Battleborn at PlayStation Experience

Battleborn News
#20

Absolutely-- I’m glad they are clearing it up on Twitter! And I can understand how this is something that Sony put money towards for their players to have free.

Mainly I’m trying to say that, while it’s being cleared up on Twitter, it seems that the announcement really confused a lot of people (gaming news outlets in particular-- I reached out and saw tweets like what you are posting, though not Randy’s).

Thank you for the links!

But, honestly, I understand how they are getting the character for free, and that won’t stop me from getting the game. Still makes me a little sore mainly with how they announced it and the fact that at least Toby so far will be only playable by PS4 in the upcoming Open Beta-- which will now be a staggered event to cater earlier access to one platform.

While I’ll still get the game, the announcement definitely didn’t seem to go over well with a lot of PC/XBone players since the delivery of the news was unclear and made it sound like non-PS4 would be getting the short end of the stick, so to speak.

(I really like the game and want it to be successful, and I want my friends to get it too. I cringe when messages are unclear because there are many people that will make decisions based on assumptions rather than trying to figure out what is factual-- and I don’t want this to be passed up by anyone based on an unclear message now being parroted by quite a few gaming sites.)

#21

communication is hard, something that might sound clear to you isn’t always for others. Even Randy stumbles on the words Battleborn uhhh Borderlands. This time the characters are called champions. that said, this announcements is made on stage for a specific party. they want you to say the words “EXCLUSIVE”, therefore they create value for their platform, offering more than the competition. Most of the times it’s like “we announce blablabla for platform x” then they leave out the names of the other platforms. Yes it’s also coming for the other platforms but “marketing” says we can’t discuss it right now.

the “good” thing about this announcement is that Gearbox is going to make more characters. They say they are going to add 1 more by now, but i think we will at least see 1 for each faction.

1 Like
#22

DLC characters are going to be the final nail in the coffin for this game, which is a shame as I was really looking forward to it. There just isnt going to a be a playerbase big enough to support this games pricing model with all the available options in the genre coming. PC sure isn’t gonna bite… they didn’t even bite for battlefront.

#23

I’d totally agree with a model that requires you to grind a large amount of ingame cash for new characters, OR to buy them for real money. Skins and story dlc shall be pay-only, for all I care. Totally justified.

But if they really opt for competitive play, the competitive content should be accessable without needing to pump in extra $.
When people are required to use cash to stay competitive, the competitive scene is decimated by default.

#24

I’m worried that paid at all dlc characters will get spun into a p2w publicity for the game, which is already asking a lot of players. No quicker way to sink a game than vaguely true statements. See: battlefront only has 4 maps. Ugh. Was considering getting a ps4 for it anyways to avoid the hacks on pc… now it’s a very distant maybe. Online games are no fun when they go the way of evolve.

#25

My hope is that they allow those characters to be purchased by grinding in-game currency. Otherwise I can see some potential issues cropping up that might dissuade new players from entering the game given its $60 starting price point.

Again, I like the game and plan to get it-- but I’m more concerned with players who won’t check Twitter or the forums. Just looking at the Battleborn website’s announcement or the news updates on gaming sites gives a totally different impression.

#26

Dear Personal Computer,
Please arrange with Gearbox software to give us a character for Battleborn for free.

Thanks PC, you’re the best.

2 Likes
#27

While I think it’s cool to be getting a free character (I’m on PS4), it’s kind of odd and a bit unfair that we’re getting access first. One can assume or even hope that the 26th character will at least be free on the other two platforms. Same goes for Toby the Destroyer only being on the PS4 beta

#28

I remember playing the beta test, it took me time to understand the gameplay mechanics! lol cuz i never played borderlands before.

see you on february boys! :wink:

**Светлана **

#29

If it isn’t, they just kicked the chair.

#30

Yep, that’s my point of view too.

Blizzard understood that and decided their Characters and Maps will be free for Overwatch.
If Gearbox or 2k decide the other way, i and many others already said it, it’s not going to work; it’s going to blow up in their faces. PvP content have to be free (Characters and PvP maps)

You can’t ask peoples to pay twice.

…

Except if you are EA.

#31

I’m finding it a bit hard to understand that people are willing to pay for skins but not for a new hero. personally i don’t really care for skins. But the Build time for a new skin is a few hours? The Build time for a new hero is over a 100 men hours (stated on a GBX Panel)

I do understand that dividing your community by adding new maps will kill your install base. Not really seeing this with heroes yet, unless they are made pay2win. If selling skins & taunts generate enough income i can see “free stuff” coming our way. But i don’t have those numbers so i can’t really judge, I do think Blizzard has a bigger appeal on their advantage. However i have a different theory that might work?

With the launch of every new hero there is an ingame ‘event’. During this time frame this new hero is free 2 play. This gives everyone a good preview of the character and gives GBX a good amount of data to balance the hero. After this event the hero will be paid DLC, but if you buy the hero during the event you will get an discount on your purchase. A bit of fair give and take?

So GBX more heroes, so we can have a weekly rotating event with free 2 play heroes.

#32

The problem is, that heroes might or might not give a competitive advantage, while skins and story missions don’t.
If they really try to start a competitive scene, and lock content that is needed for decent competitive play behind paywalls, that’s a pretty sh… - bad move.
If I like a game, I will support it and might buy a skin or two. Story missions would be quite interesting for me. But if I feel like I can’t enter a ranked match without buying the newest character first, that leaves a bad taste.

About your launch-event theory: Also interpretable as the drug-sample tactic, if one wants to. And still a paywall. A smaller one, but nontheless a wall.
Before you come up with other arguments, I want to remind that the main focus in my argumentation is on the connection between competitive play <-> competitively relevant content ! As mentioned before, it’s totally justified to charge for skins or story dlc.

2 Likes
#33

Skins don’t impact pvp.
Heroes do.

edit: Funfighter bopped the nail right on it’s head cage.
Also it’s Gearbox doing the Gearbox thing and announcing dlc before the game is even out. Like pls.

#34

my assumption was that there is no real advantage then a different skill set. each hero has it’s own counter.

just looking for some feedback on my theory.

#35

Have you ever played a hero based pvp game with a meta? If yes, you should know what it can mean to have or not have access to a few characters. No game will ever be balanced. And considering the purpose of sales, the heroes will rather be stronger than the average, instead of weaker.
True balance is a promise that noone can keep.

#36

Without talking about what FunFighter and Caballo already said:

I already said it, but with a paid character you only end up in two (Sort of three) ways:
-The Hero is a counter or hard-counter to one or more other(s), and is seen as good at it, nearly indispensable.
Peoples say it’s Pay-2-Win.
-The Hero is average, nothing too different from any other hero.
Peoples will say it’s a rip-off and Gearbox/2k is greedy and don’t care.
-Bonus stage: The Hero is just bad.
He will be “balanced” and end up in one of the two previous point.

It’s a no win scenario. You just can’t do that. Whatever you do, it will be a paid character and judged on it. If it’s worth the money, then it’s pay-2-Win, if not? it’s a greed move. Nobody win in this argument.
If it was a free character, peoples will be purely judging on it’s actual power and skill set. Not how “Worth” he is.

Now, about how making a character require more time than making skins:
And?
It doesn’t matter how much time you need to make something free if you got the income from something else.
Skins, Taunt, Voice packs, Extras, OST, Concept arts, even profile avatars and background are stuff you can sell.

And overall: Battleborn is a paid game, not a free-to-play. Peoples playing, paid for it.
If you announce that some of what is supposed to be the big part of the game (In this case, The Battleborns. Remember “Hero shooter”?) are partially cut and sold separately, then clearly expect peoples to be mad. Because you are literally cutting main content from the game.
See the Total War: Warhammer Chaos “case”. It’s exactly what happened, more DLCs non-sense.

This have to end. DLCs should be extras, not main content.

3 Likes
#37

Was about to make the exact same case-distinction as Corrsk.

The players can’t win anything with paid extra characters. And the selling company has to choose between “low income from a bad hero” and “selling a good hero, but driving away a big part of the playerbase”. Especially when the game isn’t even established yet.

#38

Gerbox can try what Capcom is doing for Street Fighter 5. You can buy the DLC characters or play the game alot to unlock them for free. I am hoping that works for Capcom.

#39

Yep. Paid heroes in competitive games are almost always a bad sign in the eyes of communities. And those games live and die because of their communities. Even if developer manages to achieve impossible and release a hero which is fun to play and balanced enough that people might want to buy it, but at the same time it’s not really that needed for competitive play. Then passes 3-6 months and some random hero comes into meta that everyone picks in each match. It just happens that this paid hero is really good counter to this new meta king. And this completely balanced and not really needed dlc hero becomes crucial…

So yeah in singleplayer games dlc heroes are ok, but if you want pvp game it just doesn’t work, because meta there always changes and each and every hero becomes crucial at one point or another. If this hero is behind paywall it splits the community for the duration.
Well unless there is possibility to unlock every added hero in game. But that has to be balanced as well so that the grind is not so long that people just feel it’s a trick to make you still buy it for cash instead of viable alternative.

1 Like