I fear for this game's future

Battleborn Battleborn General Discussion
#85

Hopefully overtime we get more people as the game grows though :slight_smile:

#86

This was a really detailed comment but not all of the battleborn community are borderlands fans and mature. I never played borderlands, maybe because I didn’t like it at a friends house. Though I’m really excited for battleborn. BTW would you care to maybe give your opinions on the benedict topic. Thanks

#87

Jesus, man, calm down. Let me explain[quote=“StargirioGR, post:84, topic:1328438”]
How can such a standard practice in gaming be considered “risky”?
[/quote]

It isn’t risky for the company, but rather the consumer. Hell, it’s considered by many to actually be anti-consumer. Here’s a video by TotalBiscuit explaining it in detail, better than I ever could. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mf5Uj4XIT1Y

I’ll admit, I blew this problem out of proportion. However, as stated early in the thread, while it isn’t an end all indicator, the lack of it is something to raise an eyebrow at, considering the internet is, well, the internet.

Being a really good game isn’t enough in today’s market. Two examples are Guns of Icarus and Monday Night Combat. Both of them are damn solid games, being loads of fun.

MNC is dead and GoI holds about 300 players average.

Get the picture.

A considerable amount of games that fit that description are arriving now, actually. Along with Battleborn and Overwatch, there’s Paladins, Ginormous (I can’t spell words), and others I can’t quite remember, but I know are there.

I’ve heard a considerable amount of people say that they look like TF2 ripoffs. Any class-based shooter with a stylized theme runs that gambit, no matter how different from TF2 it might be. The only way around it is to have a damn fine marketing campaign to differentiate itself from TF2.

Plus, there’s also the fact that Battleborn has just about no commercials or ads airing, and if they are, they’re not showing up for me. So, there’s that.

#88

Truth is that there are lot of pretty similar games incoming…

But Battleborn will be the first one which hits the market. That is very important fact and they should try their best to get advantage from this.

There is nothing like Battleborn ATM, I can’t played TF2, it’s just one ugly ancient game.

Also they should sell some beta access / founder’s packs or whatever does it call. Next week I am going to buy founder’s pack to other similar game, just because I finally want to play something fresh.

Also, other companies are already aggresively fighting against Gearbox (open beta date versus BB’s launch) and believe me, they know what they’re doing.

For me, it just does not seem that they’re doing maximum for the game (mabye they are too confident about PS4 sales ? who knows )

1 Like
#89

I just don’t agree. I will leave issues 1 and 2 slip by since I believe they have nothing to do with the game’s future and I will mostly talk about issues 3 and 4.

Well, 3, I don’t agree at all. How can you compare the future of a AAA three-year long production-cycle game, which is Battleborn, to crowdfunded Indie B titles? If I am not mistaked the initial funding for Guns of Icarus was less than 50k dollars? The amount of money used to create Battleborn and the amount of money there is to back it once it is released must be at least twentyfold if not thirtyfold or fortyfold. I am pretty sure Gearbox has utilised this money, not only to make the game great, but also to hire marketing analysts and economists to continue supporting the game’s marketing once the game is out. MNC was the first game created 6 years ago by a company named… Uber (?) Entertainment and Guns of Icarus was the second game by a company whose next big project idea is a game about hamsters called Hamsterdam. If you want to compare these games to Battleborn and these companies to Gearbox, you are free to do so. I just feel that there is a whole different playing field here and we shouldn’t judge Battleborn’s chances of success based on the commercial lives of these games. In this playing field, being good can actually give you a nice chunk of the market and help you make some money.

Which brings us to 4. So, there are no “Hero Shooters” on the market yet, but still people claim that there is going to be an abundance of them until the end of the year and therefore, Battleborn will have to face a lot of competition. First of all, the term “Hero Shooter” is nothing but a marketing gimmick to describe First Person Shooters with RPG and MOBA elements. Secondly, what are the chances that someone who wants to play a “Hero Shooter” with their friends in 2016 actually say “Hey, this AAA and well polished X game from this renown publisher is a Team Fortress 2 clone. I am going to play Team Fortress 2 with my friends instead of game X”.You don’t have to differentiate your game from TF2. Noone’s going to choose TF2 over Battleborn or Overwatch. TF2 is an outdated PC exclusive (as far as the updates go) with bad visuals, a grotesque artstyle and ancient shooting mechanics. TF2 is no competition for Battleborn. And neither are the rest of the B class “Hero Shooter” games that come out this year. Also, the fact that the game has a really strong competitor does not mean that it is going to be dead on arrival. Take the MOBA genre for example: LoL comes out first and takes most of the playerbase along with it. Then along come DotA2 and HotS and they still manage to have a strong playerbase and coexist along with LoL. Why can’t OW and BB coexist together? Why does one of them have to die for the other one to live? Sure, the market for these games is much much smaller than the market for MOBAs, but still, marginwise, it is possible. For one, Gearbox has years of experience with the shooter genre, while ΟW is Blizzard’s first FP game. Unless, of course, they got people from Activision to help them with the project… anyway, it’s a complicated matter. What I want to say is that, even if OW ends up on top, which is questionable, considering the fact that BB comes out first in a time when there are no good games at all to play on a console, BB can still flourish and perhaps outlive OW.

#90

While I see the logic in your post, there’s one thing you don’t seem to understand.

Mainly, DotA, LoL, and HotS prove my point.

LoL has ~11m players at its peak.

DotA has ~1m(?) players at its peak.

While they haven’t released any official numbers, it’s speculated that HotS has 200k players AT ITS PEAK. In fact, future speculation lead people to believe that Blizzard is actively losing money on HotS. They’re pouring more money into it than their getting out.

So, I disagree with the notion that they can coexist for that reason.

1 Like
#91

I feel like this sums up any game that’s coming out (especially with a beta option):

Play the game. Get your friends to play the game.
Do you like the game? Do you want other people to play the game?

Buy the game. Get your friends to buy the game. Talk about how much fun you have with the game.
Play the game.

Still playing the game? New fresh DLC? Buy DLC.
Play DLC.

2 Likes
#92

Indeed, when it comes to multiplayer, it seems a game either succeeds or crumbles due to a snowball effect of sorts. Players want to be in a thriving community that has lots of opponents, a lot of support, big events, etc. So, naturally, they go to the existing thriving communities, which get even bigger. Success breeds success, as seen with League of Legends and, to a lesser extent, Dota 2.

The opposite occurs with games that, for whatever reason, fail to capture market share. They wither and die, some slowly, some very, very quickly (see: the corpses of failed MOBAs from the past two or three years, like Strife, Dawngate, Sins of a Dark Age and many more). If a game looks like it is failing, or even not succeeding tremendously, players avoid it. The reasons are myriad, but I think a main one is not wanting to invest the time and effort in a game that may not last. If I were to play League of Legends and devote myself fully to it, I could be pretty assured that it will still be here in another five years for me to continue to enjoy. But most other MOBAs? I might end up in a game that dead ends and either closes or no longer is supported.

It is not just MOBAs, either. A lot of developers that used to include multiplayer in their games by default don’t because they know that if you are, for example, a shooter and not Call of Duty, there may be no point at all. You end up developing a game mode that cannot sustain itself so you may as well just focus on the campaign, like Wolfenstein: The New Order did (to great effect).

I definitely do think that in the multiplayer space there are a finite number of games that can succeed and thrive for years. I don’t know how many that will be in the “hero shooter” genre, as loosely defined as that is, but already games like Gigantic are in trouble, and based on what I am reading and watching, Paragon’s outlook is not super bright, either. That is not to say I am worried about Battleborn - I am just a player and have no stake in it and will enjoy my time, regardless - but I am realistic about the fact that it may not capture the player base it needs to exist as a supported game for years. Fortunately, since it is not F2P, regardless of how it fares it should be online for years, and even after that they could patch in offline play for single-player mission runs.

1 Like
#93

Continuing the discussion from I fear for this game's future:

  1. So, basically, you like to watch TotalBiscuit videos and just repeat his opinions on things without actually understanding them? The video you posted is more about TotalBiscuit’s issue with not letting information out about how good or bad the game is so that they can take money for pre-orders. This doesn’t seem to be an issue here because Gearbox is letting people play and stream the game before release. There is a lot of information and quite a few of us have played the game. I feel confident with my preorder because I enjoyed the CTT and every video I have seen since has basically said the game got WAY better. Bringing up Alien: Colonel Marines is a bit of a ■■■■■■ thing to do as I feel the issue with the preorder was more on the Publisher (SEGA) and completely doesn’t apply here.

  2. Yeah you did. You tried to make an issue over something that WASN’T an issue! Someone draw this guy Phoebe’s boobs already so he can move on in his life.

  3. Monday Night Combat was okay, but it had very little combat and just wasn’t polished enough. Changing to the Free to Play model with the next iteration only hurt the game. Guns of Icarus is a very niche market type of game. It’s not accessible and while it may be good at what it does, what it does isn’t appealing to a large scale audience. Backed by the fact that neither company was what you would consider large, it’s amazing they both did as well as they did in today’s market with no publisher.

  4. For someone who is quick to post a TotalBiscuit video to avoid having to iterate what you are thinking (because they seem to be TB’s thoughts), you seem to be ignoring TotalBiscuit’s Thoughts on Battleborn. This game is not the same as Overwatch except that there are multiple characters and first person shooters. Blizzard humor vs Gearbox humor are very different. The stories are very different. The fact that Battleborn presents the story with a full campaign and Overwatch lets you see videos occasionally are very different presentations. The game modes are very different. The games are just, get over it already, very different. No other AAA title coming out is close to what Battleborn is and Gearbox may not be the titan that Blizzard is, but it has a large enough following to keep Battleborn alive and build it into a competitive eSport. Overwatch just doesn’t seem to have the depth to become a competitor in the eSport market.

1 Like
#94

You seem to be confused. At no point did I say Battleborn and Overwatch were the same. Same genre, maybe, but not the same.

The problem with marketing is that you need to make sure your game is telegraphed as different. That was the point I was attempting to make.

I admitted that I probably over-blew the problem. However, regardless of everything, I still find the lack of ‘art’ to warrant at least one raised eyebrow, considering the internet is, well, the internet.

On a side note, if someone was to actually do that, my eyebrow would… probably still remain raised, due to the fact that it was only brought about by me stating that the lack is concerning.

#96

Take it as you may. I care not what you do, especially behind closed doors.

#98

It’s just occurred to me that we’ve been talking about porn for half of this thread, and the moderators haven’t taken notice.

Life is strange, innit?

#100

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I think side-boob is the most PG12 covers.

#102

Well, I finally got a YouTube video with an add plastered on the bottom, so that’s done with.

1 Like
#104

Just a reminder folks:

Talk about games, not other forum users, k?

1 Like
#105

What if talking about other users happens to be about games?

HMMMMMMMM?

#106

If you have any queries, or find that suggestion hard to follow, please pm me.

This forum is for discussing games, not other forum users. So: don’t talk about them.

1 Like
#107

Now, my fears have shifted to the PC version. Mainly, I don’t think it will have a strong playerbase there. I’ve heard many people that are going to get the PS4 version, but not PC.

If Battleborn becomes cross-platform, these fears will be sated.

1 Like
#108

Looking at this thread, Steam and PS4 users appear to be fairly balanced. The steam forums have been alive and well, the playerbase seems evenly spread from what I’ve seen.

As for cross platform, it won’t be there at release but I read an interview where a developer (Randy? Was it Randy? Can’t remember) mentioned they’d like to keep the possibility open in the future. So it’s a maybe for that :slight_smile:

#110

It feels dead on arrival. It plays like ass, it’s boring as hell, and is simply not fun.