In this article it states there will no be bullet penetration but he is not very precise in his answer

Some time ago we asked the BRINKish readers to send us questions to Brink game developer Splash Damage. The response was overwhelming but we where happy to pass on a large bunch of question which have now been replied on by Splash Damage Creative Director, Richard Ham and Lead Game Designer, Neil Alphonso.-
BRINKish.eu: How hard would you say it is to kill another player in Brink? Is there bullet penetration?
A: Keeping in mind that damage is something we’re constantly tuning, in our current play-testing setup it takes around half a clip to take down an enemy if they’re not evading, with headshots doing extra damage on top of that. This is before potential weapon damage buffs and health buffs are taken into account. Brink does not use any bullet penetration for players or the environment.

Does anyone think that there should or will be bullet penetration in the game, it could also be only available with an attachment or ability, If so state the gun body size or if the skill should be class specific or general.

And sorry for the poll being so long. i actually want to know what the community thinks about this.

This game actually promotes the use of utilizing cover. I disagree.

The lines between single player and multiplayer are blurred. You use the same character, weapon set ups and everything. The only game modes are resistance campaign and security campaign. Than you choose how you want to play the campaigns, single player, co-op or multiplayer. So how do you propose they limit it?

You should give the option to say no to them all.

I for one vote for Bullet Penetration in some way or form.

If it takes about half a clip to kill someone, and their main bar of health will always regenerate (I'm not talking about PIPS) then it sounds like a fire fight that will get very boring since the person can pop up and shoot then drop back down and in theory, protect an area because his health will keep regenerating and no one can even shoot through the cover.

I haven't played the game and until there's a beta/demo/something to tests these things out I can only go on the idea of a theory. Then they say half a clip, I'm thinking of about 15 bullets and that's on a normal body type that's not evading. So would that mean a large body type while evading will take an entire clip and more?

Back to the point, I do think there should be some degree of bullet penetration just to help "inspire" people to keep moving around and not "camp". I'm all for any other tactics to help promote this but this is something I've seen used in a few games that's effective.... Never the less, this game does seem awesome and I'm hopeful and fairly certain that this game will not disappoint.

1. That's what grenades are for
2. He won't get much accomplished if he just hides behind a wall

1. Thats if you hit them with gernades

2.Doesn't mean people still wont do it.

1. You don't have to hit them - just get it close to them. Throwing a nade isn't hard and it doesn't even have to damage them. It will still flush them out. And what's this "you" business? There are 7 other teammates on my team, I'm sure at least 1 other person would toss a nade as well. You also forgot about SMART, and people getting to vantage points or coming up behind him.

2. This isn't a problem with Brink, but a problem with people. People will do what they want, regardless if it benefits them or not.

I actually have had an idea in my head for years for how to counter camping:
If a player remains in the same spot for more than a minute, a message pops up on the screen t hat says "Nobody likes campers," and a 10 second timer starts counting down. If you don't move at least 5 yrds. from that location before time expires, you die and have to wait twice as long to respawn. It would also work for spawn camping - If you start to get too close to a spawn, a message pops up and says "We don't tolerate spawn camping." If you continue to move forward, you die instantly and a message pops up "We warned you..." you also have to wait twice as long to spawn.

Instead of getting off topic, why do you think bullet penetration would be a bad idea?

Simply because

1. their previous games didn't have it
2. I don't like it

If I take cover behind something, I expect it to provide cover for me. I don't like having to check how a thick a wall is or what material it's made out of before I hide behind it.

1. None of their other games had anything like SMART or some of the other features that they are showing in this game.

2. You need to keep in mind that this game isn't built for you.... It's built for a wide variety of players. It seems a little silly to deem anything out of this game when it's still 6 months till it release and it could be included in a patch or so.

Should keep an open mind to a lot of things.... Just saying..

Bullet penetration is a mechanic that was available and around when their previous games were made - they chose to keep it out. SMART is a brand new system, that NO other game has, since it wasn't even available, which makes perfect sense why they would implement it, since they are the pioneers.


I'm not out to please anyone with my answers. You asked a question, I gave you an honest answer - it's not rocket science. On top of that, who's to say that most players are for it? It also seems like an unlikely thing to add in a patch, and Wedgwood said they are done adding things to the game - they are just balancing and polishing now.

Doesn't mean it wont be added later.

No need to be rude or sarcastic. You're just copying and pasting what everyone knows, but for all you know, after a patch they add penetrating bullets. You don't know, so I think it would just be a good idea if you were a little more considerate to others ideas.

Feel free to state your opinion, but over doing it is a tad bit unnecessary. That's all.

It's all subjective. What's rude and sarcastic to you, could be perfectly fine to someone else. This is one reason why I never understood why they have humans in charge of moderating other humans on forums - people view things differently, take offense to different things, and you can't read emotion or emphasis in text. It's all guess work and best judgments.

You could always play it safe and play nice. That's not hard. Literally, it isn't.

Again, it's all subjective. Perhaps my playing nice isn't "nice enough." And don't say it's not hard - not everyone operates like you.

I'm just proving my point to you. You say it's not rocket science, but not everyone operates like you either. Same goes with your answer, not everyone operates like you so maybe you should take some extra procession before responding or answering.

I'm not gana vote, since 3 of the 4 poles, all of which must be answered, insinuate i dont have a problem with bullet penetration. Its a lousy mechanic that i've NEVER seen done right, period. MW2 was atrocious, and i guarantee 9 out of 10 people you ask here will say the same thing. I'm exceedingly against the highly unintuitive bullet pen systems every game uses today, save a select few in SPECIAL circumstances i wont mention. Other then those unspoken few, i've seen countless examples of poor penetration circumstances, such as concrete walls, steel girders, while other things, like wood and even cloth will be forgotten about, and worst of all is when they make you "guess" by not making it uni-formal... For example, is that glass window penable, or is it that slightly off colored "bullet invincible" glass that looks 99% the same from more then 15 feet away...

1. their previous games didn't have it
2. I don't like it

^ those are my original responses - it really isn't rocket science - it also isn't "rude r sarcastic." What point were you trying to prove?

Well put!

I'm all for not having it. If I can't shoot a guy I'll simply move to a spot from which I can shoot him, or toss a few combustables his way. (I really hope they put molotovs back in; I like fire :flamethrower: )

1. It's not needed. In a largely metal environment there can't be too many things you could realistically shoot through. I just don't forsee many instances in which a guy will be hiding behind a single sheet of scrap metal or a pane of glass or something.

2. Cover is important. What good would it be to use cover if you just get shot through it anyway? Why even put that piece of metal there if it's just going to be an obstruction and not provide any protection?

3. I've run out of points. :sadvaultboy:

All the way up until Mad Hatters post, I was all for bullet penetration.... but he's right...



Aside from the few object you might come across that would be penetrable, most of the BRINK universe is highly advanced metal objects..... it's meant to last, and stuff that lasts is not easy to shoot through. Therefore, due to the universe the developers have created, they have taken out the need for bullet penetration. Just think of it this way, everything everyone is hiding behind, no matter how thin, is made of a super dense material that cannot be penetrated by any round due to the highly advanced sciences behind it's creation.

"But why is my armor not that awesome?" you ask, well it is, but the flexible parts that you need to be mobile (joints, bending points, things like that) are where the bullets penetrate at. That's why it takes half a clip or more to take someone down..... even more for those big guys with even thicker armor. Good job Mad Hatter!!

*claps*

Personally, I'd like to see BP if there are materials that could realistically be BP'd. Like wood, glass and plastic. If they add them in, you should be able to shoot through them.

Like I said, just pretend the super builders of BRINK planned the structure to be so impervious to wear and tear that even the glass and "wood" around the area are impervious to bullets.... because that would also mean they are very resistant to erosion. Therefore, everything is bullet-proof because it is so durable and meant to last for such an extended period without maintenance.

I myself think it should be in. I am fine with like a concrete or thick metal thing being impenetrable but some cloth or some corrugated tin or wood should be penetrable...seriously try shooting through cloth with an actual gun and see what happens

cant put it better myself, whole point of BP is having it work on all the same stuff not making restrictions on what u can and cant shoot thru.

I think it should work on materials that you expect a bullet to go through, mesh cloth and thin bits of wood.
But Modern Warfare 2 done it totally wrong, you could shoot perfectly through concrete walls but not some thin metals, it was stupid. And then they said you could do it with an attachment, but its a Full Metal Jacket a normal bullet? (Im no expert so please tell me if im wrong)

There will be places where you can hide behind cover where you will be invincible to bullet penetration, but not all cover should as it would become a game of hide in cover and wait for them to run out of ammo or miss with grenades whatever.

Im glad other people share my thoughts on BP (not the oil company )