Deadbeat said:Why the fuck havent they fixed this yet?
alske said:I can't seem to get the DLC to show up in the game. I have the game from the QuakeCon pack and it says I have the DLC.... Anyone have this happen to them?
jaundicejuice said:If you can choose two extra missions below the Wat IF scenarios, you have the dlc.
Try thisalske said:Is that in the campaign menu? I've only got two what if scenarios for each side...
alske said:Is that in the campaign menu? I've only got two what if scenarios for each side...
Try to verify integrity of cache, maybe?alske said:Yeah, steam says that I already own it when I go to the Agents of Change page, but it's definitely not there when I load the game.
Maybe I need to delete the game and re-download it. Joy.
I deleted the zzzdlc* files and some random small file, and that triggered a ~400 meg download for me after verifying the integrity of the files.alske said:I can't seem to get the DLC to show up in the game. I have the game from the QuakeCon pack and it says I have the DLC.... Anyone have this happen to them?
The_Player said:Try to verify integrity of cache, maybe?
Firebrand said:I deleted the zzzdlc* files and some random small file, and that triggered a ~400 meg download for me after verifying the integrity of the files.
JWong said:Parkour is useless though.
Very useful, especially when ugpgraded by an engineer (doubles the effect).Riposte said:Command posts don't seem too useful. Perhaps I wasted too much time trying to capture them as a operative.
Is he playing with bots in games he made himself? That'll lock you to 30 no matter what.Vagabundo said:My brother has a beast of a machine and is getting consistent 60FPS on fraps, but getting lots of slow down or lag. Is this a problem with the game? Is there a fix?
I noticed some lag/slowdown myself when I was playing.
Oh thanks to the poster earlier for the info.
Red Orchestra 2 has replaced it for me but it's a good game and does not deserve the hate it gets on Gaf.Pylon_Trooper said:I usually have a few rounds of Brink on a Sunday eve, and damn it was terrific tonight. A nice little community is still running about. I can understand a lot of peoples' issues with the game, but damn, if it hasn't spoiled me on other "team" games like Battlefield. At this point, there seems to be a professional understanding of team play and objectives...everyone seems to play their roles incredibly well.
It's not for everyone, but Brink remains my multiplayer go-to game for the shooty-shoot.
Its a frustrating game because it has a lot of potential that it doesn't reach because either the devs didn't have enough time or didn't have vision to realize it.Phife Dawg said:Red Orchestra 2 has replaced it for me but it's a good game and does not deserve the hate it gets on Gaf.
A lot of the issues can be blamed on the console focus, I get the feeling that they wanted to do a lot more with the movement stuff but didn't think that they could given their main audience. My hope for their next game is that they realize they can go balls out with complexity and depth and still have a successful game, even on consoles.charsace said:Its a frustrating game because it has a lot of potential that it doesn't reach because either the devs didn't have enough time or didn't have vision to realize it.
Yes it does deserve the hate. Its a broken mess. Runs like shit, too much stuff highlighted and pointing TAKE THE COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMANDPOST did I say COMMAND POST yet? Let me make sure: STOP THEM BROTHERS!!!!!!Phife Dawg said:Red Orchestra 2 has replaced it for me but it's a good game and does not deserve the hate it gets on Gaf.
I knew this months before the game was out. I don't know why this is a huge sticking point with Brink haters.Deadbeat said:Singleplayer was a giant lie. Its just multiplayer with bots.
So you ignore the rest of the problems the game has and use this one point as a cop out? Typical.Billychu said:I knew this months before the game was out. I don't know why this is a huge sticking point with Brink haters.
Um, did I say that knowing it was multiplayer only excused everything else you said? I chose to address only one of your statements. Brink is a very flawed game and I'm not going to convince others to like it because I understand the reasons why I wouldn't.Deadbeat said:So you ignore the rest of the problems the game has and use this one point as a cop out? Typical.
charsace said:Its a frustrating game because it has a lot of potential that it doesn't reach because either the devs didn't have enough time or didn't have vision to realize it.
I doubt console stopped them from building the game in a way that would take advantage of movement. Mirror's Edge had more advanced movement and Shadowrun has more complicated movement options as well. They didn't build levels that took advantage of the free running, the guns feel off and there are a few more little gripes I have that I won't bother mentioning. This game just felt straight up sloppy to me. I've said it before and I'll say it again; they should give it another try, just don't put the Brink name on the next game.Danne-Danger said:A lot of the issues can be blamed on the console focus, I get the feeling that they wanted to do a lot more with the movement stuff but didn't think that they could given their main audience. My hope for their next game is that they realize they can go balls out with complexity and depth and still have a successful game, even on consoles.
Oh, and another thing. Did people ever figure out more advanced ways to move around? They had systems in there where you'd get more momentum if you timed your jumps after you did a parkour move. Though I never, ever saw anyone use that (even in competitive games).
This. The truth. Every game they've released has gotten worse. And they are basically iterating on the same design. How is it even possible that each iteration is worse?kevinski said:Return to Castle Wolfenstein is still one of my favorite games of all time, so I've tried to be loyal to Splash Damage (despite RtCW being handled by different developers) because Splash Damage seemed to be very intent on continuing RtCW's style of game play. The problem is that no Splash Damage game has matched the quality of RtCW, and each Splash Damage release was less impressive than the last.
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars is a pure multiplayer combat game, and all of our effort has been put into making that the best experience that we can do. Now if we'd diverted some of our resources to create a single-player mode for the game, the game wouldn't be as good a multiplayer combat game as it is now.
There's a general philosophy that Kevin [Cloud] and I have that you don't "nerf" a game's gameplay to make it more accessible to players. You improve the user interface to make it more accessible to new players, and once you make the decision on how you're going to approach the game's design, you're less concerned about putting in lots of depth and complexity, because you're going to find an interface solution that makes the game more accessible.
On why 12 maps is a good number for ET:QW:I think in this genre that there isn't anything that offers the same kind of depth of gameplay as Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. Actually, I don't think, I know that to be the case because of what Activision let us get away with! When we started out it was kind of like being a 15-year-old saying, "Wouldn't it be cool if we could do this? And wouldn't it be cool if we could do that? And wouldn't it be cool if we could do this?" And nobody stopped us because Kevin and I are both respective owners of our own companies.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/e...ews/6165848/qanda-paul-wedgwood-on-quake-warsEnemy Territory: Quake Wars has 12 maps, each of which is about four times as deep and complex as a single Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory map. In Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory you would be going for one bridge, or you would be going for one outpost and that would be the basis for the gameplay. In Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, you'll play for perhaps 30 minutes, and then in taking the bridge and escorting the MCP through the tunnel and then securing the outpost, hacking the shield generator, shooting the strategic strike missile at the shield generator, then infiltrating the final building and destroying the final objective, that whole sequence of gameplay and the tactical and strategic possibilities are considerably more deep and complicated then Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. So the amount of fun that people have and the longevity of the maps would be considerably greater even than in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/132507/interviews/enemy-territory-quake-wars/?page=4Our general feeling is that we want to pursue persistent character advancement but that gameplay effecting rewards should be campaign length and status rewards that tell people how good a player they are, how good a leader they are, are the persistent elements.
For example, persistent military ranks are a great idea but giving somebody an additional weapon is not necessarily a good idea as it isn't fair for other players playing on the same server. In an RPG like World of Warcraft, you tend to go off and fight in specific dungeons which are appropriate for your skill level, but unless you have a really good solution to player matching on servers that's not a constraint you can apply to people running public servers. And so you end up with an unbalanced game if persistent rewards are too gameplay effecting.
And why didn't they build more complex maps? When they first thought that they wanted to include a wall-jump I doubt that they had what's in the game at this point in mind. There's pretty much not a single spot where it's useful to jump from more than one wall, even though it's fully possible to do so (there's one spot I know where it's useful to jump twice off the same wall, a couple on Container City). My guess would be that they really wanted the SMART system to work in all cases, adding complexity thus would make the SMART system more and more complicated. There's no reason at all to have or even use the SMART system on PC, that's one thing. Then you have the classes, where the light rules supreme and there's no reason at all to use the mediums or heavies for PC play. Things like that makes me want to see how the game would've been if they had gone for PC first and foremost.charsace said:I doubt console stopped them from building the game in a way that would take advantage of movement. Mirror's Edge had more advanced movement and Shadowrun has more complicated movement options as well. They didn't build levels that took advantage of the free running, the guns feel off and there are a few more little gripes I have that I won't bother mentioning. This game just felt straight up sloppy to me. I've said it before and I'll say it again; they should give it another try, just don't put the Brink name on the next game.
Eh, it's a disappointment compared to ET and QW but that doesn't mean it's not a good game in its own right. I certainly had more fun with it than with the run-off-the-mill shooters.Deadbeat said:Yes it does deserve the hate. Its a broken mess. Runs like shit, too much stuff highlighted and pointing TAKE THE COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMAND POST COMMANDPOST did I say COMMAND POST yet? Let me make sure: STOP THEM BROTHERS!!!!!!
Weapon damage is fine (IE how many bullets it takes to kill people). It took them 2 months to balance the fucking weapons though. Their talk about how fast they can update the files was a giant load of shit. Singleplayer was a giant lie. Its just multiplayer with bots. The game is shit because outside the idea of teamwork everything else is horribly setup.
I rather play wolf:et. Which is what I did.
charsace said:This. The truth. Every game they've released has gotten worse. And they are basically iterating on the same design. How is it even possible that each iteration is worse?
Именно. Pretty much this. I love the hell out of the game, but at the same time I can see lots of unrealized potential. Hope they'll make their next ET game without so much of console orientation. It's killed too many good games already.Danne-Danger said:A lot of the issues can be blamed on the console focus, I get the feeling that they wanted to do a lot more with the movement stuff but didn't think that they could given their main audience. My hope for their next game is that they realize they can go balls out with complexity and depth and still have a successful game, even on consoles.
I think all platforms would get a better game if design and balance were PC focused, the game releases there first and has some major tournaments for feedback, the console versions are polished up as this goes on and get the tweaks necessary to make the game work but has a deeper experience to offer and the game is promoted as already being a hit.The_Player said:Именно. Pretty much this. I love the hell out of the game, but at the same time I can see lots of unrealized potential. Hope they'll make their next ET game without so much of console orientation. It's killed too many good games already.
kevinski said:It's Splash Damage. That's how it's possible.
This company doesn't CREATE; it TWEAKS. And what it tweaks, it breaks.
Example: Prior to Brink, healing or resupplying involved dropping packs on the ground for others to pick up. In Brink, however, you "use" a teammate and lock onto him, surrendering control of your character's movement while also gaining access to an exploit that I found in about five second of playing. (You can continually stop and start a buff on a lighter body type in order to move at the same speed as that lighter body type, unless this has been patched since I last played.)
In the off chance that Splash Damage manages to create something, that something doesn't work properly.
Example: Going prone in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. For starters, crouching isn't a toggle function. So, why is going prone a toggle function? Also, why is it that you immediately stand up whenever you bump into ANYTHING while prone? Good luck if you want to script your keybinds to cycle through stances, because prone breaks it every single time.
I just wish another company would make a game with objective-style game play that didn't blow.
Have they fixed this thing I screencapped in July yet?Alextended said:Was there ever a solution for this issue? I tried to google but I don't know how to call this and looking for words like "lines" and "seams" didn't work well. I got the game over Steam and I'm using a GTX285 with the latest drivers.
http://i.picpar.com/d13fbf0209f5200e8860c3dc0d1dcdd671268b79.png
Heavy's Sandvich said:Honestly don't bother. The game is dead.
http://store.steampowered.com/stats/Pylon_Trooper said:Not true.
Deadbeat said:http://store.steampowered.com/stats/
Brink is not on the list so that means there are less than 347 people online playing this game at best. At worst, its much much lower. That number is worldwide. So your area will be a fraction of that.