(I had originally planned to make this a video, but due to the length of this, I decided to just have it be text instead)

Authors Note: I made this when I was really tired, and it is probably full of typos and such(Note: spastic un-professional writing). It's supposed to be a look back on a game that has been released a while ago, and sort of see whether the game was a success or not in the long run. This is more of a proof of concept, and if people like the concept, then I will plan on making more of them. If not, then I obviously won't. The full version would probably go a little bit more in depth, and possibly be a video instead. Ok, enough of this note.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: Thanks Killjoy for moving it to reviews!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breach, the game that had groundbreaking physics and awesome gameplay, what happened to it? In this look back, I'll explain why I personally think that the game was not a success.


Destruction:

I remember getting Breach when it first came out, I was enticed by the fancy new destruction. Battlefield Bad Company was the first game to feature near full destruction in a game, but this was different. The whole concept of destruction in this game was meant to be tactical, it was all about the "micro destruction." I remember watching videos and gameplay where the developers talk about how the walls could be torn out brick by brick, which is in fact true. I think that the destruction was one of the reasons for this games downfall. But more on that later.

Gameplay:

The trailers did not lie, when this game came out, most battle were full of action and fun. I remember taking out walls to get to enemies, and having my cover blown to bits and running for another shelter. The game itself was fun to play, which is obviously one of the most important aspects of the game.

Graphics:

The graphics were nothing special, but that is really all about personal opinion. Since the level of destrcution is this game is so high, I expected it to not look on par with most AAA games.

Downfall:

Now to the downfall. One of the main problems with this game was the lag. I remember when I first got the game, lag was prevelent. It might of not always been there, but you were likely to experience it at least  a few time a game. I think the cause of most of this lag was the destruction itself. The weird thing was, it wasn't consistent, sometimes it was fine and sometimes it wasn't. This was probably due to servers, of course outside of the developers control. Another reason, to me at least, is the leveling system. The game rewards constant play. But how much is too much? This seems to me like the FPS equvilent of grinding. It seemed like forever before I had enough points to purchase a grenade launcher. The game seems to have been made intentionally long to level up to increase play time, but this turned me off pretty quick. To me the whole idea of grinding, getting enough points for an attachment, then grinding even MORE to unlock another attachment that costs even more seems ridiculous. They could have just made a simple level unlocks system that would have worked fine. But instead they made an arbitrary points system where you get 500 points, spend it on an attachment for one weapon, grind for a ton more points for another weapon. It lacks flexibility. It punishes people who accidentally get the wrong perk/attachment and sets them back an hour of grinding. It's not like a game such as COD or Battlefield where you just keep having that "just one more game to get that scope" feeling. Trying to unlock things in this game is more of a chore than actually feeling you are unlocking things. Another problem I noticed right off the start is the level gap between players. Even when I got it near the release, it seemed that some people had been playing it 24/7 just to get a new item that put themselves way ahead of the competition. It's one of those games that unless you get ahead really quick, you're going to get left behind.

Aftermath:

Looking at the game now, only about 5 months after the game has been released, there is almost nobody playing it at all. When I was on there were only 5 servers, only 2 of which actually had people playing on them. The lag was unbearable, as shown in the gameplay I recorded. Again, the level difference was clearly vidible, either people who have just bought the game recently and extreme masochists of the game remain.
The destruction albeit a bit laggy, is still there in full. The destruction was what was supposed to make the game, but it never seemed to hit off as well as it should have.

Summary:

If you and a group of friends had this game, I bet you could have a blast from it. The game still has its flaws, but amidst them you can squeeze out some fun with the destruction and cover system. The reason this game didn't last very long was due to lack of developer support and a lackluster community. When the game came out, it was fun, people were playing, but the amount of people took a drastic turn soon after the release. It's sad to see a game with so much potential tank, but it's just what happens when people don't get into them.

Awesome input for breach. Im moving this to Game reviews

Good review FenwayFan25.......short and to the point........expecting more from u

Well this was interesting. Nice job man.

Nice, I thought about getting it but the gameplay looked boring and just an excessive amount of destruction. Too bad it died so quickly multiplayer wise.

You justified Breach as though you had already bought it. So, you don't have it, but you still like it?

You have confused me. It looked boring. So I didn't get it. And the destruction was really excessive but not as brilliant as BF. I have played it.

Nice review. I never tried the game myself, but I thought about buying it at one point, before it's release.
But I'm just wondering 1 thing: You said that Bad Company 2 was one of the first games to feature near full destruction. But I'm just wondering, why you said Bad Company 2. Because there is a game series which is praised for it's destruction, and where it has been a key feature in the series since it started back in 2001. And that is the Red Faction series.
Just thought I might want to say that, but anyhow, nice review

Dang, for some reason that totally left my mind when I was writing this. I've Played Red Faction: Guerrilla before, and the destruction in that is just jaw dropping. I can't believe i didn't mention it. Thanks for pointing that out!

Hehe, sure. No problem . All ways glad to help!