The way I understand it, there are going to be no leaderboards what-so-ever. Stat based ranks make people care more about kills than teamwork, and pure experience based ranks lead people to farm. Experience will be solely for the purpose of leveling up and improving your characters. You can move unused experience from one character to another, so you can use your main to level up your alts as well.

well, my last info (i guess it was a leonardi interview form EGE) was that there will be leadersboards displaying exp points per player. maybe i'm wrong.
anyhow i share your concern that perhaps ppl lose interest in exp and will become uninterested in winning by teamwork and just go happy slapping or what-not

I like the idea of those perks. Make your abilities suit your playstyle does sound good.


Quickscoping takes skill!!! Otherwise there wouldn't be over 9000 skilled players on Youtube!


"If you're the last man standing, you're not fighting hard enough." - Codex of the Space Marines

Quickscoping might take skill to aim the shot, but it's a bit cheap since it's an OHK. Throwing knives in MW2 are the same I think.

Halo, MW Series, MOH 2010 are very competitive in nature and that is the way they are designed by developers; however, it is the hardcoe [censored] competitive nature that support the developers competitive game play designs. It is the "Chichen or the Egg" Theory. No matter what hardcoe [censored] whine and complain about everything when comes to their hardcoe games like Halo, MW and MOH 2010. They compare every game to MW or Halo and if that "new game" doesn't meet their standards of MW2 it svcks or if the "new game" does reach or bypass MW standards the game is copying MW2 also svcks.

Eitherway, no one wins here, especially the gamer who isn't hardcoe and want to have a good time, but what happends is developers try to keep the MW2 trend alive by adding in MW2 stuff into other games and eventually we get tones of MW2 game rip offs or many boring and generic FPS that are will boring and add nothing new to the table. This is where I strongly believe Brink will be different....they are taking risks, but the risks will pay off in the long run!

egg, dinosaurs you know?

Maybe there could be leader boards at the end of the game like left 4 dead had, that say who buffed other people the most or who did the most objectives. They wont have any reel baring on character advancement, but it will encourage people to help their team more.

Also a TF2 Thing if i am not mistaken. I mean, how much you spent time as a certain class, did certain things, life time, stuff like that. Yeah, i would be into that, really would give a good depth for the game.

none of those games are "hardcoe" and only idiots think MW2 is a great game....cs 1.5 is 100x more hardcoe then all 3 of those games combined..and better

not sure, but i think there are leaderboards at the end of each game. since some people who played it mentioned they were the best of their team, or somewhere in the middle of the bunch, i would assume there will be.
it's just that there will be no online leaderboards that keep track (and display), your skill and where you fit in the community leaderboard

In one video you could clearly see that there is a leaderboard at the end of a round. Click http://bethblog.com/index.php/2010/10/12/moar-brink/ and check 1:28 to 1:38.

indeed, thanks for the proof :icecream:

Cool, even the defenders will have a cut scene for winning.

They would have to because if not there would be a hole in the resistance/security story, every multiplayer game is just a singleplayer level with random people.

Imho, the Counterstrike-Series is one game which did basicly not develop and improve at all, while other games did. It's only hardcoe and rather not fun, if you don't live it.

However, all other games can be hardcoe. I hope BRINK can be hardcoe, but will only really be if played competitive.

As for the CoD gamers, yes i totally understand, way way too many rambo's and at times over many hours and throughout many serves i have seen close to zero team work. What people fail to understand is that sure gaming is fun thing to do and in a way relieves some stress, but when you immerse yourself into the team play aspect of gaming then it opens up a completely new angle of gaming.

As for Brink, well lets say i have a feeling that this might just have the star dust to separate itself from others. Obviously its game engine certainly has what is needed, all that is required is that the maps themselves provoke team work. By injecting team orientated maps is automatically provides a foundation for the game and modders throughout the community to sit up and take notice. Lets face it, all these gaming news sites are totally dependent on what the game publishers release and how well they can tune into the heart beat of gamers.

Myself and as i have posted earlier, Brink would definitely be a rage if it was modded with identical game movement into a ww2 mod. Simply take a look at all recent titles that orientate around war. The movement is limited and i wont even approach the fact that sure the scenery is cool, but the gamer is limited to impact physics that remind back when i was playing Donkey Kong.

So in short and i know you sir are going to read this post, allow the tools needed to push the title into a pasture that has been dominated by so called other publishers. You will definitely have my full support on a wide aspect of fronts and as for the gamers, well i am sure and with your background and hands on experience you will surely see what i am referring to.

Peace.

MW2 and HALO games and the like is all about the individual and nothing to do with team work. It is all about 16 lone wolves out for themselves who are trying to get the best k/d and see if they can beat the next guy. I just can't wait for the next 10 MWs with the same formula and same game play....I will be passing, thanks, but no thanks!

I played CoD, Halo and unreal tournament for some time. It got boring after a month, its each time the same. Then I met Quake Wars by an accident and I knew that I will always chose those games above all the 'big and great' games like the CoD franchise. A teamgame is always different and you can create great teamgames with the right mates.

But I think that there will come more players who play for k/d, even if they know that's not the right way. Because the kills and deaths are shown at the end of the game and it would be better if those stats will not be showed, like in Quake Wars, where you can only see the player with the most kills.

Yes, this will appeal to CoD players. You define CoD players as players who only focus on racking up kills, thinking that that was the aspect that drew them to the game itself - that's not true. The appeal in CoD is that it gives the players a chance to play what they see in the news, they get to be a hardcoe soldier and they get to shoot from an AC130 - and then add to that the very solid shooting system that CoD has (which is the only thing I like about it). Anyway, the 13-16 year old players who think that AC-130s, throwing knives and amazing graphics will love free running.

If you want the weapons of CoDMW but team work try BF:BC2, with a good group of people you get the buzz of working as a team and the real-world weapons. Plus the frostbite engine is awesome. BF:BC2 makes MW2 look very simple when you compare them

BF2 is more fun though

Yes it appeals to CoD players, I am a CoD player and it appeals to me.

The COD Player is a lie!




Seriously though, I find Modern Warfare 2 (we're talking about that COD, are we?) quite interesting.
I mean, the youtube-community of this game is huuuuge (HUUUUUGE!) and even I enjoyed the free weekend on Steam. MW2 is not all too similar to BRINK, because it's so very different. But many people prefer FPSs, not COD per se.

Well i hope that its not too much like COD because then people will camp. I looked up COD in the dictionary and it said "COD:camp with Barret 4 the win"
fortunately i can tell that they made this game very balanced between attack and defense

I SECOND THAT