I have been reading all over the place that the reviews are bias, that they svck, are unfair and are being compared to CoD etc etc

The fact is... most of the flaws ARE a fact.

Ign review does indeed svck ass. They adress complaints and ratings on the things that are pure opinion and judged the game with those 'flaws'

- The presentation for example deserves an more then a 7.5 simply for its unique character creation and style.

- I cannot really judge the graphics but by the looks of it ign simply does not like it's murky colours and overal graphics style. Which is an opinion.

- Giving sound a 6.5 is unfair. Especially because apparently the explosions don't live up to ign standards.

- Gameplay a 6.0 ? what a joke. It functions as a shooter and that is what it does with an extra: The S.M.A.R.T. Gameplay deserves atleast a 7.5

- As for the lasting apeal, I will have to play the game myself.


The other reviews I have been reading have more valid points which adress the same flaws.

Lack of strategic appraoch when it comes to Maps, Fast leveling with limited level cap, imbalance with some classes, lag, Donkey dumb A.I. and the absence of lobby's which makes the game less accessible. Lag and imbalance can be fixed with a simple patch but all the other issues are not so easily brushed away. That will take time.
For a game that focuses on multiplayer so heavily suffers from fatal flaws in my opinion. Flaws that can really kill a game if not treated.

I Wanted to buy brink myself but seeing all those series issues the game has I will wait. I will buy it when most of it is fixed.

The bottomline is: Some reviews are indeed to opinion based but most are not.

How many times have you stated this, and on how many threads? I've lost count the count is so high. You should become a preacher.

I average out reviews. If they sway towards negative, I don't buy. If they are so-so, like Brink, I don't buy.

Was interested, still am a little, but definitely waiting for more reviews before deciding.

Haha. Couldn't agree more.

simply implying that you should admit that brink is simply not or perhaps not yet the gem that everyone thought it would be. You don't need to say: I ADMIT, I ADMIT!!!!!!!!. But you could atleast stop whining about the reviews and stop creating threads about them.

I don't really see classes as imbalanced. They all serve a role, some more offensive, some more defensive, some more supportive, some more loner. Their specific abilities prevent them from being on equal levels in all respects.

This is a shooter with an RPG element in the form of leveling and abilities. This isn't meant to be a RPG or an MMO. The game will probably be played most at the top level, where people may have any combination of abilities. The levels leading up to that really serve as a learning tool, teaching you the best use for each ability.

I can't play online, so I can't comment on lobbies or online lag.

Thing is, classes get mixed up. The engineer for example seems to be more proficient at killing then a soldier. And a game does not have to be an mmo or rpg to get more ranks to rise through. 20 ranks which are raced through in roughly 7-10 hours? I don't know about you but I like to work a wee bit harder for my gear, weapons and upgrades.

THREAD FIGHT!!!!
:ahhh:

I'm not at all bashing you and I do look into reviews and average out the common complaint. With that being said, you really should have read the reviews a little closer. Most of the complaints are based on working around bots and these guys working with an unpolished product. They all received "beta" type games because of the fear of piracy; again, look at what happened to Crysis 2. Gameinformer refused to post a review because they felt they would have not given an honest assessment without first exploring the game within the gaming community. Again, I completely understand if you are on the fence, as anyone should be with these economic times because spending $60 could hurt when you aren't Donald Trump.

Ultimately I only judge games through reviewers in purely singleplayer experiences (most RPGs, platformers, what have you) and even then I usually just go with the average consensus amongst the sites. So far, that's a system that has yet to fail me. On multiplayer heavy games, especially in the case of FPS, I rely much more on the reaction of fellow gamers, because they end up influencing the game almost as much as the developers. Communities can make or break games depending on potential exploits they abuse, teamwork they display, and loadouts they equip. As for right now, I'm simply wading about in the forums waiting for said responses; I never pre-ordered because I'm not the richest guy in the world. It's definite that I'll play it, i'm just on the fence as to whether through a rental or a purchase commitment.

lol...bets please.

this does not in anyway disprove what I have said. Bots are still dumb, maps are still to linear as for as I have read, leveling still goes way to fast, and classes are still somewhat imbalanced. As is the use of some classes in certain maps.

OP, don't say you haven't played something, then give it a review based on other reviews. It makes you look like a complete moron.

I wasn't out to disprove you at all, merely trying to provide different perspective. Regardless I'll give this game a shot considering all the possibilities and it really cannot get any worse the Black Ops. Ooops! was that out loud?

FYI: Shooters aren't known for their non-linear gameplay (maps). And Brink is a shooter first and foremost. Battlefield is the only shooter that doesn't force the player into a tube, and even then, you'll get yelled at by your team if you aren't doing objectives.

I don't expect brink to have an open free world like the elder scrolls but simply having 2 spawnpoints for 2 opposing teams with corridors all leading to one bottle neck and the imbalance between the attacking team and the defending team is not really something all shooters have.

Is this your opinion or are you taking what others have said as fact? Again, take everything with a 'grain of salt.' Let's see what the patch fixes or changes. Give the gamers time to adjust to the learning curve of a new game (no one was gust-gliding in Shadowrun for the first week). To state that classes are imbalanced without any extensive time spent playing proves what? Power builds always pop up in the first week but they never last for more than 2 weeks before a new and better one develops. That is not imbalance but inexperience with the class. Even in CoD there is always an 'easy' build that every whines about at first and then next week a new build comes around, etc. That does not prove that the game is imbalanced, only that the players lack experience in handling those situations.

You haven't played the game for one second. Stop acting like you know what you are talking about, because it is quite clear you have no idea.

Yeah... I think that's false and complete exaggeration.

This.

Homefront is worse so you know what [censored] it I'am buying brink. If I spent 60$ on a cod game I only played for a month I can spend 60$ on brink.

^^^

No, how about you just accept that this game isn't one which can be reviewed with a few hours of play?
Most of the reviewers haven't even played online, or COMPLETELY understand the game.

Maybe I am exaggerating, maybe not. Thing is, can you tell me that what I have been writing is not true? What all the reviews have been saying is not true? Can anyone here say: Brink is so balanced, not fast leveling, has a deep strategic map layout and has smart A.I.?

I never said I played the game. I just pressumed that all the reviews what they have in common is somewhat true.

Convince me it is not the case. If so, I will buy this game today and play it as much as I can.

/thread