Designers's Cut should not show up in game if you do not own it

Thanks for the insightful response, appreciated. I am just looking at things from the view of a customer and clearly don’t take everything into consideration at times. With that said though my biggest complaint is that BL3 was released in pretty bad shape and it seems GBX has been in catch-up the whole time. I know that every little thing the community has asked to be fixed is not attainable or realistic but things as matchmaking, console performance, split screen, mayhem could be addressed. Personally I think the community would be fine if we just got more information than the standard cut and paste answers we typically get. GBX certainly has no issues putting out road maps for paid content so why not one for fixes?

My comments on the gears subject was basically a counter point I made with CharmlessBee regarding gear that is showing up for people that didn’t get the latest DLC basically. I know it seemed when I played I spent more time going through all the legendary (which is a lot) items that dropped comparing stats and everything else was pretty much useless.

There are a coupla problems here, and they’re a part of the scene these days. I’ll try and keep this short (I’m bad at this).

Problem #1 is communication with fans has changed, possibly permanently. Or at least for the forseeable future. I can’t speak for Gearbox in particular, but most developers have had to significantly change how they interact with their fanbase. Sometimes this comes from the publisher, sometimes this comes from a changing relationship with consumers (the fans, but consumers are the important part here. Not all consumers are necessarily fans). This leads to approaches like we see here - infrequent patch note threads where the developer representative replies only in that thread, and seldom elsewhere.

Does this change in direction suck? Yeah. And it isn’t always for a good reason. But I have also seen good reasons, myself. It’s complicated. And it’s hard to fight the fan perception that they’re losing out.

Problem #2 is fixes don’t make money. I mean, they do, but it’s very dependent on the timeframe. A game that runs better sells better. But that’s increasingly hard to justify the further from release the game is. Especially if there’s a new game out (like Godfall) that would benefit better from resource allocation.

This doesn’t mean they’re not going to fix anything. I strongly believe that they are (but I’m also still a fan of the game, so I’m very much glass-half-full). But it means that they’re not going to commit to timeframes publicly. Again, you have no way of knowing, and that hurts you.

tl;dr: the lack of communication is a sore point, but one that is unlikely to be resolved as it’s likely a combination of corporate policy (from the publisher often, but sometimes from management in the developer company) and a lack of available resource to commit to a timeline. It sucks for everyone, consumers and Gearbox alike, in my opinion.

3 Likes

Also, i think M2.0 came a bit to late to attract new players and on top of that they received so much backlash that i got the feeling they just gave up because of that (having the feeling nothing they do would be good enough? Or well, i see their CEO blaming the player other then his own bad decisions)

Hopefully these games will serve as an example for the future.
At least the core game should be solid, which for BL3 wasn’t so and for SP it was so bugged (haven’t played it) i get the feeling the devs also didn’t test their product

2 Likes

There’s more than one backlash m2.0 was a bad idea but don’t forget the backlash about Ava being the future of borderlands that’s chasing players away .

2 Likes