, AND you move your aim to keep up with it, type 2 will make it easier to keep on target. This type has a SERIOUS drawback however... if you are in a head on fire fight, and second enemy crosses your path, it will track the moving enemy JUST enough to make you miss your initial target, and then stop...

Then there is auto aim, where when you aim, it auto-snaps on any enemy within x degrees. This type is for pure casual play.... like if you wanna let ur 50 yr old dad, or 3 yr old son play.... it's THAT easy. It's also extremely rare, and generally not found in MP (though it is... /facepalm)


But I turn mine off... I don't want the computer getting me kills

My GOD!! your game aims for you? WTF?!? Would it be so hard to actually aim yourself?

Console gamers....ill never understand em. The console is great for sports games, but please...if your gona play a FPS, PLAY the game...and dont let a tiny computer aim for you.

Red Dead redemption did it... GTA, I can't name any FPS that did... though there might be.

and didn't you read the part where I said I don't even use the minor assist?

Take ur elitism and bugger off... aiming with a mouse is 10x easier then a gamepad.

It doesn't aim for you, geez. It's not an automatic lock on. It just makes it so that if you aim within a few centimeters of a guy it snaps the gun onto him. They have the same feature in Brink, sort of. In one of the interviews it said that players will have a sort of gravity well around them that makes it easier to follow them with your gun. So your crosshairs will move quicker towards the enemy than they will away from him, as long as they're within that small "gravity well."

B4 the misunderstanding...

he (^) means that so long as you MANUALLY track the enemy, the aim assist will help keep it on target, since smooth aiming with a gamepad is difficult.

That is type 1 I was referring to... and you can turn it off... (usually... I guess MW2 has it no matter what.....)