The leaderboard shouldn't be tied to what you unlock, it will probably just be there just to show off peoples achievements. An example would be like it will display the players name, his lvl, the challenge, the time you completed it in, the ranking you received (bronze, silver, gold) and the challenge rating (normal, hard, elite) - The harder the Challenge, the cooler the reward.

Of course, I do not know the specifics on Challenges, but basically, they are called "Challenges" - they are probably going to be challenging, at least some of them. The leaderboard is there to track players progress and for some bragging rights. It could also potentially be a better method for determining a players "skill" than the standard K/D ratio, accuracy, overall points, etc.

Thanks for the update to the info, always a good read

I think they mean challenges as in MW2... like 50 kills gives a new scope, or 20 objectives unlocks a new perk, or so on.

It's probably the same concept, but much more in depth. I envision easier Challenges like, "navigate through the course before time expires," to give players a feel for SMART. And maybe more advanced challenges like class based scenarios, like "keep your team alive by performing 10 revives and 10 health buffs without dying."

I don't think they will be so generic as "get X amount of kills." They will act as ways to actually make you better, not only at Brink, but at shooters in general. Also remember, Challenges appear to be their own thing, not something you unlock from playing the game regularly.

Does this imply a challenge mode as a game mode I wonder?

If it is how I envision it, I would call it more of a "scenario mode," Since it would be a bunch of pre-determined maps and conditions, in which to complete each Challenge. And you wouldn't be able to play them online - You wouldn't be able to get help from others (that wouldn't e very challenging would it). This is how I envision it.

To the 2 suggestions in the poll:



It makes sense, betas don't necessarily take place on all platforms. However, I think it is safe to assume people would vote in-line with the platform they are playing Brink on. It could be added for the minority of people who are going to buy the game on multiple platforms, but because very few people do that I don't see it as really worth it.



I think it is a more pressing issue if it is included as DLC at all, and because that is so far in the future I don't really see the need to ask the price question. However, if there is a major out cry of people who want this question I have no problems with adding it.



And just my theory on adding questions : This is meant to be a short and to-the-point Brink Survey for a lot of the common polls, not a 5 page questionnaire, so I am somewhat reluctant to add questions. But if people want it longer let me know and I can do that.

Thanks for acknowledging my question.

If this forum is any indicator... I would say many people would like to see the packs as DLC. I was just wondering what everyone would think is a fair value for them, or if they even felt the packs are not worth anything at all. Maybe they want the packs, but are not willing to pay for them. The same goes for female avatars.
I, for one, just want to see what the general belief is on their value. I may be wrong, but I think a majority of people would pay at least something if they were added as DLC.

EDIT* If you do decide to add this to the poll, be sure to express that its not what you want to pay for them (I want them for free too, but don't see it happening). It is what you would be willing to pay for them (so it would say "I wouldn't pay anything for them" instead of "I would like them to be free") if they were to be DLC.

the pre-order bonus should be available ONLY through pre-order...it isn't much of a "bonus" if anyone can get it....

You'd still be getting the content for free if you're pre-ordering it.

Not at first, no, but later on, when they release some DLC (which I hope they do), then I don't see why they couldn't include all 4 of the pre-order packs, as well as other additional content. I mean, for a game with as many options as Brink, a few hats, T-shirts, and masks does not a satisfactory DLC pack make.

what's the point of giving them while saying it's to set you apart from the rest to show you were there in the start.
when after a while, a lot of people who weren't there have it aswell?

That's fair.


Morrowind had an in-game pre-order bonus that was later released to the public but since then Bethesda has mostly stuck to swag. New Vegas, Brink, and Hunted are trying something new (for Bethesda) so I don't really know what their plans are. However it does seem likely that these pre-order bonuses will only be available for pre-orders.

Maybe they'll have DLC packs like this, but I don't want these on the market. Like having small packs for about $5 and maybe map packs for $10. Or an all weapons pack for 5 and an all clothes+skin pack for $5 as well.

i don't see why added content has to cost, it used to be free except it was a big load, and then it was an expansion so you gladly paid money.

what they're doing these days is outrageous, just look at mw2, 15$ for 2recycled maps and 3new ones...
without any other content...

I will consider putting it in for another question in the future, as it stands I don't want to update the poll with one question at a time, then people will want to go back and vote again, and may vote on one which they have already submitted a response for.

I am interested in the question "What would you pay for as DLC", with answers such as weapons, maps, customization options etc..

Yeah that was a rip off. I shouldn't have bought it.

Yeah, I mean, look at borderlands. I mean, their DLC was 100x the DLC MW2's was. It had tones of of new areas. Tons of new guns. Lots of new areas. New vehicles. Even an increased level cap. And people are still buying IW's crappy DLC.

Although borderlands is a totally different game from MW2, you'd think they would care about their players.

I would like that. It would be fun to do stuff on the side while not in the middle of the game.

Quite interesting stuff in this compendium. I've been lurking for a few days and have read through all of the info very interesting indeed. Plus all the videos and everything else, theirs certainly a lot to this game and its in what alpha still? I like the idea of the challenge modes and I think they will fit great. When I heard about the challenges I thought more of in game challenges rather than solo challenges where your just running a course or whatever. Not to say that is not a possibility I don't doubt it but the way they keep saying it in the videos is for the better unlocks is. "To show off what a bad [censored] you are." Now people aren't going to go man he is such an great killer if you ran a course in two minutes for it. It just means you kept practicing a lot which is great and everything but.. I think the challenges will be more in game and probably tied in with the objectives and such so people aren't just randomly running around trying to do a challenge. Just my thoughts of course, who knows really nothing is really final at this stage in the development cycle. Thanks for posting all the info up by the way, its appreciated.

I had a question to which I think I know the answer, but I want to verify it first. When you use voice, it is not exclusively to your team? because even though there is an AI commander, call-outs are useful for accurate tactics and orders to your teammates, especially if you are trying to coordinate a rush, even if a player can't contribute a voice and say spy, at least they can hear it normally. It seems like there would be either 2 options (team/off) or 3 options, (global/team/off). The main reason chat is default to off (in Brink's case) is "misogynist, racist" 12 yr. olds (and more recently voice spamming), but most conflict is spread between the two teams, which trash talk each other to enrage the enemy team, provoking unnecessary mistakes, because trash talking is proven to be effective, some of the reasoning behind why tea-bagging and trash talking are banned in tournaments.

It seems like the ability to talk to the other team should be taken off entirely--as a deterrent for unsportsmanlike behavior. Then the only two options are team and friends only, meaning if you do voice spam/curse off players, you are only hurting yourself and your team. While people would still fight/trash talk--although in smaller amounts--over xbox and ps3, voice spammers will rarely get negative feedback, which feeds/reinforces their behavior, thus a great percentage of voice spammers will realize how fruitless voice spam is if no one is listening (because even the players who have VOIP on can turn it off).

I was going to suggest that SD only includes VOIP team and VOIP off, but I wanted to make sure I was right before I posted anything.

Thanks.

[edit:] because the only sportsmanlike behavior you ever see is "gg."

In the words of Richard Ham, from a December, 2009 interview:

"Before I came to Splash Damage, I used to play Call of Duty all through, solo. And they I’d be done with it, I’d put it on a shelf. I would never actually take the time to go online and so this huge amount of game experience was completely lost to me. So to me, a big goal is ensuring that players like me, who are missing out on these kinds of experiences, are comfortable and invited in.

In BRINK, we actually literally invite you to come online. We can guarantee you that you will never hear the voice of someone who isn’t already your friend.

Now, for years on PC it was very hard to do voice communication. But on consoles, it’s really easy because it’s all built in the hardware and we have this wireless mics. So you go online to play Halo and it’s just a cesspool of foul language because it’s just so easy, there’s no barrier.

So by default, [in BRINK] all the voice pvssyr is turned off. And that’s a dangerous thing, because it means that if you and I are playing together and I see you’re about to be shot in the back, I can’t warn you. Again, it could if we were friends and were using the party channels. But if you’re a stranger and I wanted to help you, there’s nothing I can do. There’s a big focus in our development on working on a very robust automatic chat system. So the game can do it for you. The system very smartly recognizes what you are doing and what I am doing. And if there’s something really important you need to know, my character will speak in the language of the game about that situation. And by doing this, we create a game where players can really have that game experience that people normally don’t have, because everybody’s pretty much just running around calling everybody a [censored].”

Read it, jw if you knew whether VOIP on is global or team. The AI is helpful, but it doesn't help with general tactics (Me and player X will take route 1, player Y and Z, take route 2 and prepare to attack in 30 seconds). The AI will warn teammates, but it can't really suggest the best routes to your team the first time (although it might get the idea after 5 minutes of standstill).

I noticed global and was hoping it would be team specific voice chat, because if the enemy team is a clan, 6/8 will probably be trash talking you (at least on console).

I don't regardless. I grew up playing FPS on PC with nothing but type chat. Now that I play on consoel, I never speak to randoms. I only talk to friends in party chat, and if I'm playing by myself, I either don't use the headet, or join a private party by myself so I can't be bothered.

The way SD is doing things currently, is just fine with me.

Lord of the Rings Conquest had backstab...

it was stealth though, not a costume, and you definitely broke stealth to backstab

Disguises are different then then stealthing.... BUT... you can always steal the disguise of the guy you just backstabbed... so whats the big deal either way?

Thanks to everyone who has voted in the poll so far, to address some submitted responses:



There is a reason why all the questions are phrased along the lines of which one do you want to play or are looking forward to the MOST. For your provided example, I try not to be derogatory in poll choices, no reason to.



I considered this and assumed that the amount of people that were going to be pre-ordering from multiple places was small enough that it should remain multiple choice. As far as the second suggestion, it is a good one and I didn't think about that. I am hesitant to change the fundamentals of a response as it would alter the data, I think I will change the response to "I will be activating multiple pre-order keys". So people who voted for the original responses answers' still hold true.

EDIT: Apparently editing the answers erases all of the original responses, so that question just lost 3 answers that were voted to "I will be pre-ordering from multiple places".



It is governed by the assumption that you will be able to use multiple pre-order keys, I don't think it is officially confirmed at this point.



I haven't really seen enough debate about this to include it as a question. It is also similiar (although not as common) to a poll on this forums of "Should PC's be able to custom configure controls" since there is no real negative to it (besides price, which the average customer isn't aware of), I think it can assumed that the majority of people would vote yes.

And thank you to the people who pointed out the came / game typo.


If people are interested in viewing the data / graphs again after they have voted let me know and I will see what I can do. I am currently trying to figure out the best way to go about this, but there doesn't seem to be a terrible easy way to make the graphs public past the first time you view it after voting.