How do you think the game should be received? Do you think it should be large-scale? or stay in the small, dedicated fan circle?

whatever happens, happens. I think the media will give it good ratings, but not great ratings, not because it won't deserve them, but because Infinity Ward or Bungie isn't tied to it.

I think it should stay 8v8 because you can use more tactics and communicate better (if they have mics, plus that have the game tell if someone needs help with his/her goal). It will also no be as hecticas MAG and hopeful have better servers than MW2

there is a lot of auto pvssyr in Brink - If you're near the objective and come under fire, the game will automatically let your team know, "I'm under fire in the control room!" If you need ammo or health, if your team needs a certain class to complete an objective, if an Operative is disguised or you found a minefield, etc. there are ways to relay the info to the team without having to use a mic.

That's what I mean with "plus that have the game tell if someone needs help with his/her goal", but I didn't know about all the specific details

I would guess this game would sell one million copies in the first week, if not more, although that also depends on the release date. Plus, it won't be boycotted by PC players lol. Even if it doesn't get a lot of sales, I would definitely predict Brink to be the FPS game of the year.

-_-..... Valve already went over that! For the last time, it's not an expansions! Lul.

I think they should make the maps a little bit larger because you'll have a lot of more places to practice smart.

Look at the date off the post before you. It's a 5 month old reply.

Anyways, ontopic. The maps are big, because they're split in different parts. The defending team gets pushed back, meaning the actual battlefield stays small.

On a computer with a keyboard, mouse and monitor and a mic to communicate with and speakers to enjoy the sounds

On a couch with snacks set for an all nighter, controller in hand with the lights dimmed and your speaks on your "Too Big" TV cranked up.

The more the better....there's no reason to be selfish about it. It's no secret: the better the game sells, the more likely they'll make a sequel.

yo are u gonna make like a steam squad to play with during release
cuz i'd like to join
:)

the popularity will change frequently, depending on DLC's, media ratings, glitches(from what ive herd they are doing a damn good job eliminating those), and many many other things, above all i think it will receive A++ player ratings, but because it isn't a big name series (and possibly because of some of the innovations) critics will blow any little flaw out of proportion

with friends

Yeah I think this game is going to get killer ratings! :bowdown:

I definatly think that with just 8 players per team would make the gameplay go way more smoothly than in other shooter games.

I have a bad feeling that IGN is going to be REALLY picky when it comes to rating this game, but hopefully in a good way.

with a keyboard and a mouse

It's not out yet and I'm already giving it too much of my time. So much for my post being read.

Brink will no doubt have a long lasting dedicated group of players for years. Right now it doesn't have aggressive or widespread enough marketing for a majority to discover it. Once the game is released it will get player videos, magazine and online reviews. I see Brink gaining popularity only after it has been out at least six months; enough time for word to mouth and for major reviews to be discovered. I envision it that way because right now anyone who know has seen an ad has probably not given Brink a second thought. Unless they force themselves to learn about the game, it will be written off as another generic shooter from nobodies. My first exposure to Brink were various side ads on webpages and I felt a similar way. I've trained myself to mostly ignore ads so I did not know anything about the game until a friend told me about it. Wolf ET is one of my most favorite video games. For me that game kept me interested in first person shooters because of the objectives, teamwork, and experience levels. I get bored of shooters easily when they're just death match or capture the flag because they all wind up having the same mind numbing effect. In the following paragraphs I use Left 4 Dead to relate to multiplayer gaming since I found it as a comparable tactical and team oriented FPS. The creators of Wolf ET are finally making a true successor, so I have high hopes for Brink.

I can't say how things will go on the console platforms. I do not own or play consoles but I have two categories of friends who involve themselves with those. One group will try to play every game there is and usually lean towards anime based games. Their favorites they will try to master or completely finish. The other category would not exist twenty years ago; they like mashing buttons to watch graphics and use the console as a social activity. They cannot play the games by themselves and they do not like owning or collecting. It's like how some people are fans of Star Trek and others have only watched the 2009 movie because everyone told them to go see it. They play whatever game has the most popularity and then have it collect dust or sell it. Console gamers seem to treat their games and make gaming too disposable for my taste.

Regardless of platform, the game will only last if people understand what it is and play it properly. Some of us can appreciate it already and will probably stay with the game if it is carried out well. Learning curves are amplified with first person shooters. Most people are expecting the DM or CTF style play and ignore everything the game tries to teach them. Left 4 Dead is a pretty exciting game but the common community attitude of "I know shooters, let me run though this so I can say I beat it," is what made it stale for me. Left 4 Dead 2 was designed to cater more to those kinds of people making it almost a different game than the first. If the average person is able to understand what they should be doing in the game it will be more interesting for the random public matches. If they cannot figure it out then there will always be the thousands of odd players out there cycling through that haven't quit for good yet. Okay, they don't get it, they give up and leave. But then the next one buys the game and has the same behavior. Will Brink be elegant enough to understand? If the mission commander tips sound like nagging people will refuse to learn thinking they can figure they own way and break the game.

I'm very impressed that Splash Damage acknowledges that they're aware of griefing. Rather than admit it that way, they phrase everything as being rewarded for contributing towards the team. Multiplayer games usually require the public servers because you need enough strangers to fill in. Not everyone has a massive group of friends who all buy the same games for the same platform. They seem to have a very clear understanding of community habits and all the variables they've come up with for rewarding experience is what makes me believe the game will last. I also do not see how Brink could get boring very easily. There is enough variety to be trying different configurations for many months. Often in Left 4 Dead it sounded like most people wished to ruin everyone's game simply because they've completed the missions and are bored of it.

The game should be played without the microphone. Microphones allow too many inept people to become more annoying. In Wolf ET they would have to pause their movement to type in their rage and therefore be killed over and over. In voice chat games they can have dual focus where they team kill while screaming. ET's vocalizes worked well for me; I used them and understood others. When I custom mapped vocalizes for Left 4 Dead I could play the game just fine without a microphone. I noticed people who insisted on it actually had it become their crutch. They would not pick up in game musical cues or hear all the sound effects. Using your mouth not only dampens your other senses but makes the in game sound harder to hear. With enough playing experience in a game there should be a point where you can identify situations without someone needing to narrate it to you. A Wolf ET example would be the medic checking the radar map for revive icons rather than wandering around looking for the icon over the corpse. There was a time when games couldn't do voice chat because it was too much for the computer or modems to handle. Gaming with strangers over the internet is not socializing. A majority of people cannot handle a microphone as I just described. But also there are so many people who don't know how to position it near their mouth, calibrate it, or remove background noise (such as speakers, music, tv, fans). Microphones turn gaming into a fleamarket.

tl;dr

The game will be good. It will become popular given enough time. Shouldn't use microphones. Hopefully the community won't get bored and find loop holes to grief with.

wow...good post

I think the game is going to be awesome.

It should be received very well. As a revolution in the FPS genre.

Yes as long as all the reviewers aren't too busy svcking up to Bungie, Activision, and whoever is making medal of honor. (Shows how much I know about console fps )

Sitting in a lounge chair with surround sound speakers and a 52 inch tv

Now I don't think it's going to be so popular that everyone on my friends list is playing it (like reach which is awesome btw) but I don't think I'll be the only one playing it.

I think this game only need to be advertised and needs some more hooks in the advertisemants.

This game is easily better then COD and Halo. It's obvious.

I think the game should be played non-seriously.
The art style and gameplay make it seem light-hearted and fun.
I hope I don't see many players worrying about their kd's.