Borderlands 3 Review Thread- Currently at 85 on metacritic

Metacritic- 85
OpenCritic- 85

2K allowed a select number of publications early access to the game. The remainder of the reviews will presumably go live after it releases, so be expecting more reviews later on.

A summary of some of the early reviews:

  • XGN- 95- Borderlands 3 has surpassed the bar that its predecessor had set. The story is grand in scale, the humor is on-point and updated to 2019, weapons are diverse and the new Vault Hunters are unique in every way. Every BL-fan must pick this game up.

  • IGN- 90- Borderlands 3 sticks to its guns and outdoes itself with an amazing arsenal of weapons, humor, and missions.

  • Destructoid- 90- It didn’t need to reinvent the wheel either; as Gearbox pretty much had the formula figured out the second time around.

  • Game Informer- 80- Borderlands 3 is a love letter to its fans and a celebration of the style of play it first popularized. Filled with characters from previous installments, and unapologetic in its silly humor and bombastic action, it’s an amusing ride that seems hesitant to innovate. If more of what you loved before is your chief desire, Gearbox has granted that wish through a game of impressive scope that charts some very safe territory.

  • Gamespot- 80- Borderlands 3 has a few stumbling blocks when it comes to bosses, but these fights are overshadowed by the game’s rewarding gunplay and over-the-top humor. The game’s character-driven narrative acts as a satisfying finale for the loot-shooter franchise, and the new mechanics and features–especially the reworked skill trees and weapon manufacturer effects–give you plenty of agency in how you want to play through it. If you’ve never been a fan of the franchise, it’s unlikely Borderlands 3 does enough things differently to change your mind, as the game best excels at continuing what the series has always done: deliver a humorous tall tale of misfits looting and shooting their way to heroism.

  • PC Gamer- 63- An endless font of bad jokes and cool guns in the series’ most vapid story yet, Borderlands 3 skates by on watching numbers fly and goons explode.


That PC Gamer review is just a travesty, smh. My favorite critic currently, Destructoid’s Chris Carter, gave it a 9/10, so I’m happy. I do wish that the average was higher so that it had a better chance of getting a GOTY nomination later this year.


Having a smaller, select, review base makes a single 63 score sting much more. Averages work that way. Wonder why so few review codes were sent out?

1 Like

It’s becoming more and more frequent for whatever reason. Some publishers like Bethesda no longer send out early review codes at all, you have to wait until after release to see the reviews, so preordering is a very risky business.

1 Like

PC Gamer is pretty much slamming it on the grounds that it is more Borderlands, so that doesn’t exactly discourage me


They’re catering to their audience. Which often prefer elaborate, “console free” games.
I’m pretty sure the most negative comment we’ll see is exactly that.
It’s still the same bad jokes, cool guns and Boss’plosions!
Which is perfectly fine with me. If I want to play something else than Borderlands. I can buy something else than Borderlands…
Story wise BL2 will be hard to top. We’ll see.


It’s really just a long list of complaints why Borderlands 3 is Borderlands 3. I don’t have a problem with negative critics, but this is a useless one. The reviewer barely even talked about the gameplay.

I like the gamestar one. It’s very critical of some aspects, but fair and acknowledges the series for what it is. If you want a good review, let google handle the german-english translation and read through the article (I pray that google doesn’t screw up the translation^^).


Why are people upset about PC Gamers bad review? Sorry guys but the reviewers aren’t obligated to give it a review based on how much WE want to like it.

PC Gamer gave BL2 a 90% so they obviously loved everything about it. Giving BL3 a 63% is not saying they disliked it simply because it is just a repeat of BL2, they said they didn’t like the humor in it, but liked the guns and combat. The story is what did it in according to PC Gamer.

I personally am a fan of Chris Carters reviews as well so I am not worried, and I would buy it even if everyone gave it a 10%, but getting upset at a reviewer because you didn’t like the review they gave, that seems pretty petty to me, especially since none of us have played it to know if they are right or not.


My personal problem is that the reviewer seems to not like the humour of the series at all. And he goes on and on about it and stretches that point for over half the review. This makes the review incoherent and devalues it at the same time, as the rest of the game gets so much less attention that it is just not balanced at all. I don’t have a problem with him not liking that kind of comedy, but if he knows that, why isn’t someone else on the review? That person doesn’t need to love the game, but by setting up a person to basically hate the game, you set up a tone for the review that isn’t neutral at all. And the base position needs to be critically neutral, which is for example why I personally would never review a Borderlands game as I’m inherently biased to like the game.

To evaluate further: I personally would never let a single person review a game period as that can only lead to one person’s opinion. That and the fact that big games get more flak anyway as they result in crunched reviews (it is literally impossible to avoid) leads to either rushed or purely opinionated reviews. Reviews always are a piece of opinion, but it should also be a piece of objectivity, which is basically prevented if you set someone up for a game he basically has to despise for it’s humor.


That’s a 2 way…what’s to say a person who gives it a good score isnt critically neutral. I would be more pissed if a reviewer gave something a good score but ended up being garbage.

This is why “Review Scores” are a complete waste of time.

Just say what you liked, what you disliked, and let the gamer make up thier own mind.


Something I’ve noticed recently is PC Gamer following Polygon down a path of extreme political correctness in their reviews. So I suspect one of the main reasons why the PC Gamer critic is hating on the humor so much is because the humor isn’t politically correct, and that is just a silly reason to bash a game in my opinion.

Also, you need to try and have some objectivity when reviewing a game instead of reviewing it completely based on subjectivity. That PC Gamer review is super subjective, it’s not even a little bit objective.


Yes, this is the exact opposite side of the spectrum. That’s why one person shouldn’t be the only one to review a game. And like I said, I shouldn’t review a Borderlands game either for that exact reason. The XGN review (after the translation) reads like the review of a blind fan finding back to a Long-lost Messiah. Really over the top.

In general bias is bad and that is why I can appreciate the GameStar review. 2 people with different stances towards the series review the game critically.


Reviews are simply opinions, and how often does your opinion match up to a stranger?

Either way, I have played a lot of games that people have hated and gave lousy reviews too, but I personally loved. Mass Effect Andromeda and Dead Effect 2 come to mind. I love both those games but apparently I am in the minority. On the flip side, Witcher 3 is ranked one of the best games of all time and I personally can’t stand it, yet I love the Dragon Age series.

There is no review I could read that would stop me from buying BL3 regardless, but I do admit it is nice when I see a game I want and all the reviews have it high.


But…but…my Metacritic numbers!

1 Like

I take reviews never as singular ratings, but more as a part of the overall perception. That way I get to see how “the public” thinks about the game in question. It isn’t a perfect approach as it is really time-consuming, but seeing the overall perception and reading/seeing through multiple articles/videos helps to get a good understanding of what I get into with a game.
Alternatively it really helps to find a good reviewer that has a very similar taste to my own and see what that person thinks about a game.

1 Like

Some Youtubers who possess a review copy of the game, are allowed to upload their detailed impressions tonight. So keep an eye out for that if you are interested.


That PC gamer review is a dumb joke honestly. He doesn’t fairly asses the quality of the game (or maybe he does yet refuses to talk about it?) and just rants on and on about one and a half topics. Sorry but the review is useless, not because it has a relative low score, but because nobody is any the wiser about what the game has to offer reading said review. In any case, the majority seem overwhelmingly positive.

1 Like

I won’t take any notice of reviews unless they all mention loot boxes, a review is always pretty much one man’s appraisal and who’s to say that man isn’t a fannybangle with bad taste? I’ve really enjoyed some games and then gone to look at reviews and they’re sometimes under a 5/10. Different strokes for different folks isn’t it. I always had reservations it’d get anywhere near the review scores of BL2 as they nailed that, story and gameplay wise and it was always going to be hard to live up to (probably why Jack featured in TFTBL - even Telltale couldn’t create a better baddie so had to resurrect Jack)

The twins seem like a really awful pair of bad guys for me, from what I’ve seen anyway so I was expecting reviews to come in at 70-80%, pretty much saying it’s as good as 2 gameplay wise but the story is far worse hence the drop. If that’s the case, I’m fine, we’re all still playing the older games now and it ain’t for the story. The new DLC story was absolute tat, but I loved playing through it anyway cos it was just new BL with new places and guns, I didn’t really care Hector was banal and generic.

They peaked with 2, and especially with the Dragon keep DLC, nothing will top that I don’t think so I’ll be happy as long as the gameplay is the same and there’s no pay to win tripe bolted in there. It could get a 20% on Metacritic, I’d still buy it as long as it’s as fair and down to rng as it’s always been and isn’t asking us all to pay £3.99 for Pandora bucks to get things.

Don’t forget Randy Pitchford is almost universally detested amongst reviewers for his petulant and petty fued with Jim Sterling as well as the Epic stuff (and a long list of other things like sacking the Claptrap fella etc etc), it totally wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of them pan the game in show of solidarity with their journo mate and because of Pitchfords general bellendery. It’s amazing how a view of a specific person can taint your perspective, and a lot of folks will talk trash about the BL games based on nothing other than they hate the guy at the top of the food chain. He really doesn’t do the series any favours with some of the stuff he does and says, dude needs to keep quiet and in the background, much like Peter Molyineux should have done before he totalled Fable with his constant BS.

Edit - I’ll add the only reviewers I take with any real credibility are the guys at Gamecentral, they tend to get things spot on, but even they pan some games I’ve loved and they have a real love affair with Nintendo so always overrate their games, so although I’ll take their reviews on board if they give something I’ve not really heard of (for instance they sang the praises of Celeste which I’d never have bought myself but I did, and adored it) but, I’ll also ignore certain reviews as they seem to not get certain genres at all, they crucified Mass Effect andromeda, and I really enjoyed it for all its flaws.

PC gamer giving BL3 a 63 stinks of an ulterior motive for me, is he still butthurt it’s not on Steam perhaps? Or is he doing that thing where they want their review to get all the attention so deliberately give some obtuse review that doesn’t tally with all the others? (Jim Sterling gets another mention as he does this A LOT) If you see 10 reviews all giving a 8/9 and then one giving a 63, you’ll likely go read the 63, and hey presto, some garbage review site gets all the hits.


Exactly. I mean, maybe he really just doesn’t like the game, but his job is to asses the game’s qualities. Clearly, the quality lies somewhere between 80 and 90. Personally i think that’s amazing for BL3, especially for BL3 since it focusses on the gaming element that it is known for and good at, and not so much on what’s trendy or whatever. Whoever reviewed it just didn’t do his job, and let his personal taste stand in the way of a fair review, or worse, just for the clicks.

1 Like

Well most of the reviews I have read all seem to say similar things. Mainly that the story is funny, but not quite as good as BL2, and the combat is great, but the bosses are lacking both in fun and being unique.

PCGamer basically said the same thing as those people, they simply came down harder on the story. Story according to them was full of Austin Power jokes, which is fine as I love the series, but at the same time they said combat was fun but the bosses were lousy for the most part.

We’ll see, but I could see PCGamer’s review being 100% accurate, but maybe they just focused more on the story then we think they should. To me the story is the least important for the most part, once you play through once you know the story and it doesn’t really matter. Combat mechanics and bosses though, those are important for longevity as well as loot.

Everyone said the loot was good and everyone seemed to like the combat mechanics, but a lot of people have being less than thrilled for the bosses so we’ll see.

1 Like