Brink Comments by Oli Welsh
When is an online shooter not an online shooter?
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-22 of 22 in total
Poster
|
AphoticCosmos
12/06/09 @ 12:14
-2
I was really impressed by what was shown at E3, hope that this delivers.
|
|
designerheadache
12/06/09 @ 12:14
-2
I've been very un-impressed with Splash Damage so far. Hopefully this might change my mind about them.
|
|
RedSparrows
12/06/09 @ 12:18
0
Sounds...hopeful.
I still want an MMO/-esque FPS that has a command structure and a persistant world that requires you to fly (by human pilots) to a zone (one of many, on a flowing frontline between factions, with stealth ops behind the lines) and have squads with a radio/sniper/heavy/grunt/commander formation, and then top ranks back at home essentially playing an RTS game but with real people (although being top, you can go in to the battle if ye want), commanding them to move as they can see where to go due to human-flown recon and AI-controlled satellites. /dreams
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 12/06/09 @ 13:19
|
|
-2
More and more games will move into the direction of partially/fully controlled player "worlds" or partially/fully AI controlled. With AI getting a lot more advanced (I just hope some company will create a shared AI for a game like L4D soon that combines and analyses the play patterns and situations of ALL players online and modifies the gaming world/rules accordingly) this will make dev cycles shorter and hopefully will give us a more dynamic play style. Combine this with procedural generated stuff (Borderlands) and we might enter a whole new era of gaming in the next few years.
|
|
-3
"Except when people realize that they are bored by the same limited behaviours underneath the AI director and the randomized weapons. "
People get bored of everything eventually. The whole idea of advanced AI is that it is not easy to find patterns. The L4D community seems strong and still playing like crazy. I am sure that AI directors will get very advanced next few years. They do not even have to run on your console/PC but could be a dedicated AI server on some killer remote machine, easily upgraded and updated. Instead of complain, look a bit beyond your horizons. |
|
BrokenSymmetry
12/06/09 @ 17:16
0
ET:QW did exist on consoles, but the console versions were not made by Splash Damage, and all innovative features (like the dynamically-generated missions) were stripped. The console versions simply can not be compared to the original PC version.
|
|
0
'I still want an MMO/-esque FPS that has a command structure and a persistant world that requires you to fly (by human pilots) to a zone (one of many, on a flowing frontline between factions, with stealth ops behind the lines) and have squads with a radio/sniper/heavy/grunt/commander formation, and then top ranks back at home essentially playing an RTS game but with real people (although being top, you can go in to the battle if ye want), commanding them to move as they can see where to go due to human-flown recon and AI-controlled satellites.'
Hmm, that sort of sounds a bit like what Planetside tried to do... |
|
3william56
15/06/09 @ 05:21
+1
"The sweet spot for us is absolutely eight-v-eight. "
"the whole sniper alley thing just isn't enough fun for enough players." "I would never go online because it's really just a cesspit of the foulest of humanity" Dear God, I've been waiting for a dev to say stuff like that. 8v8 in Killzone is awesome and tense. 16v16 often ends up as grenade spam chaos. God knows what the final 128v128 person confrontation in MAG will be like: you won't be able to move for bullets. One shot kills are only fun for the person on the trigger. Bring some of the Syphon Filter focus to this, and it could be very special. |
Comments: 1-22 of 22 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
