AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Eh, I don't know. I see why people would like it, the characters look great at least, the bodytypes make your experience a bit more adjustable to your likings, with friends this would be a fun thing to play.

I just feel like the shooting isn't as satisfying as it could be, and as someone who has nightmares about last stand in the call of duty games, I get a nervous tic everytime I see someone go into "not completely dead" mode after I shoot them.
I still think the HUD couldve been a little less cluttered, and I just dont have the draw to keep playing the game. I'll probably still play it every now and then, but I don't have the same draw back to it like I do with something like TF2. I don't think its a bad game at all, I just feel like it could've been better. Opinions are opinions etc.

Another thing I will give it credit for is having some nice colour in its stages, I'M LOOKING AT YOU GEARS OF BROWNANDBLOOM 3.

I meant more the controls and the placement of buttons to navigate between the menus than the menus themselves. I have no problem with their looks, it's just annoying to have to get to different corners constantly in order to go somewhere.


Complaining about lag, game-breaking bugs and hardly being able to run it at the minimum settings for no apparent reason is definitely nitpicky!

Complain about something everyone experiences, when you complain about something only you experience, it looks like bitching.




EDIT: Computer issue now that I went back.

And I wouldn't argue that the audio logs have nothing to do with the plot considering it provides the "why" for the story you actually play. They may have awknowledged lagging issues, but I still don't have any. Also for clothes combinations, I can only give you my current characters.

Resistance, Heavy: Fortress Body, Shemagh Hat, Ze Goggles, the Wasted pants, all have a green or military camo coloring.

Resistance, Heavy: Dude Body, Sweat Face, the Voice pants, Red/Yellow coloring

Resistance, Medium: Warrior Body, Fortress pants, whatever face you want, red/black coloring on clothes

Security, Heavy: Bouncer Mask, Bug Chest, Bomb pants

Security, Medium: Eel Mask, Bomb Chest, Unit Pants

EDIT: "Brink closes its checkered launch week with news of free DLC and promises it's fixing the crippling lag in its multiplayer."

http://kotaku.com/5801846/brink-devs-pu ... e-free-dlc

I really enjoy the game, and the shooting isn't the main subject of the game, the main subject is to use teamwork to complete objectives. I mainly play Engineer and I place turrets, buff friendly player's guns, give them body armor, etcetera.

I can't stop being a soldier. I give out ammo like it's Christmas, but I still spend most of the time shooting.

Eh, I've gone Soldier, operative, engineer, soldier, medic

Lost many levels.

So place automated shooting things, help others shoot things better and help them suffer less when other people shoot them.

Face it, it's all about shooting and avoiding being shot. Objectives are either about carrying something somewhere without being shot, or pressing a button long enough without being shot. I suppose that makes it better than a simple deathmatch, but it's still 99% shooting.

Most of my problems with Brink are gameplay issues. I don't mind the UI, or the plot, or the customization. All those things are subjective and I figure that if I can enjoy them, I'm probably not the only one out there. The biggest effect lag has had on me is making my character look like he's teabagging downed players while attempting to comms hack them because the game can't seem to decide on whether he's standing up or crouching over them.

That said, I hate iron-sights with a passion. I don't want to have my gun blocking the most important lower half of my screen, and when I'm looking at a background the same color as my weapon, it's almost impossible to see where I'm supposed to be hitting. Switching to red-dot sights solves the second problem, but I shouldn't be required to use either one in order to shoot. I'm trading the ability to see my target for a dramatic decrease in bullet spread, and there's no attachment which simply lets me take aim and use my existing crosshair to target things. I'm not big on modern shooters, but is this really something people want?

Another thing I take issue with is the level design. Not so much in terms of certain maps being unfair for either side, but because the distinction between light and medium body types is almost nonexistent. I only know of a single area in one map which can be accessed exclusively by lights from one side. It seems like the movement speed is the only real benefit, despite all this talk of free movement. The first time I did that Parkour challenge map, I assumed it was simply the game's way of showing off how you can hold down shift and simply fly to your destination without really understanding how. It's quite disappointing that there's nothing even remotely similar during actual gameplay, and I can only hope that they experiment with more complicated maps in the future.

It's a fun game, but it could be better. I'm going to stick with it until I'm convinced that it's not going to improve.

A wallbouncing and efficient light will always be faster than a medium, no matter what. A light can jump gaps far better than you think you could, and if you think a heavy can move around as easy as a medium, play Container city for ten seconds.

Also, get your eyes checked if you can't tell the difference between your gun and the environment, and please don't get mad at iron sighting, if it's that big a deal, take Improved Iron Sights, considering it doesn't tighten your vision as much as standard ones do. And yes, it is something modern shooters want, especially ones who enjoy realism. Iron sighting is proper, you don't just point your white crosshair at the enemy and shoot them.

Funny, that's exactly what I said. The only advantage being a light gets you is more movement speed. A medium could still follow you virtually anywhere without the ability to wall-jump. Name one path that only lights can take if you're trying to defeat my argument, because you completely missed the point and ended up agreeing with me.


Dark gun. Dark background. Yes, there's a difference, but chances are that if I'm trying to shoot at someone, I won't have the time to be accurate and it's just another handicap. Improved iron sights doesn't solve the problem at all because I'm still using a point on a 3D model rather than a vastly superior UI element that I have access to when I'm not holding down the right mouse button. If the developers cared about realism so much, then why would the crosshair exist in the first place? Real soldiers have to guess where their bullets go when they aren't aiming down the barrel, so obviously, players should too, right? Also, why should looking down iron-sights reduce bullet spread? That's not very realistic. Your gun doesn't suddenly become more stable or more accurate just because you're looking at it a certain way. Firing from the hip and firing through iron-sights should maintain the same bullet spread pattern, because they only thing they influence is how well the user can visualize where their bullets will go.

I don't care if you want to use iron-sights in your games. Go ahead and cripple yourself unnecessarily for the sake of false realism. I should have the choice to not do the same, and Brink doesn't give me that.

If I have to provide only one, then the high security door at the beginning of C-City can be jumped over only as a light. If you already noticed that one, note the shortcuts available in the Mall by leaping across from one store to another, and in Shipyard where you can access the Resistance sniper posts by being a light and either wallbouncing up there or by flanking resistance by leaping across a gap not usually accessible, near the side barricade.

It's not my fault that you have a problem differentiating between a "dark gun" and a "dark background" and it's not my fault the game developers put in crosshairs and iron sights. I'm only stating that you can iron sight because that's what you should do. Some people clearly don't. The only argument I could provide with hip fire decreasing spread is the fact that you're not holding the gun to your shoulder and steadily cradling the gun, rather you are holding it and pulling the trigger. What the game cannot show is your gun bouncing all in your hands, but it can punish you by spreading your bullets out. I don't agree it's a good solution but that's the only rationale I can provide. Yes if you fire a gun from your waist and from your shoulder they come out straight, I can't and won't argue that point.

Perhaps this requires more detail on my unique situation. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I play as a Light Body Operative with a Barnett and Ritchie. This effectively makes my primary weapon a revolver whenever I'm trying to directly interact with objectives. I'm just going to go point-form here because it's a lot easier to read and write.

- The Ritchie, when not zoomed in, has a very large cone of fire for a slow firing semi-automatic weapon. It is so large that I cannot even guarantee body shots, let alone headshots, on a target at distances where an SMG would be effective.

- When zoomed in with the scope attachment, red-dot sights, or iron-sights, the Ritchie becomes seemingly 100% accurate, allowing me to score headshots at sniping ranges, provided I can target the right area with so little zoom to assist me. Note that it's a handgun and as such, you cannot brace the weapon against your shoulder or hip to make it more accurate or steady. Holding it with both hands is the most effective solution, and this is already how you fire un-zoomed.

- The recoil on this weapon is so large that when zooming, my character takes a second out of his time to stare at the clouds and admire their sublime beauty between shots. He would likely cry, were it not for the water-soluble nature of his voodoo face paint.

- With iron/red-dot sights, the revolver is completely obscuring the lower-middle chunk of my screen, which is where my target goes whenever the recoil kicks in, thus making it impossible to know where I should aim next until my weapon is completely steady. I have to re-target them every time I shoot a bullet.

- In most situations, my target is likely to be moving and shooting a fully automatic weapon in my direction.

The whole system is ridiculously punishing for anyone who tries to use any high-recoil, low-bullet count weapon. I shouldn't be forced away from guns which were included in the game just because a development oversight made them nearly unusable with no alternatives to the dominant "zoom and spray" style of combat. The best I can do is attach a long range scope to the damned thing and hope that nobody tries engaging me in close quarters, where my accuracy is made pathetic due to my inability to effectively shoot while zoomed in.

Yeah cause god forbid the handgun that can kill in the same amount of time/effort as the SCAR should have little recoil. Clearly they did it for game balance. I can understand where you're coming from because I use the Ritchie myself, but lets think about this, you can kill someone from rifle distance with something half the weight for light build characters, it kills in the same effectiveness as high tier rifles, the only way to keep it balanced is to slap on some high kick.

With the scopes, I don't see it, but I don't use the Ritchie for long range sniping anyway, it's supposed to be the light's shotgun, which brings up the question if you're using the Barnett why you're sniping with the revolver.

It's not /that/ big in the screen when scoped, infact the scopes are smaller than they are on the rifles.

Also, closed barrel revolvers like the Ritchie are notorious for their kick anyway, it's why most governments don't field revolvers, kick and reload speed fucks you in the booty. Also, if the time between shots is really that big a of a deal, use the quick fire.

I'm not just complaining about the kick. I'm complaining about the kick, combined with the function of iron-sights making me unable to see my target after I shoot. I need to be zoomed in because it makes the weapon more accurate, but I can't see what I'm shooting at because iron-sights, especially on a pistol, obscure everything except the top half of my target's head, and the kick sends my screen upwards past that. The weapon's terrible unscoped accuracy forces me to use the scope attachment because it actually lets me see my target while firing, but at the cost of often excessive zoom and tunnel vision. The attachments which are intended for medium-to-close range aiming are unusable.

And I don't snipe with the Ritchie. My point is that it becomes as accurate as one, but only when zoomed in.

Pick different fucking weapons. Problem solved.

Holy shit I just tried hard difficulty at level 18. Seeing an enemy medic revive himself, wipe out my entire team, and the reviving the guys we just killed and disarm a bomb I set made me ragequit so hard. Need to do it on co-op.

Gamertag is HisanTakura if anyone wants to play on Xbox.