I would've thought the unique thing would be the PvP campaign..?

i have to disagree here.


that's 3rd person, and imo that's simply jumping and more based on the tomb-raider series...


well, APB is 3rd person too, the game svcked big time, and they still are far away from nailing it. not entirely comparable.



i second the argument about the art style. tho, i would still count the mission system as an addtional feature to mention. in MP/SP FPS there have been several ways to win and gather "points. i.e. CSS planting bomb OR killing opposing force. BF2 and on: leveling by killing enemies, capturing, doing support. however these mission available in brink are unique AND foremost dynamic.

Even if select elements can be found in a handful of other games, there really aren't any new ideas in any games. What makes gameplay unique these days is how the devs decide to combine different ideas, and in that respect, Brink is quite original. Coming up with totally new concepts is quite difficult for several reasons. For one, its quite difficult to imagine that which doesn't exist already. Even if you do manage that, chances are there is something already made that it can be compared to (even if you never knew about it).

The spirit of Machinimas really does not require mouth-movement. Even though Valve took a step into the right direction by adding the Face Poser to the Source SDK package. After all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6Q_koTHB54 is quite amazing with lip-sync. But it would have been nice without as well.


Like ... objective based gameplay?


Mirror's Edge then, like Opalord mentioned.


It's a matter of opinion if APB svcked, I liked and enjoyed it very much. No matter of opinion is. that it had a scale of customisation no other game does offer until today.


I guess this is true. But also for the reason that not many people really try something new. Recreating successful stuff is more likely to bring in the money, after all.

generally u are 100% right. tho i have the point of view, that in such cases as namely APB, large amounts of customization do not make up for aweful mechanics and technical flaws. moreover "s?ldner", an quite small [censored] release back in the day, had similar options for character customization. see: http://www.secretwars.net/



i'd rather say, that the innovation of ideas is what makes game become successful and finally bring in the money. the two part HL legacy pushed the twice into new levels none had even thougt of. these titles still are playable, just based on their mechanics and ideas. recreation never achieved this.

Dude. Really? I agree that in Assassin's Creed you do parkour, but saying parkour is climbing stuff and running fast? just no. It's about getting from one place to another as fast as possible, not just climbing stuff and running fast.

Also, BRINK does bring quite a bit to the table. It has it's unique art style (as you said), the S.M.A.R.T system (although, parkour has been in other games this is a new approach to it), taking the campaign online, the context sensitive objectives and rewards, the customization (sure, a lot of games have customization but not too many FPS games recently, or at least to this extent. Besides, if you could customize every bit of the face, jaw, cheeks, forehead etc. then the characters wouldn't have that unique art style to them). So there you go. I think BRINK has a lot of new things to offer, but if you don't think so, that's your opinion.

You are correct, parkour originally developed as a way of getting from Point A to Point B as fast as possible. The fastest way to get anywhere, is of course a straight line, which consists of running and climbing over obstacles in the way. So he is also correct, just more informal. I think he was more concerned with separating parkour from the more popular free-running in which the only goal is to look good and express yourself, as people were saying that without flips and svck, AC was not "parkour".

Not to get that mathematical nerdy on you, but the fastest way from point A to point B is to bend point B to point A and thus your travel distance is 1/10th of the time needed. So in short, the theory of straight line only applies to a 3 Dimensional world. Since game physics is not orientated and limited to 3 dimensions then as we say the " the sky is the limit" ( figure of speech)

Well, that all depends on how long it takes you to bend space. It would be faster for me to walk upstairs than to wait for science to figure out how to bend space to get me there. As far as your reference to the game world, i was actually talking about parkour in the real world, so it doesn't really apply.

And as long as you are able to bend spacetime, then the concept of "short" within a time-frame loses all meaning anyway. You could warp spacetime to be where you wanted to be before the moment you actually decided you wanted to go there.

Before we go on, we should be careful as we both are getting slightly off topic and might be warned about it. Since light years is a factor of measuring distance then i guess bending space as it has been proven can be done, but we as a human race lack the elements to achieve such a task, but that equation is very well documented and accepted amongst physicists.

Bending space happens due to gravity, but gravity alone does not bend space onto itself, nor allow the ability to pass through another dimension to bridge the gap. There are theories that you could use a pair of black holes to create a wormhole between two distant objects, but they are meerly theories, no one knows if they are possible, or even if you could actually exit the other side if you went in. Its also possible that you could link a blackhole to a whitehole in another universe, but again, no one knows hat would happen and it would be a one way trip so there's no way to tell anyone if it DID work.

ON TOPIC!
I support the idea of spectator mode, as it is fun to be able to watch clanmates and clan matches, but allowing some 3rd party to control a critical game element seems a bad idea to me.

I guess the spectator mode could be used when competition level is being applied, but sure as for viewing clans or specific team side as spec could be fun while raging on your team mate over ts or vent for loosing in a stand off..

Having a referee who free floats throughout the game while commentating during live streams with the obvious delay time involved would be a very positive add on to the game and community who adopts the game.

yup dudes got a point in that kind of way it is similar to halo and to say all elements of a game such as halo svck then you're writing off quite a few game elements that are use in most modern day games. i agree that there are points bout halo that arnt amazing but over all its a pretty epic finnish to an amazing game seris

Silly Shadow cat, silly FGJ. every one knows the quickest way to get from point A to point B you divide by 0 causing the universe to collapse into a space the size of an atom. then point B will just be .0000001 of an electron away.

But seriously i would really like to see a theatre mode. tactical input from games could me very useful in brink. those that actually study videos culd get a huge edge over the competition

Well, actually, that would form a singularity; both A and B would be at the exact same point, along with the rest of the universe

I find actually playing the players you want to learn from to be far more educational than watching them play, not only do you learn what works and why, you also learn about your own weaknesses.

no doubt practical game experience is key. however i find replays do give you perspective and provide you with the aaahA-effect becuase you usually do no see what went wrong, or what "that-guy" actually did.

And if you're in doubt about somebody cheating, replays usually can support or weaken that suspicion.

I heavily promote this idea. It would bring A LOT of attention to this game if people start making awesome look gameplay videos, montages, movie videos and machinimas.