[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PVYZGOJrH4[/media]
I posted this in the TB thread, but I think this is something more people should see. As someone who wrote this game off, I'm actually kinda liking what I see here, it's definitely a different game than I expected. It's more Monday Night Combat than it is hard MOBA, and that really tickles my fancy. And I didn't even know it had a singleplayer/co-op story mode.
Given the reactions I've seen to the game, it's clear I'm not the only one that thought that way. A lot of people are calling it an Overwatch ripoff, a MOBA cash-grab, or dismissing it because it's a Gearbox game. So I'd say if you didn't know much about it, or weren't even going to give this game a time of day, I'd recommend watching this video and seeing if it changes your mind as well. I don't expect it to magically convert everyone, if it [I]doesn't [/I]get you interested it may at least explain what the game actually is, as opposed to what the public perception may be. I think his complaints are valid, but I agree that there could be a pretty cool game here.
There's an open beta test around the corner as well.
It was extremely monotonous when I played it. No way would I spend 60 bucks on this.
[QUOTE=Mister_Jack;50034244]It was extremely monotonous when I played it. No way would I spend 60 bucks on this.[/QUOTE]
It looks like something that should be F2P I think
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50034397]It looks like something that should be F2P I think[/QUOTE]
Why though? It doesn't have any microtransactions, it has multiple multiplayer modes, a full story mode that can be played solo or cooperatively that will updated episodically for free. It's a pretty complete package of a game. I don't see why it shouldn't be full price.
Look at Siege and Overwatch. Everyone was like "Man why pay full price for a game that has microtransactions and no story mode?" Well here's a full price game that has no microtransatcions [I]and [/I]a story mode. Now that's not enough?
[QUOTE=Skyward;50034446]Why though? It doesn't have any microtransactions, it has multiple multiplayer modes, a full story mode that can be played solo or cooperatively that will updated episodically for free. It's a pretty complete package of a game. I don't see why it shouldn't be full price.
Look at Siege and Overwatch. Everyone was like "Man why pay full price for a game that has microtransactions and no story mode?" Well here's a full price game that has no microtransatcions [I]and [/I]a story mode. Now that's not enough?[/QUOTE]
That's how I feel. You're saying it as if there are no complete package F2P games.
I don't know about the PvP side of things, but the PvE co-op missions look really fun
[editline]30th March 2016[/editline]
And I'm digging the artstyle
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50034450]That's how I feel. You're saying it as if there are no complete package F2P games.[/QUOTE]
And if that's how you feel that's fine, I was just more curious as to why. And I'm not saying none exist, but you can't deny the majority aren't complete packages out the gate. Sure, you get the anomaly that is DOTA2 where the [I]actual [/I]content is freely avaialble, but most F2P games don't have the income of the largest online video game distribution platform to back it up. Most rely on things like selling major things like heroes, weapons, things that effect gameplay, and then bolster that with boosters, cosmetics, etc. You don't get any of that here, you just [I]buy the game.[/I]
And whether or not there are fully-featured F2P games is irrelevant. That's not the point I was making. I can see an argument being made for F2P making the game more accessible, because it would be. But based on what's being shown here, I don't feel like it lacks the content to justify having a full price tag.
[QUOTE=Skyward;50034203]
Given the reactions I've seen to the game, it's clear I'm not the only one that thought that way. [B]A lot of people are calling it an Overwatch ripoff, a MOBA cash-grab, or dismissing it because it's a Gearbox game[/B]. So I'd say if you didn't know much about it, or weren't even going to give this game a time of day, I'd recommend watching this video and seeing if it changes your mind as well. I don't expect it to magically convert everyone, if it [I]doesn't [/I]get you interested it may at least explain what the game actually is, as opposed to what the public perception may be. I think his complaints are valid, but I agree that there could be a pretty cool game here.[/QUOTE]
This is what I have been seeing and its kinda sad. People for the most part don't know anything about the game but all I have seen is it being instantly dismissed as Overwatch clone/failed MOBA etc
I have been in the super early access for the last few weeks playing alongside TB and doing custom games with Gearbox devs/2K guys and it is really fun, especially with friends. Poured around 50 hours into it so far with just 20% of the story and two of the multiplayer maps.
[QUOTE=CrossNgen;50034467]And I'm digging the artstyle[/QUOTE]
I do hope they cut down the visual clutter though. The readability is [I]rough[/I].
[QUOTE=Skyward;50034496]I do hope they cut down the visual clutter though. The readability is [I]rough[/I].[/QUOTE]
I see not much has changed since the clusterfuck of alpha.
It's still a fucking mess.
Also, wasn't BB announced before OW? calling it a clone is a fallacy
[QUOTE=CrossNgen;50034573]Also, wasn't BB announced before OW? calling it a clone is a fallacy[/QUOTE]
It was. Overwatch was just more widely recognized, so now it's apparently a copy/paste job.
I wasn't into the game at first because I thought it would be more like first-person smite, but I always thought the "Overwatch Clone" thing was ridiculous.
It's always a shame were interesting games get instantly shot down for being called ripoffs by people. Happened with MNC with people calling it a TF2 rip off and it's happening now with Battleborn, Gigantic, and Paladins being called Overwatch ripoffs, even though two of those games were announced even [i]before[/i] Overwatch. Hell, people even called Overwatch a TF2 ripoff when it was announced.
Looks interesting. Reminds me of SMNC with the skill/inventory building of Awesomenauts.
To me the problem with these 'hero focused' games is that they all try to have characters from every style and they just come across as an inconsistent mess. How do a Rambo-esque army man with a minigun, a multi-limbed alien, and a Victorian gentleman robot fit together? They all have entirely different proportions, their technology is wildly inconsistent, and their pallets don't match at all.
It's the same problem I have with Paragon, or with Paladins. If every game tries to do everything they all look the same, and they all look generic and boring. TF2 has multiple classes but they all have the same art style and uniforms (until Valve threw that out the window with cosmetics), it works in Overwatch because the characters all use technology that has the same clean, white aesthetic.
It doesn't really matter how good your game is if the first reaction people have when seeing it is "What the fuck am I looking at? They just threw everything in." It's especially bad in Battleborn's case because the first footage of the game looked fucking awful.
Also because I'm sure there's another game I can't remember I searched for "games similar to Battleborn" and got [url=http://2p.com/36161815_3/8-Innovative-MOBA-Games-You-Should-Have-a-Try-by-cindyhio.htm]this[/url] article. Aside from Overwatch my immediate thought was "All these games look the same."
[editline]30th March 2016[/editline]
It was Battlecry. I was thinking of Battlecry. The game that looks like a MOBA tried to steal Dishonored's soul.
[editline]30th March 2016[/editline]
More importantly, could these games possibly have more boring names? Battleborn, Battlecry, Paladins, Paragon. Fucking snore. My mind actively purges these boring names from memory.
I like some of the character designs but god damn the actual gameplay looks so.... hard to watch, there's so much shit going on in that map everywhere at once.
The coop story mode seems kind of cool, tho it reminds me a bit too much of borderlands which isn't really a good thing to say.
[QUOTE=Skyward;50034203][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PVYZGOJrH4[/media]
I posted this in the TB thread, but I think this is something more people should see. As someone who wrote this game off, I'm actually kinda liking what I see here, it's definitely a different game than I expected. It's more Monday Night Combat than it is hard MOBA, and that really tickles my fancy. And I didn't even know it had a singleplayer/co-op story mode.
Given the reactions I've seen to the game, it's clear I'm not the only one that thought that way. A lot of people are calling it an Overwatch ripoff, a MOBA cash-grab, or dismissing it because it's a Gearbox game. So I'd say if you didn't know much about it, or weren't even going to give this game a time of day, I'd recommend watching this video and seeing if it changes your mind as well. I don't expect it to magically convert everyone, if it [I]doesn't [/I]get you interested it may at least explain what the game actually is, as opposed to what the public perception may be. I think his complaints are valid, but I agree that there could be a pretty cool game here.
There's an open beta test around the corner as well.[/QUOTE]
No. Ultra monotonous, Warframe level spamminess, and a company that is not set up properly to do long term support, and that's the clincher. GBX is trying a new thing, but there's no evidence they've done a lot of research and and have the logistical support to make that work long term.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50034980]To me the problem with these 'hero focused' games is that they all try to have characters from every style and they just come across as an inconsistent mess. How do a Rambo-esque army man with a minigun, a multi-limbed alien, and a Victorian gentleman robot fit together? They all have entirely different proportions, their technology is wildly inconsistent, and their pallets don't match at all.[/quote]
Gearbox' justification for that is the galaxy (or was it the universe?) is ending, so different people from different factions from different places are coming together. There are like 5 factions. But yeah, the reactions to OW's cast was better in part because it's more unified.
[quote]It was Battlecry. I was thinking of Battlecry. The game that looks like a MOBA tried to steal Dishonored's soul.[/quote]
Same art director, Viktor Antonov. Dishonored had HL 2 (City 17) vibes too.
this game looks like a complete mess
I know this is a really stupid point but they keep using the word Badass in the marketing for this game and it turns me off completely.
[QUOTE=Skyward;50034446]Why though? It doesn't have any microtransactions, it has multiple multiplayer modes, a full story mode that can be played solo or cooperatively that will updated episodically for free. It's a pretty complete package of a game. I don't see why it shouldn't be full price.
Look at Siege and Overwatch. Everyone was like "Man why pay full price for a game that has microtransactions and no story mode?" Well here's a full price game that has no microtransatcions [I]and [/I]a story mode. Now that's not enough?[/QUOTE]
It was not my intention to imply that I don't want to spend 60 bux because of some principle of the matter. It just seems boring to me.
Doesn't even seem like a fun shooter, it looks like a first person ability user. I know they're different games but I think out of all the games I've played TF2 and Overwatch seem to get the FPS class ability idea right. Your abilities aren't the main damage dealer of your character, it's being able to aim and shoot at an enemy. Your abilities augment this but don't replace your gun. Overwatch has this more than TF2, but TF2 got more of it as new weapons were added to the game.
[editline]30th March 2016[/editline]
Come to think of it, Monday Night Combat the game that this is apparently inspired by did this too.
"Someone has to come up with a better acronym"
ok
FPASSFAGGOTS
i dont know if there's a term for this oversaturated generic fantasy/scifi/everything art style but its horrible. how they intend to make an impact with designs that are completely indistinguishable is a mystery.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;50037277]i dont know if there's a term for this oversaturated generic fantasy art style but its [B]horrible[/B]. how they intend to make an impact with designs that are completely indistinguishable is a mystery.[/QUOTE]
there's your answer
Well I've played it and I already knew it wasn't an Overwatch clone, still didn't find it fun. It was overtly unfunny and the gameplay was floaty and unresponsive.
I played this game and I did enjoy it but I absolutely could not stand the character's, absolutely none of them have likable personalities. What would make me buy the game is waiting and seeing the general reception and to see how many players it gets.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;50037277]i dont know if there's a term for this oversaturated generic fantasy/scifi/everything art style but its horrible. how they intend to make an impact with designs that are completely indistinguishable is a mystery.[/QUOTE]
This art style is one of the most terrible issues plaguing western games and it needs to die.
[editline]31st March 2016[/editline]
It won't die though, of course, because every game studio is trying to escape the practically non-existent "grey shooter" stigma and in doing so somehow manages to come up with the [I]same exact soulless conclusion.[/I]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
