Brink's biggest problem is that most people might ignore it. As an online shooter it's loaded with brilliant ideas - so no problems there.

It has an art style all of its own, clever missions which give you fun solo tasks in big team games, tight controls and an interesting setting. 

But what if hardly anyone plays it because of the other big name shooters being released at the same time? 

UK developers Splash Damage are no stranger to bright ideas. The team behind huge hit Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, they were also behind the little-selling Quake Wars, which had a similar problem to Brink: its audience.

Released around the same time as Team Fortress 2 on PC and in the dead summertime season on consoles, the follow-up to Quake 4 was stuffed to bursting with brilliant ideas to facilitate team play and give campaign-like structure to multiplayer games. 

However, hardly anyone played it. Brink beware.

ON THE BRINK
With a bot-driven main campaign, it's the multiplayer element of Brink that publishers Bethesda hope will capture our imagination, finally exposing us to the clever tricks Splash Damage invented for their last game. 

It's an online shooter where you always have a job and where every mission plays out like a story, but it's an online shooter hitting shelves in the same launch window as Crysis 2, Bulletstorm, Homefront and Duke Nukem Forever - four big games with four big campaigns and multiplayer modes no smaller than anything offered by Brink. 

Brink will be great, but great didn't help Quake Wars. When Brink hits shelves, it'll be up to you to make it a success.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=283821

EDIT: better video

Honestly, I wasn't blown away by anything in that video. A lot of these FPS games are starting to look the same to me.

How is this game going to differentiate itself from all the FPS games coming out in 2011?

Exactly my thoughts. And all modern shooters play the same online. When my roommate played Black Ops, Medal of Honor and Bad Company 2 onlin I could literally not tell the difference between the three.

True, I rather like Killzone 2 and Gears of War is probably among my top three coop games this generation.

I still prefer the single player campaigns in most games though, including shooters, the only FPS I enjoy online lately is Team Fortress 2.

I was pretty hyped for it since I saw some kind of preview in OXM magazine around August 2009. Man... How time flies. Hype is kinda dying down now, although it looks like an interesting concept, freerunning fps, I don't know how well it will be executed, bugs/glitches? No doubt.

You should easily be able to tell BFBC2 out of those three. Its Battlefield, there are vehicles and its a way better game. There is no better game out than BFBC2 currently, it destroys all in quality like all DICE titles do.

So true, I found MoH abysmal. Although I still like COD to some degree, BFBC2 rapes it in the face, although I think Blops is a better installment at the moment, waiting for Dice to strike back.. Unless MoH was their strike back.. Which was just apalling.

Fingers crossed for Battlefield 3 coming soon.

BF3 is apart of the main BF franchise. Based on  the fact BF1942 and BF2 are still played and is still amazing, we can easily say BF3 will be god like.

True haha! I think BF2 had to be one of the best PC shooters I've played, it was just up there with the jets, choppers and everything. Unless BF3 comes to consoles I'll probably have to go ahead and purchase a gaming rig that can actually run it. I could never fly jets on BF2, my pc was abysmal >_>

it is  coming to consoles, main platform is still PC though. And people hated me in BF1942 and BF2. I'm one of the few who can barrel roll or do flips with choppers. I can also snipe pilots out of their planes and choppers in those games, boy did people think I was hacking when I did that.