Fatties And Free-Running: Brink Hands-On

By Alec Meer on April 20th, 2011 at 9:31 pm.

I looked like this, but fatter. And in the game.

I’ve had brief encounters with Splash Damage’s upcoming athletic shooter Brink a few times now, and by this point I’m simply very keen to be able to sit down and play it at my leisure, building my character under my own steam, tackling its challenges with an RPS collective. Fortunately it’s now just a handful of weeks away, but even so there’s a few things left to chat about.

On my most recent entanglement with it – while I was also seeing the likes of Skyrim, Prey 2 and Rage – I had a chance to poke my big, stupid nose into two aspects I’d not seen before. Number one! The training missions, which double up as tutorial for the more esoteric aspects of the game and a gear-unlocking, high score-chasing sub-game in their own right. Number two! Being a fat guy.

Let’s start with the latter. To date, my Brinky-bouts have involved me playing as the default, ‘medium’ character body type, which offers a happy middleground between meatshield and athlete. This time around, I opted for the heavy build, which you gain after completing a suitable number of missions and objectives. This guy = fat. Whereas initially my character looked like a scrawny, small town sheriff who probably chews tobacco and frowns at people who own large dogs, now he looked like a steroid-addled wrestler with a Stetson fetish. It remains hard to say at this stage how noticeable this enfattening is to other players, as in this instance the server I waded into was full of Mediums, but in the character creator I looked a world of beefy difference from what I’ve grown to think of as the Brink look. Those long limbs and camel necks were replaced with, essentially, a human cube.

In game, the movement took an instantly noticeable hit. Rather than the light-footed parkour type I’ve played as before, I felt like an armoured caravan – a palpable change, not a minor stat-tweak. I forever trailed behind the rest of my team, often discovering that the skirmish was done and everyone had moved on up by the time I hauled my thickened carcass over to the nearest combat hotspot. Against this glacial dawdle was just how much of a bullet-soak I was. I elected to play as Medic class, which meant I added an extra health pip to the bonus one I was already granted for being a fattie. On top of that, an unlocked skill granted me another pip still, meaning that despite nominally being a healer I was also a wall of cackling meat, wading into a fight at the last minute and able to pick off a slew of skittering enemy Mediums while my recently-slaughtered allies got back into the fight. It evoked my fond memories of ritually playing Heavy in TF2, but I felt more like a necessary defensive than a bullet-spraying lunatic. My guess is that Brink is likely to be more of a class game than it might seem at this stage, with Lights and Heavies, and furthermore specific builds of Lights and Heavies being entirely recognisable and very pressing threats which require different tactics to tackle (and to control).

This brings me, in fact, to a gentle concern I have about Brink. Not about the quality of the game, but about it reaching the audience it deserves. There are a great many people who play a great many shooters but run screaming from online modes. I’m one of them, for the most part. Brink offers a bridge between the two, a game that works in both modes rather than requiring a hard-switch in discipline, but it’s incredibly hard to not describe it as though it’s a pure multiplayer game.

Without yet playing the game purely with bots, and experiencing it as the narrative-led linked missions it’s designed to be, it’s impossible to say for certain how satisfying a singleplayer experience it will be. What I can say at this point is that I could perceive very little, if any, difference between the human players on my server and the AI-controlled bots. Whatever I was doing, whoever I was, whoever I was doing it with, it seemed like a plausible surge of allies against a plausible counter-surge of enemies. I didn’t experience the performance anxiety I often do when stepping onto a shooter’s multiplayer server, yet I didn’t feel I was trudging around with idiot, cheaty respawn-o-soldiers of the type seen in those sections when Call of Duty games pretend you’re fighting as part of an army, or even with the eerie semi-minds of, say, Unreal Tournament’s bots. So I’m expecting a team-based shooter I can cheerfully play offline without feeling like I’m missing much, but the proof will likely lie in the strength of the setpieces, the satisfaction of completing mission objectives and the promised plot progression.

It’s certainly well-presented (extreme anti-aliasing and careful camera angles aside, the screenshots we’ve seen to date are entirely reflective of the game’s high-colour, stretchy-limbed look), with all the assembled journos especially cooing at the intro FMV which depicted the construction of Brink’s post-disaster, water-bounded human enclave The Ark as stop-motion architect’s models. Sets the scene nicely, gets across that this is a game with a world to show you and a story to tell you as well as offering a bucketful of men for you to shoot.

Another element I rubbed my grimy hands across was the game’s training missions, which were something I’d presumed from afar as being dreary tutorials aimed at the 3 people who’ve bought a first-person shooter without knowing how to look up in a first-person shooter. In fact, they’re absorbing challenges in their own right, and also the key means of opening up weapon and outfit unlocks in the character creator. The mission I tried focused on the S.M.A.R.T. auto-Parkour system, both training me in how to leap and slide across the maps with minimal button presses and demonstrating that I got nowhere fast if I just held down the S.M.A.R.T. button and jogged forward in a straight line.

S.M.A.R.T. requires foresight and reflex, not slack-jawed laziness; it’s a matter of surveying the terrain as you sprint and making judgement calls as to the best route, based on a certain familiarity with your character’s athletic capabilities, and just a little bit of blind faith. Falling over and embarrassingly missing jumps happened just as much as it does in game where I must manually hit the jump button – this is about taking away some of the manual labour, not about dialling down the challenge or player perceptiveness.

The challenge was tiered, first daring me to hit a series of far-apart, up above and down below checkpoints in less than three minutes, then less than two minutes, then less than one. I made it to tier two, then repeatedly made a goddamned fool of myself in tier three. I didn’t care about getting the unlock, but I wanted to prove I was man enough to navigate an obstacle course in a timely manner. I wasn’t. But I will be. This I swear. There’s a slew of other training challenges too, and if they play out as well as the Parkour one they should do a good job of adding the more personal objectives that the team objective-centric core fights perhaps don’t.

So yeah, Brink. It’s been an awful long time coming and I’m enormously glad it’s finally lurking on the horizon. I’m not quite sure what the general reception will be, but I reckon there’s a good chance it could pick up a fine following in these parts- showing off character builds, getting together for vendetta-fuelled fights, nervously allowing the appearance of real-live humans in maps we’ve grown confident at. We’ll find out on May 13, eh?

__________________

« | »

, , , .

82 Comments »

  1. StingingVelvet says:

    As a singleplayer guy I really have no faith in this being worth serious money for me. They talk about making it more than a bot match, but in the end it doesn’t sound like they are delivering. I’ll get it when it’s $10, maybe 20 if I’m bored.

    • Larser69 says:

      Well, the question becomes… whar are you comparing it to. Obviously it won’t match 60 hour RPG’s or some open-world action games. But it will probably end up being a better SP exprience then CoD etc.

      I mean most FPS games today are incredibly linear and scripted. While that leads to some cool moments then it has 0 replay… you know what will be coming. With good AI and design like Brink tho you can replay SP many times over and over again.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      The reasons I don’t play multi have little to do with the actual people and a lot to do with the structure and gameplay style. If this plays like a bot match I’m not going to enjoy it.

      I’ve bot multi-focused games for their bot match style campaigns before and been disappointed every time, unless I got them for super cheap. Games like Quake Wars and The Club were good $10 purchases in sales, and I would guess this game will be as well.

    • Mike says:

      Also, what does it mean to be a ‘singleplayer guy’ in this context? In the past that has only really meant one of two things: you prefer a narrative-driven game to an Unreal Tournament, or you don’t like the intimidating challenge of multiplayer. Neither seem to apply here, unless I’m missing something?

    • PoulWrist says:

      I spent ages as a singleplayer only person, due to my obsession with Anarchy Online zapping any shooter skills I might’ve possessed. I got into the BC2 MP beta and thought “meh, might as well try” and I was like “omg I’m home :O” and since then spent something like 60 hours online in that. Sure, that’s not a lot to some, but I to me it’s a whole lot more than the number of online hours I clocked in any number of FPS the previous 10 years.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      @ Mike

      Other than Battlefield I only play singleplayer games. I just prefer playing a game at my own pace, which is impossible in multiplayer, even in coop. I also do like a narrative focus, and a lot of immersion, which multiplayer usually takes away from.

      Battlefield works for me because it’s immersive in a singleplayer way despite being multiplayer, if that makes any sense.

    • thebigJ_A says:

      But it DOES have structure, and you CAN play at your own pace. Have you read nothing of how the game works? You play through the campaign. It’s a story like any other sp campaign. If you don’t play it online, the bad guys are AI. They’re only “bots” in the sense that every enemy AI in every single player fps is a bot.
      The only thing that changes when you go online is the enemy and your teammates become real people. None of the issues you are worried about are present (assuming the game works as designed ofc).

    • Ultra Superior says:

      I remember Unreal Extrended multiplayer being the best FPS multiplayer shooter ever.

      It was arcadey – it wasn’t like one hit_one kill, unless you were a sniper or unless you were a sniper hit by a rocket launcher… but there was just SO MANY fun ways to lay waste to your opponents.

      You could hack generators to steal power for your team, build turrets, lay mines, spread napalm on the floor and then ignite it when enemies came, there were HOMING MISSILES – jetpacks, playing with which was extremely fun in zero-G level which took place on a asteroid field…..

      I can’t believe that game disappeared never being replaced with any successor remotely as inventive and fun.

    • CoFran says:

      It’s funny how SD tries to disguise they’re SP system as something revolutionary when in fact its exactly like a server which adds bots and removes them as people log in or logoff, granted it’ll actually try and match the level and perks the guy just left had..

    • Commisar says:

      don’t forget that Brink has 2 campaigns, 1 for Security and 1 for the Resistance

  2. Spider Jerusalem says:

    please don’t suck please don’t suck please don’t suck, etc.

    • Teddy Leach says:

      That’s what he said.

    • Creeping Death says:

      @teddy leach: REALLY? Then that man was a fool!

    • Alexander Norris says:

      At this point the only thing that matters is whether they make the multiplayer balanced or not and I really, really hope they do. I’ll be crushed if it turns out to be as unbalanced as basically every multiplayer FPS on the market. :(

    • Martha Stuart says:

      What do you mean by balanced? do you mean symentrical level desgin? i have never understood what people ment by this.

    • Sassenach says:

      Ah, well if I may try to elucidate. There are two types of balance:

      External balance: Balance between teams or players. So as you say a mirror match would be true balance in this regard and any other form where neither team had an advantage would have an infinitsimal chance of being attained in an absolute sense

      Internal balance: Balanced choices a single player has. So for Team Fortress 2, for example, that all the classes are useful is good internal balance. If one were to be entirely obsolete that would be an extreme of bad internal balance.

      To summarise, good balance results in an increase in the diversity of possible outcomes. Either through uncertainty of who shall win a given game or uncertainty about how someone will go about playing the game. By extension a game which was entirely predictable from the outset would be the epitome of bad balance.

    • KlaxonOverdrive says:

      Excellent. All cleared up then.

  3. Spectre-7 says:

    Gah! I hate being this excited for a game. Makes every moment waiting torture… ya know, in the kind-of-annoying-but-no-one-is-plucking-out-my-fingernails sense of torture.

    Thanks for the write-up, Alec. Will re-read a few times and then check to see whether it’s May 10th yet.

  4. Duckmeister says:

    THIS GAME IS AWESOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Just, fyi, you know.

  5. PureUncut says:

    There will probably be a slew of “I don’t play multiplayer” types come around and tell us dreary stories about how miserable the world is but I will never understand them.
    MP has given some of the biggest highlights of my time gaming. I am very much looking forward to Brink, I’m glad to hear how well SMART works.

    • magnus says:

      As opposed to the ‘I don’t do Campaign mode’ types? There’s a mexican facepalm forthcoming!

    • Xocrates says:

      It’s not something that’s hard to understand. Lots of people prefer to play at their own pace and that’s something not usually compatible with multiplayer since it either forces you into the pace of other players or you risk falling way behind/ahead and end up not having fun.

      Add in the often abusive communities many competitive games have and you end up with loads of people who don’t particularly enjoy multiplayer, even if they would otherwise greatly enjoy the game.

    • Yosharian says:

      I personally bought Modern Warfare 2 just for the multiplayer (and, for that matter, it’s predecessor too). However this was on the Xbox 360, and I *was* planning on getting Brink for the PC… not sure now, if it’s just going to be a multiplayer-only game…

      When it comes down to it I still don’t really know what to expect at all from this game, all I’ve seen is parkour set pieces mixed with limited gunfights. I didn’t even know if it had a campaign or not.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      What Xocrates said.

      While other people are annoying the real reason I rarely ever play multi is because of the pace thing. I like to be immersed in games, to wander and look and investigate. Multiplayer games invariably urge you to move on, keep up or repeatedly die.

      Plus I like stories.

    • godkingemperor says:

      I like multiplayer games, but I can’t afford the net connection required to keep up these days. Nothing quite good enough in my area that doesnt cost an arm and a leg.

    • the_fanciest_of_pants says:

      @StingingVelvet

      I understand your preference in game style, that said do you honestly feel that games have to be at YOUR pace to be immersive?

      If anything, time-sensitive pressure(either mechanically or enforced by other players) to perform heightens my sense of being immersed in a game.

      The world doesn’t wait for us to do something, so why should game worlds?

    • Xocrates says:

      @the_fanciest_of_pants: Gaming is often a form of escapism. Why should I play a game that places on me the same pressures than the real world unless I want to?

      I want a game that waits for me, not one that I have to constantly try to catch up with.

    • Waffleszs says:

      @StingingVelvet
      Why don’t you get immersed in single player and play multiplayer as well? If you don’t want yelling, play with friends or don’t use a microphone. Everyone has an opinion, but that’s just mine.

    • Wilson says:

      It’s interesting, but as Xocrates says, I don’t think it’s hard to understand. Just a question of tastes really. The game I’ve played most online is TF2, and I’ve played some Company of Heroes too, but while I often enjoy it a lot, I very rarely feel a strong desire to play online like I get for certain SP games every now and then. I find it’s very variable whether you’ll get a good game or not, and often you’ll end up way better than the other team/player or far worse, neither of which is much fun. That can happen in SP games as well, but you normally have more control of the situation, and it’s not as random.

      Also, I’d agree that I often don’t fancy the fast pace of MP games, and there can be a feeling of obligation in MP games. You’re a tosser if you quit half-way through a good CoH match because you got bored, and you can’t save and return later. In games like TF2 I can’t always clown around as much as I might in an SP game because it’s not fair on the rest of your team. That’s opinion rather than an inherent part of MP games though, obviously.

    • Commisar says:

      the game IS NOT MULTIPLAYER ONLY!!!!! It has 2 singleplayer campaigns, they are objective based mission with cutscenses and all that /ragerant over

  6. andtriage says:

    man, fuck the haters. this game is going to be AWESOME. it looks like shadowrun and cod had a bastard child that grew up and became a millionaire…?

    • Tarqon says:

      Fuck yeah Shadowrun! Multiplayer game of the decade.

    • Wedge says:

      So I’m not the only one that saw the Shadowrun likeness AND wasn’t totally appalled by that fact?

    • Ovno says:

      Shadowrun was ace (on console) I never got it on pc dispite wanting to try because of GFWL and also the way that they’d gimped the pc’s avantages to make it fair to play with the 360 people as well.

  7. El_MUERkO says:

    The Halibuts have played BF:BC2/Vietnam and BLOPS to death, we were curious about Crysis but that’s been uninstalled as it’s a gigantic turd so we’ll be all over Brink like a rash :)

  8. Vagrant says:

    This is a game that I saw a super-long time ago that I thought was instantly forgettable, but has somehow stewed in the back of my brain over the past couple years to become a savory looking bit of game. The art style helps.

    This is the first I’ve heard of no true single player campaign, though, which is a bit disheartening. Here’s hoping for a good demo.

  9. beloid says:

    I’m afraid of this game. I’ve soaked nearly 300 hours into ETQW and can’t afford currently to do the same with Brink

    • tigerf117 says:

      300 hrs…. you’re making me feel like a loser with my 1000 (about 800 ingame) in L4D2 which came out significantly later than ETQW. eh… I have a full time job instructing IT and a life outside of games.

    • beloid says:

      at least you have a better chance of surviving a zombie apocalypse

    • seattlepete says:

      I had around 300 hrs just sitting in the Hog in QW. I held the top spot globally for kills for around 3 months but finally gave up. All that Hog time is probably why I never learned to fly…

  10. mR.Waffles says:

    I’m so optimistic. This is such a rarity for my jaded tastes. Can it replace my love of CS? I hope it is awesome.

  11. JFS says:

    I hope those unlockable skills and perks don’t add too much to your capabilities, or else the devs cook up a system to balance it out on servers. Some RPG-ing sure is nice, but in multiplayer I like it when things are fair and People Without A Life ™ don’t get loads of advantages.
    (The latter is, by the way, another reason – besides abusive communities and the pace race – why people mightn’t enjoy multiplayer games. I am one of them, and in some cases it really is a pity that multiplayer seems to be geared toward kiddies who can train for 25 hours a day and have a B.Sc. in annoying other people. I would really like to play some games in multiplayer, but the experience often is so bad that I can’t bring myself to put time into it.)

    Looking forward to this a lot, ever since it was announced.

    • Spectre-7 says:

      The devs have recently stated that all of the most powerful unlockables (things like increased damage and health) will be the first ones available, able to be unlocked within the first hour of booting up the game, and they claim that all of the higher level skills will be more nuanced abilities that give you more options without specifically making your character more beastly. Whether all of that is 100% true remains to be seen, but I appreciate the sentiment at least.

    • JFS says:

      Well, that’s great news! An unconventional way to do it, yet the right one in my opinion. Let’s hope for the best. Thank you for the info!

    • Hypocee says:

      Also anybody only gets three perks at a time. Even if a perk were absolutely the shit, that seems like a nice low ceiling for them to be flavouring rather than substance.
      Just to be sure you know, SD have spent a lot of effort and chutzpah on fixing the other broken parts of multiplayer as well, primarily turning off voice chat from people not on your friends list and replacing it with a ValveDirectorlike contextual bark/HUD system. Also friendly players cannot block each other, the score screen shows XP (given for team-oriented actions) rather than kills or K/D, and some other griefs and glitches. Basically the players create content for each other but Screaming Elmo never once gets the chance to talk to you.

      Edit: Oh, and there are apparently thirty character levels and you’re matched with people within ten levels of you. The designers have recently been talking up that they think of it as a ‘three-tier game’.

    • KlaxonOverdrive says:

      BTW: they don’t give out BSC’s in Annoying Other People. That’s a Liberal Arts Degree.

  12. Jake says:

    I love the idea of this human brick character forever arriving late to firefights and out of breath all: ‘guys wait for meeee’. Can he still scramble up walls or does it take several attempts while the rest of the team look on and sigh?

  13. Steven Hutton says:

    I really, really need a demo of this.

  14. CMaster says:

    Most interesting FPS on the horizon for oh so many reasons.

    The multiple objectives

    S.M.A.R.T. aka “fuck the refrigerator box”

    A clear, distinct art style that isn’t cartoon styled.

    And more.

    But I’m still nervous that it won’t quite sit right. We shall see. Here’s hoping.

  15. HermitUK says:

    The class system and body builds reminds me of Dystopia, in a very good way. I’m looking forward to this, and really hoping it gets a decent online community behind it.

    • CMaster says:

      There’s a lot of it which reminds me of Dystopia, a game which I wanted to like so much, but simply lacked the clarity necessary for it to be fun rather than confusing and frustrating.

    • dsi1 says:

      I could’ve sworn this was a Dystopia article when Alec was talking about the differences between Lights and Heavies.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      CMastere: in the unlikely eventuality that we ever make Dys 2, not having a zillion hidden features and a game so opaque it scares new people away will be one of our top priorities. :(

    • KindredPhantom says:

      For those don’t know what they are talking about (Dystopia) and are interested.
      Dystopia is a cyberpunk themed, team based mod for half-life 2. http://www.dystopia-game.com/ It shares some similarities with Brink.

    • CMaster says:

      @Alexander Norris – I knew one of the regular commentators was on the Dystopia team.
      It’s not so much that I don’t get the general idea and concepts of the game (although I dare say some struggle). It’s more ermm, things that happen as you play. For example the electric weapons – when I wield them, they seem to do pretty much nothing – very little visual feedback and not much if any damage to opponents. Equally, when I get killed by the electrics, I often had no idea I was even under attack, certainly no concept of where from or by what. Cyberspace combat – took me a long while to understand any of it, and I still don’t know how I’m supposed to “win” a fight and still have the energy left to do anything else.

      On top of that the objectives themselves, while straight forward enough often leave me confused as to where I need to be covering approaches, or how I should go about getting there.

      All that said, I’m not sure I’ve played since the transition to the OB engine and I did really like a lot about the game. It was just hard and often frustrating – it feels like there are TF2-style lessons that could be learned.

    • KindredPhantom says:

      @CMaster Team Fortress 2 and Brink both handle these things much better than Dystopia. If Dystopia 2 were to be made I’m sure that the way both these games handle objectives would definitely be inspiration for a similar system in Dystopia 2.
      in 1.3, the latest version of Dystopia on the Orange Box engine the issues you talked about in your post are still there, it is still worth playing though.

  16. Kandon Arc says:

    This is one of those games that it’s impossible not to be nervous about, because you just can’t tell whether it will work until you sit down and play it for yourself. For that reason, I really hope they release a demo before release and don’t Bulletstorm it.

  17. Moni says:

    Worth getting just to see a fat man do parkour.

  18. thestjohn says:

    This is one shooter I’ve actually been looking forward to. Could never really get into TF2 for mp thrills, maybe will try again, but the class customisation and SMART movement in this one looks damn good. Will be interested to see if the PC version does allow the level of AA shown in those screenshots to be turned on in play.

  19. Dachannien says:

    Why does nobody in this game have a normal-sized head?

  20. Navagon says:

    Will you guys be planning some RPS Brink multimanshoots?

  21. Longrat says:

    I’ve got this nagging feeling that somehow this game is going to bomb. I don’t know why, there’s no GLARING FLAW, but it’s just intuition telling me that something about this game isn’t right. I really want it to be good, but somehow, I’ve got the feeling that it’s either going to have too little maps, too much DLC, or some other such plague that renders potentially great multiplayer games bad.

    Please god, let it not be plagued!

    • bit_crusherrr says:

      I know what you mean. I really like the look of this game, the art style, SMART. But I have a bad feeling something is going to be horribly wrong with it.

    • torchedEARTH says:

      I think they have made what they think is a lovely balanced game but have inserted it’s own flaw.
      The Fatties don’t have enough going for them.
      The COD players want to run like idiots and knife people.
      The Fatties will get overlooked and you will end up on servers where every bugger is jumping around like a loon. (The Fatties need twice as much health and guns that are nuclear in comparison to everyone else, I know this is addressed, but the disparity to the other types is not marked enough).
      On the plus side, this will piss off the fag camping bitches (snipers) and make offline play more attractive.
      It’s still a day one buy just so I can be there when it all goes wrong.

  22. NaloaC says:

    Please tell me you were playing this on the PC and not on a 360.

    Pwetty pwease!

    Cannot frakking wait for this. 3 weeks to go.

  23. Cael says:

    Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory was the best most finely crafted multiplayer shooter I’ve ever played, this sounds like it is shaping up to be an awesome game. I’m really glad they’ve given up on trying to copy Battlefield like they did with ETQW and they haven’t added all the cheesey crap from the newer CoD games.

    • Springy says:

      ET provided so much pleasure and was such a perfectly-poised experience that I’m just hoping they can recapture a small portion of that in Brink. A few good maps and the right incentives to make teamwork seem the natural choice for everybody and this one’ll be a winner.

    • Ovno says:

      I loved ETQW was a really nice mix of bf and et, but I can see how many people didn’t.

  24. wristcontrol says:

    How many hats does it have?

    • Orija says:

      I know you’re not being serious but I’ll answer anyway, there will be 14 hats whose color, texture, paintjob, design can be changed.

  25. mda says:

    Pre-ordered. I didn’t even pre-order Portal 2. I am a crazy man.

  26. no worries says:

    Absolutely everything about this game appeals to me, and everything I’m reading just continues to jive. This was another great write up. I hope word of mouth sells this game (since there’s no demo planned). I’d love to see it become a long lasting IP.

  27. mkultra says:

    It’s a Splash Damage game, men.
    They cannot fail. Not hard, anyway.

  28. killmachine says:

    thanks for the article. ive been waiting for brink since i heard of it.

    im also very active in the official splash damage forum. im actually a splash damage fan since wolf et.

    many people currently wonder, or complaining, about the game speed. everything what was released until now looks rather slow. maybe you can tell us a little about that. how did the game speed fell? to what game can you compare it, if any.

    other than that, im pretty excited for the game. i love the art style and the levedesign is really awsome. finally we go away from realistic to more artistic. tim willits once said “realism is not always fun”. i couldnt agree more.

  29. SwiftRanger says:

    Alec, did you play it with a controller or mouse+keyboard? Lots of doubts surround this game because of the PC controls and multiplatform mindset of Splash Damage. I recall a damning PCG UK preview not so long ago due to the poor weapon feel on PC.

  30. Quine says:

    “Stetson Fetish” shall be my new band and/or porn name.

  31. Rei Onryou says:

    Can we get an RPS Brink server? That’d make me VERY happy.

  32. Altin Cilek says:

    Thank you Golden Berry

    ForumTR

    Film izle

  33. Foosnark says:

    I play a fat guy IRL, and I say: nerf skinny guys!