I loved so many parts of BL3 but at the end of the day I feel cheated

I mean, that’s not what I was getting at, but why not? :sweat_smile:

A game can be objectively bad on mostly technical qualities. BL3 performed poorly at launch, I don’t think there are many here who’d deny that. I certainly don’t - I complained about performance issues for ages.

But when it comes to the content of a game . . . that can be wildly subjective. Some aspects can be less popular than others (I still hate Slag in BL2, for example), but people would still shout if it were removed, nine years on (or changed, or replaced, or whatever. It would fundamentally change an entertainment product that people have gotten used to). We see that with BL3 and M2.0 (and other things).

Was M1.0 bad? Not . . . really? I mean I didn’t really care for it and I appreciate M2.0 much more, but I also understand the scaling issues that M2.0 introduced and how that can affect other players more than it does me. But, likewise, I’d never want to return to M1.0. Ever. Just like I can’t really return to BL2 because how badly Slag (in UVHM obviously) is aging for me.

tl;dr: “it’s complicated”

1 Like

I don’t get you Gorbles. I’ve seen some of your posts and you seem pretty unhappy with the game. I don’t get why you’re defending it. Bl3 sold 10m copies. Lets say bl3 has just as many players on egs as on steam, which brings the total number of concurrent players to 10k. Of course, a lot of players don’t play daily so it’s reasonable to assume that monthly players is something like 50-100k. That’s 1% of all players that bought the game still play it. Yes, it is abysmal.
It’s been only two years. That’s not a whole lot and player count is pretty bad. Borderlands 2 has quite a lot of players for a game that’s a decade old. I think borderlands 3 will not endure the test of time like borderlands 2 has.
Of course that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy the game. The argument started from people preferences on content and has since then derailed. My calculations above prove my previous point regarding content preferences because if ‘a lot’ of people (as someone said above) liked bl3 for role playing, retention wouldn’t be so low.

1 Like

I love Borderlands 3. The fact I’ve had difficulties with it is something I don’t disguise, half so I get to laugh when people call me a white knight (which . . . happens, sadly), and half because it’s important and I want the issues fixed.

But that doesn’t change the fact I love the game, I’ve gotten fantastic value for my money, and even with that I realise that doesn’t necessarily mean others do. It’s an incredibly personal metric.

All games experience the drop-off you’re describing. If you’re going to claim BL3’s retention is uniquely abysmal, you need to actually prove it. Two years is not a short amount of time for a video game. Let’s have a look at what else was released in 2019:

  • Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order - ~480 playing the game currently on Steam. This game was not a failure by any measurable metric.
  • Sekiro - ~4,300 playing currently. This game was an outstanding success by popular metrics. And yet it’s active player count (on PC, on Steam) is comparable to BL3’s.
  • Disco Elysium - ~530 playing currently. Again, another huge success story.

There are more, I just went for the most popular ones. A standout example is Red Dead Redemption 2 - it still has ~14,000 players on Steam at the moment. Obviously that’s an example of fantastic retention. But I hope the other examples I’ve given demonstrate that BL3 is by no means abysmal.

I guess you’re right here. I see borderlands 3 quite expensive for the enjoyment it provided. Hell, I got a lot more enjoyment from free games (path of exile - played it for 5k hours, paid like 10-20 bucks for some qol but that’s it). I guess I have been spoiled by other games and this format of triple A pricing feels a bit too much. Games didn’t use to be this expensive.

Borderlands 3 retention is abysmal, I never said it is unique. I proved it by reporting it to its own numbers over the years.

Games that are meant to be played once (which have a story and that’s it) are different. I wouldn’t pick at retention for those games because they’re a different genre. However, borderlands 3 is meant to be replayed. Having low retention means it fails at what it does, which makes it a bad game.

Btw, never said you’re a white knight, you said it yourself :smiley:

1 Like

Well, a few points in order to hopefully wrap up the tangent. I’ll try to keep it quick!

  1. Games have frequently been this expensive, and in the early (actually early) days of video games, were even more expensive. Pokemon Red (and that’s not even “actually early” in terms of video games) set me back £30 in 1998. That’s about £54 nowadays.
  2. This doesn’t mean that BL3 was good value for you. I completely respect that you didn’t find it worth the cost.
  3. If Borderlands 3’s retention is arguably abysmal, but other popular and incredibly successful games are also abysmal, then it’s nothing worth mentioning.
  4. Assuming that the games I mentioned are only worth playing once kinda really shows you don’t know what the games are. NieR in particular has multiple endings and to that end, multiple playthroughs are a part of it.
  5. I never called myself a white knight either. Well, not recently. But relax - I wasn’t saying you were either :smiley:

tl;dr: the thing you’re criticised BL3 for isn’t a fair criticism, as evidenced by comparisons to multiple other games. You then just this as justification to call it a bad game, and I disagree. That’s all!

1 Like

crazy frog racer ?


Crazy Frog Arcade Racer is probably dangerous enough to be classified as a controlled substance, for it will surely drive anyone who plays it long enough into the throes of insanity, left holding 20 minute conversations with houseplants and trying to iron French toast “just to get the wrinkles out.” Despite not looking like the ocular abortion that one would expect, I still wouldn’t even wish it upon my worst enemy. If you play it, you clearly hate yourself. And freedom. And puppies.


I don’t understand the points of some people here in this thread, they imply that there is lesser physical endgame “content” (raids, gauntlets etc.) in game compared to bl2 but they say “you have to create your own endgame, there are many things to do” which is not something the game provides, you make it.

I’m exaggerating but its like saying COD single player has replayibilty because you can do a pistol only challenge if you like.

1 Like

The real endgame is pages and pages of forum pointless argument :popcorn:


True :wink: though i still enjoy BL2 over 3, only because of the challenge (3 improved a lot of things but it’s just… So easy it’s boring)

And it’s pretty hard to make it difficult :joy::joy::joy:

GTD is somewhat the difficulty i want (but in time even that would get to easy)

Oh well, we’ll see what the future holds

I think I just miss the extra characters as dlc. Trying to tackle the game with new characters with new mechanics was what kept me playing. It also made me appreciate the base game characters even more.

Also the vermiverous fight was much more satisfying in 2, because the fight happened organically. You had to force him to spawn, which was pretty cool. I’ve never been a fan of paying eridium to farm.

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight…?

That’s what keeps me coming back… to the forum… :rofl:

1 Like

haha…on that note the multiplayer actually works here and the forum has yet to crash my system so it has that going for it as well.


And endless co-op opportunities as well! :grin:

1 Like