CyRaX-494 [2018-05-07 02:10:42 +0000 UTC]
It's such a shame that BRINK wasn't well received by both gamers and critics alike.
To me, BRINK was literally the multiplayer shooter within the 2010s era that has caught my attention. The fact that the game itself is more orientated to completing objectives as a team, as well as the implementation of the 'lesser of two evils' between the Security personnel and the Resistance fighters, and the adaptive parkour mechanics is what made my experience with BRINK flawed but enjoyable nonetheless.
However, it's also a shame that Splash Damage had stopped supporting BRINK, even more so that BRINK is now free to play since late 2017. I'd really wished that Splash Damage could learn from their mistakes from BRINK and deliver a proper sequel that's well engaging and fun to play both casually and competitively, without the greedy implementations of microtransactions and loot boxes that can found quite often in a lot of AAA game titles nowadays.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
CyRaX-494 In reply to Pino44io [2018-05-09 14:39:58 +0000 UTC]
I can definitely agree with you there. The team at Splash Damage really did work darn hard on BRINK, and yet the game got a mixed reception by the gaming community on an overall basis.
Though as I've said before, BRINK is not without its flaws. There's the big ones such as the 30 frames-per-second lock on the one-player modes and the questionable A.I. controlled players, then you've got
the smaller flaws such as the inconsistent radio commander dialogue, especially when you're on the Resistance side and whenever a turret you've built as an engineer or hacked as an operative got damaged,
it would be the Security commander who would alert you on the turret being severely damaged instead of the main Resistance commander, or the one-time Rebel commander on a specific 'What-If' mission.
Nevertheless, BRINK was some of those few multiplayer shooters that tried something new, and it actually sold to me, even though it took up until 2016 to find the game's existence.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0