Top
100°
5.0

Brink Review [Game Rant]

Game Rant writes, "Imagine a world where the parkour-styled free running is able to blend seamlessly with the high-octane action that comes with merciless gun fights, life-or-death consequences, and the need to survive. This is what Bethesda and Splash Damage were trying to accomplish in their new take on the old first-person shooter classic, yet somewhere between the agonizingly painful balance issues, and the fundamentally broken gameplay design, they missed the mark by a goodly distance."

Read Full Story >>
gamerant.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Elimin83023d ago

And the HITS just keep on commin'.

TheEatingChampagne3023d ago

What hits? He's right..
Mediocre game with no single player mode whatsoever and a rubbish online..
I mean you have like 8 small maps and that's it.. I regret buying it..

Elimin83023d ago

Right or wrong. The game is still taking hits from review scores, NO?

TheEatingChampagne3023d ago

Oh sorry man I didn't get you.. I thought you were talking about him trying to get hits to his site..

Ducky3023d ago

Looks like the guy just doesn't like team-based shooters.

The game emphasizes that you stick together as a team and collectively work to take an objective. I wouldn't call that a balance issue.

GameRant3021d ago

You could say that ANY team-based shooter emphasizes teamwork if there are objectives. That's not enough.

Ducky3020d ago (Edited 3020d ago )

Not necessarily.

Emphasizing teamwork is done when the game is designed so that you have to work as a team or fail.
BC2 Vietnam has objectives and classes, yet you can lone wolf just fine. (It is harder to accomplish in vanilla BC2 due to enemies being bullet sponges)

The 'staying together' aspect is more emphasized in Brink. Which the reviewer didn't seem to enjoy. That, and even the focus on objectives was seen as a flaw as he felt useless. Which shouldn't be the case as you can always support the your team-mates.
Hence why I said that it looks like the reviewer just doesn't like the class/objective-based shooters in general.

He's right about the technical mess and the SP. (There is a lobby system I believe but the game does a bad job of telling the player how to access it). It's just the gameplay criticism which I found odd.