Just a question: the intensity of the firefight is greater than COD because they last longer, or is this a false assumption?

That is what I said. Because to me they felt more intense in the demo.

Also due to the fact that every now and then a medic will come around and get you fixed, they can last even longer.

Okay. Can you specify longer? Is it along the lines of W:ET or something similar?

I haven't played the Wolfenstein-games, but let me phrase it this way:


If you're confronted with an enemy in Call of Duty, the odds for one of you to drop dead within 15 bullets is 80 to 20. The odds to drop dead after 30 bullets is 95 to 5. It's a very, very, veeee-ry rare thing to have both combatants survive a full unload of two clips into each other.

If you're confronted with an enemy in BRINK, however, the odds of one to get incapacitated after the exchange of bullets is ... about 70 to 30, I'd say. However, the chance for one to just escape the combat are much higher as in CoD. One could try to climb away while the other is reloading. Or slide into cover all of a sudden (as we have seen in the Container City gameplays, you don't need too much momentum to get into an effective slide). Furthermore, if you're incapacitated it doesn't mean you're out of the game already. A medic could come around and give you the chance to revive yourself, while holding back your opponent.

Unlike in CoD, a takedown must not be the end of a fight. In CoD, you're dead when your opponent got his kill-reward.

Spy Plane standing by

Not to sound like an elitist, but I'm a player that typically tops charts in COD during relatively casual play. I think it's precisely due to the speed at which you die that it is fast paced. Every single bullet makes a huge difference. Especially in hardcoe mode, where a great deal of the weapons deal 30 damage base, and a player only has 30 life. Meaning you die in one shot from any range, and most guns are automatic.

Playing competitively means constant response times measured in mere milliseconds, 100% of the time, maintained throughout a full match. I've wrapped up a TDM match on a ranked server with a K/D of 12.5 (25 kills, 2 deaths), which totals 27 engagements not counting assists. 25 of which I won, and were over in split seconds. It's exactly that sort of maintained killer instinct that keeps the COD coming back to COD. For serious players, especially with a medic handy, I can see having a great deal more life being beneficial to team play (holding out together with a buddy in COD is near impossible because one stray tube can end you in a hurry), but I also see it as making being shot at less of a life or death thing, and more of an inconvenience so long as you don't A) stand in it, or B) wade through tides of it. Obviously it's a different game, but if the recoil really is so subdued, and the life is higher to boot, getting the drop on someone may not prove to be a trump card.

There's times in COD where it's so frantic that two people will actually miss eachother repeatedly while strafing eachother causing both to reload several times even, and it simply looks a boatload of silly to be in the middle of it. I fear this is going to be exacerbated by the fact that health is so much higher and getting shot is so much more inconsequential. "It will only be a few seconds may be accurate," but that does prevent a really skilled player from taking on even two novice players simply because it can take so long to drop just one of them and aiming is so easy they're bound to be hammered. Maybe I'm just worrying too much. Perhaps it's a concession to teamwork, which I'm all for. I just wish a happy balance could be struck between mad skillz and team work. :V

I'd say it's the exact opposite. In COD a lot depend on your reaction speed and Ping, while in Brink it's way more about aiming. With the information from REVO, I'm absolutely convinced that Brink firefights will be more intense than CODs. You will have to aim for the head if you want to drop someone fast, while it doesn't matter in COD where you can just spray and still get the kill with ease.

Any good W:ET or ET:QW can play good matches on cod, while the opposite cannot be said. I tested this with friends way back in the days of CoD 2.

Foth are fast paced in a different way. In COD, the gunplay is fast paced. When the shooting starts happening, its very frantic, you need to be quick and efficient, and its all over very quickly.

In games like Brink, the strategy is the fast paced part, you don't die instantly if you pass an enemy you didn't notice, there's time to turn around and try to kill him, or just run away when he starts firing. The focus is on getting to tactical points like command posts as fast as possible, rather than taking the game more cautiously to survive.

I remember playing headshot only mods for W:ET and RTCW - good times.

Just to add one thing from my side: For me, a game is fast paced if you get into the action fast and have a large amount of your time spent in a firefight (speaking about shooters, that is).

In CoD they arn't really fights, more like "I saw you first now your dead". And if they do drag on for longer than a second it's more like playing the lottery. The lucky guy (usually with the better connection) wins. My .02

Oh, good thing for those brackets or I would of totally thought you were talking about Age of Empires or World of Warcraft...

Yea, I was pretty much thinking the same.

But that's where the reflexes come in. There's plenty of times where someone gets the drop on me, I spin around, and take them down with some well place shots. Usually because they figure "Oh he's facing the other way, and spray". Admittedly, the opposite has happened to me as well.

In CoD, being accurate is half the battle. The other half of the battle is being intelligent about where you go, how you go about getting there, and your capacity to pay attention to your surrounds WHILE accomplishing objectives. Sure, there's plenty of people that hunker down into a Sabotage match and pretend the bomb doesn't exist, they just shoot and shoot and shoot. These aren't good players. Good players kick ass, take names, AND plant the bomb, or better yet, guard a less skilled player while he plants the bomb. A big part of it is being able to discern in a split second if a movement on screen is a hostile. Most players look in one direction and just play it like a shooting gallery. Most players get stabbed in their inattentive ass.

It encourages a sort of adrenaline fueled height of perception that allows a player to rapidly engage hostiles regardless of direction of attack, or instantly decide it running is the best decision, while capturing points. But, I digress. This is all an aside..

The real issue here is not the pros and cons of COD (because the cons outweigh the pros the vast majority of the time). The real issue here is gunplay in Brink.

I'm fine if my character is just ripped and can shoulder the kick of an LMG like nobody's business, but the LMG should still kick like an LMG. The recoil is suppressed, presumably by the mad pipes of the heavy soldier wielding it, but it shouldn't just pop back after every shot and spray with slightly increasing hit radius. It should feel like a real gun, with all the difficulties of handling a real gun's recoil, just toned down. This way, it maintains a realistic chunkiness that lets everybody feel like the total mini-gun wielding badass they wish they were, while still having fun.

It should not feel realistic, since it doesn't fit in the game. Not gameplay wise, nor storywise. We're in 2045. If they can make a self sustaining floatin island, then they should also be able to make guns with fewer recoil. (storywise)

Some people are alreay complaining that it takes longer to kill someone. This happens because you can get hit more often and you can dodge easier. If you're going to add realistic recoil or COD-like recoil, you will ruin the game. (gameplay wise)
In COD it's about initial reflexes, while in Brink you'll have to keep up your reflexes for longer periods, because you will be aiming at a dodging target and you'll need more bullets to put your enemies down.

I suggest you download W:ET and play a few games and imagine how it would play with COD recoil. (spoiler alert: it would ruin the game)

I could also use this for MMORPGs or RTSs.

Guild Wars is probably more fast-paced than World of Warcraft.

And Command & Conquer is definately more fast-paced than Total War.

I personally like that, not forced to use ADS.

In one interview it said that recoil kicks in after some shooting and the cross hairs stay in the same place so you know where your gunna aim once the gun comes back down (as with the shot gun). can anyovdy answer me this: how is bullet speed affected? as in BFBC2 when you shoot with a sniper its more realistic and you have to factor in teh bullet drop, and it takes longer the farther away you are but in the CoD series teh sniper hits in less than a second and flies in a straight line.

@Brinkgamerhead: I heard the same. I quoted myself to show you. ^^

I also thought that they said that bullet impact is applied instantly. They've chosen for this approach but I can't remember the reason. My guess is that they want to keep it as fast paced as possible.

When you have such short distances in maps it's not like it matters.

If aiming is that important in a reflex heavy game like CoD, then in a game where you will almost always have time to turn around and react, aiming will be huge. The higher health in Brink will just magnify the whole scenario you described - "I'm behind him, so I can just spray". If both people have the same gun, and the guy who flanked was only aiming for the body, it wouldn't be hard for the other guy to turn the encounter around by getting a few headshots in.

I personally like games where gunfights are long, pretty much #1 reason I hate CoD, spray and pray instant kills isn't fun, same with MoH and BF: BC2. And I prefer bullet impact being instant aka no drop.

Aiming will be a much bigger factor in determining the winner in Brink than in COD. - In COD, you can hide behind a barrel or a bush and kill anyone who passes by. The players needs minimal aiming skill, since it takes so few shots to kill a player, no matter where you hit them - foot shot or headshot, he's going down quick, so taking the time to aim for the head is almost pointless, which is a reason why it appeals to so many casual gamers.

In Brink, the above techniques will only get you killed. First off, it takes more shots to kill players in general, and second, depending where you hit them, it can add even more shots still. The difference between a headshot and a foot shot in COD = negligible. The difference in Brink = significant. Going off averages, it's gonna take about 2-3 headshots to kill a player in Brink, around 4-6 torso shots and 5-8 legshots, so players who choose to aim for the head are going to have a much higher chance than the guy just trying to hit the target.

I think your numbers might even be a bit low, last i had heard, it takes half a clip to take down a medium enemy that isn't dodging. To me, that means somewhere around 8-10 torso shots

That sounds really high to me, atleast for a medium. I would say 8 torso shots max at mid range.