Overwatch Versus Battleborn Comparison

Battleborn Battleborn General Discussion
#13

the “garage programmer” days are over man. its huge teams with committee decision making processes. middle managers in giant corporate infrastructures play it safe ; everyone watches their competition carefully ; everyone copies their competition.

hell they hire employees from the competition… half of Blizzard’s RTS team is from C&C… 10% is from Relic’s CoH team…etc etc

Dustin Browder – RA2 ; David Kim – CoH1 ; Greg Black – RA3 and C&C3

and that’s just off the top of my head.

The SC2 Banshee is a C&C3 Orca.
The SC2 Hellion is a C&C3 Raider Buggy.

1 Like
#14

Heck, to me Toby has a lot in common with Gunther from Adventure Time but I suspect it has something to do with with evil penguins being funny and Winston (from Overwatch) really feeling like Beast from X-Men (mostly 90s cartoon).

#15

Blizzard games take 4+ years to make. An employee from say 2010 to 2014 could’ve left Blizzard and been hired by Gearbox. The guy is probably still friends with some guys working on Overwatch.

and Bam… now everything happening at both companies is 1st learned about by their competition.

#16

While I’m sure Overwatch will be stunning (we all know what happens to Blizzard games that aren’t considered stunning…) it was the voice they used for the Tracer that cemented my decision to stick with Battleborn.

Also, couch co-op!

#17

The problem with Overwatch is that a lot of its trailers depict this epic story and lore, but the game itself has no story mode what so ever.

5 Likes
#18

…you should hear her voice in spain spanish…

1 Like
#19

Yes! At least someone understands! This game is NOT worth 60$. Why should console players be force to pay 60$ to play this game? All the content that contains the origin edition is useless for console players.

Heroes of the Storm: Tracer Hero - Useless for console

World of Warcraft: Baby Winston Pet - Useless for console

StarCraft II: Portraits - Useless for console

Hearthstone: card back - Useless for console

Diablo III: Mercy Wings - Can be use with console (But let’s be honest, Who still plays that game in console?)

And last but not least, 5 skins. They want you to pay 20$ extra for 5 skins and a pair of wings!?! I like Overwatch but there’s literally NO WAY I’m paying 60$ for it. The game doesn’t have a single player campaign and only two modes for multiplayer.

3 Likes
#20

but don’t dare say that outside the forums, they’ll flame you twice for that.

3 Likes
#21

Yeah, i still get extremely hateful comments from YouTube… Although, some console players agree with me.

1 Like
#22

Exactly. I’ve seen this video before and I think it makes the best case for both games. While I do enjoy the occasional pvp free-for-all I get tired of them quickly as there’s a limit as to what you can do. I’ve always enjoyed games like Warframe or MMO’s, that feel of being able to better yourself as you play. Even if you choose to main a single character in Battleborn, the gear, helix, and buildable systems still give a large amount of complexity to master and goes far more in depth. And if you want to master all the characters then you have a ton of content available to you, before you even get into the story mode.

3 Likes
#23

The only thing I can really say is that I find the Overwatch open beta situation hilarious. The open beta starts on May 3rd with a preorder and 5th without. Battleborn is released on the third… the first real chance I have to see if Overwatch is worth it will be dedicated to playing the game I already know was worth it.

6 Likes
#24

Because Microsoft and Sony dictate the prices they’ll allow games made for their systems to be sold at. I’m sure Blizzard would rather sell OW at the lower price point, but they can’t if they want to sell it on the consoles.

#25

Word, yo

1 Like
#26

Gearbox is better then Blizzard anyday.
Then again both Gearbox and Blizzard are Game producer’s so called Real Estate providers.
Neither one is better or worst because Gearbox or Blizzard don’t produce games they sell them on behalf of game companys that’s all.
Or they are the middle guy like a Game producers shop that sell to public shops to sell to consumers.
EA is another good example of this!

#27

Mostly agreed.
But GBX is indeed a studio producing the games, while their “real estate provider” is 2K as far I know. (Same case as Bioware made MassEffect, while EA was their marketing company - good point there!)
So replace “Gearbox” with “2K” in your post and you are definately right.

#28

How interesting to read.
I remember going to Gearboxsoftware website ages ago and they had 20 or 30 games that they do bissness with. I did not know Gearbox was there own game production company.
Thanks for the Correction.

1 Like
#29

Nya, don´t take my words to be 100% true, I´m not completely familiar with their inner buissness structure^^
As far as I know they do both, producing own games as well as publishing others. Its hard to keep track on that.

#30

I’m not gonna lie, I had the sneaky suspicion that Sony and Microsoft were behind it. Overall, it’s bull and I’m not paying for it. There’s obviously going to be people who will, so I guess Microsoft and Sony win…

#31

All three console manufactures have a lock on their consoles. If you’re a developer and you want to make a console game, you have to play by their rules, which include what type of content your game can contain and what price you have to sell it at.

GBX develops games, it’s 2k that does the publishing end, which includes marketing and getting the games into the hands of the distributors.

#32

Gearbox published Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak. So they are a publisher as well as a developer.