Latest News
PAX Prime Brings Brink Discussion and Previews
PAX Prime 2010 took place over the weekend over in Seattle, Washington, and with Brink playable on the floor, the game attracted massive queues every single day of the show, which was both frightening and exciting. The first few press write-ups have also started to appear and are as ever available in the list below.
Before that, though, we turn our gaze towards The Weekly Blend. With a crew of several people out at PAX, they managed to sample every game at the show, resulting in an epic two-hour podcast discussing their findings. We're very excited to hear that (spoiler alert!) Brink was one of their favorites of the entire show and the Weekly Blend crew spend several minutes sharing their thoughts and impressions. If you want to jump directly to the Brink portion of the 'cast, skip ahead to 1 hour 15 minutes.
Previews & Impressions
Look for more coverage from PAX as the week wears on. If you've spotted any other Brink bits coming out of the show, please let us know in the comments.
-
Never Miss a Thing!
Like Splash Damage on Facebook to get the latest news in your Feed right as it happens or subscribe to our daily news digest:
Comments
I have already read most of the coverage. And I feel there all the same, they all talk about the same aspects of the game. What means offcourse it is a fun game to play and the reporters have enjoyed themselfs.
Only thing is I find lacking in these previews it lacks of new content to talk about. And it seems that also they don't have any own screenshots or videocontent they can show of there own
Are there people who have been to Pax who want to share there impressions about Brink in this thread?
EDIT: Last game, about 1h 14m
"If you want to jump directly to the Brink portion of the 'cast, skip ahead to 1 hour 15 minutes."
This level of critical co-op makes Battlefield Bad Company 2 look like Call of Duty.
Building a game that is based off that concept from the start all I gotta say is CoD players beware: You wont be winners here. This is where men come out to play and the boys return to their abandoned buildings in look-alike Afghanistan. Yeah, take that to the bank and bite me.
Yeah, baby!
effin Eh! eff the Lone Wolves, love the team players.
Depth. Marianas Trench depth. Two thumbs up! Way up!
Just last night, before my very eyes, I laid a health pack at my friends feet. He was just about to go down, but sucked on that thing like a baby on his mother's breast. He instead killed the other guy, and lived to kill again and again. I made him look so good.
All I mean to say, is that I am deeply grateful that developers are starting to realize that there are many things that can be fun about a game, not just having deadly aim and cat-like reflexes. Rewarding those personalities also, is a great change in gaming.
There are just as many bad medics who dont know when to revive, who revive the 'wrong' players, as there are wannabe rambo snipers. My issue isnt how good or bad these players are. My issue, is the perception that playing rambo doing the maximum damage to the opposition isn't classified as being a team player. How competent these players are determines how much of a valuable asset they are to the team, but the actual action itself is still predicated on contributing to the team.
More people who understand that, the less people start saying stuff like:
"******* the Lone Wolves, love the team players"
I chose the term "Lone Wolf" as a descriptor of the selfish, kill your teammate to take his power weapon, play with total disregard to the rest of the team and the objective of the game, gamer. Depending on circumstances, this gamer moves into the griefer category. In contrast, I would use the term "Slayer" to describe the incredibly effective killing machine that always has the best interest of his team at heart. He kills for the benefit of the team, not his personal stats. For my purposes, any other terms are fine if they can be given those meanings.
In application, MW2 is a game that not only allows "Lone Wolf" play, but actually encourages and rewards it, even in the CTF gametypes. Because flag captures are given so little reward for the objective work, there is no incentive, aside from the win itself, to be the flag carrier. If you do choose to help your team by carrying the flag, you will almost certainly be listed near the bottom of the leaderboard at the end of the game because all the "Lone Wolves" and "Slayers" too, will have been killing and streaking and scoring major points the whole time you were hoofin' it with the flag. Treyarch's imminent Black Ops is cranking that exact gameplay up a notch. It looks to be a lot of fun, but it is what it is. There are lots of other games like it, as well. That genre is well stocked.
Splash Damage is trying to do something different with Brink, and that is what excites me (compare MW2 and Brink in Gamer Appeal). As illustrated in that jpg, I think Brink is going to appeal to a whole range of gamers, including "Slayers". In fact, for Brink, even the "Slayer" will have a shot at the top of the leaderboard (i.e., the Glory), but it will mean that he will have to focus his killing around the objective, and in direct relation to the support of the team.
If you are creating a "class-based" game with "objective" gametypes, doesn't it make sense that you should reward all the classes and all the required actions, not just the killing?
I know that we need the "Slayers". Without someone who can run through several enemies in a row, things can't get done. I love the fact that I can hop into a room with my "big brothers" and be of support to them while they decimate the enemy. I love watching them survive while the enemy falls time and again.
How about this: "efff selfish griefers who pay no attention to the actual game itself but take up a valuable slot on the team: love the Slayers and Objective and Support classes."?