Please don't let micro transactions or loot boxes ruin borderlands 3

So Take 2 recently made a statement that they expect to include micro transactions in all their games for the foreseable future. Now 2K isn’t technically take two but it is a child company of theirs and borderlands is published by 2k…

does this mean they are expecting to put microtransactions in borderlands 3? I am certain this would be a mistake as this game above all others is about LOOT and the acquisition of such. That might sound like the perfect fit for lootboxes but it isn’t. If your game is already about collecting loot and you can just pay to skip it…what would that do to the sheer joy of finding a legendary? ruin it.

Even if you never paid for any loot boxes in borderlands 3 the knowledge that you COULD or that other people were not impressed with their farming because they just paid a few bucks and got the stuff would hollow the entire experience.

Don’t do it randy…even if 2K tries to pressure you into it.


I agree. In theory I wouldn’t care too much if they did it just for skins or something, but leave the core game alone.


@MentalMars recently did a video on this topic, based on something said by Randy Pitchford.


Yeah, I’m against the idea of paying for loot, I think. Purchasing skins is fine, especially if they are part of dlc.

Basically happy for gbx to continue with what they’ve been doing in Borderlands already.


This one goes on for 12 tweets:

Currently microtransactions have bad reputation because of some bad (lootbox) practices.
There is nothing wrong with microtransactions Borderlands 2 had a lot. However the DLC you paid a small amount for gave you something that adds value for you. As long as developers add content that brings value to there customers there is nothing wrong with that. Yes we are all against pay 2 win and locking the game behind a paywall in order to finish the game.


Also, phase shifted to gearbox talk.

1 Like

Agreed. This would kill one of the major fun factors of playing Borderlands, the loot hunt!


So the question becomes…

If microtransactions and loot boxes are the only ways Borderlands 3 can legally get published under 2K…
Do you accept the microtransactions just to have the game released… or do you oppose the release of the game on principle?

1 Like

If they do add microtransactions, I hope they can get away with only having a store for player skins (supremacy packs and all that stuff).

Also no paid crates/cases please :worried:

1 Like

Honestly a lot of other games are doing this and i cant help but rage…but hopefully gearbox wont go down the same road

1 Like

I don’t mind them selling skins like the did with BL2, and don’t put skins in loot boxes either. When we go to a shop to buy clothes we don’t go the assistant, hand over cash and have them go out the back, grab a box, open it and find out that we’ve just bought the pink jeans with orange polkadots or something.

If they have loot behind paid MT loot boxes, then I simply won’t buy the game, I’m sure I’ll find something else to do with my time and money that doesn’t including buy the CEO of 2k another sports car or additional wing on the mansion.

I’ve got no problem buy content pack dlc such as Captain scarlet, Torgue etc. Hell I buy Paradox games such as CK2 and Stellaris and there model consists of 5+ years of support with content packs every 6 months or so.

As long as it isn’t weapons and as long as the purchase items can be obtained through gameplay I am ok with it just as long as its implementation is minor to the entire experience.

I will tell you what if micro transactions become like they are in the mobile market (pay to play) I will stop buying video games.


I already dont like paying for xbox live so im near my limit


I believe they also have a contract that says it has to be released under 2K. And a contract that says they have to make BL3. And since 2K is the publisher they have the ultimate final say, since they’re the one providing the funding. And after Battleborn, 2K is likely riding GBX’s ass high and low to get the lost money back.

Either way, I see this as becoming loot boxes, XP boosters, drop rate boosters, ect. And looking at NBA 2K18… yeah, I have no hope for BL3 at all.


The only thing that will stop me from buying BL3 is if it’s online only. I love the BL series far too much to get addicted to it knowing it will end eventually (when the servers are shut down).


Man, lootbox roulette has turned into the new boogie man of video games. As someone only interested in single-player and co-op campaigns, I still cant envision a microtransaction that I would care about. Note the logical fallacy here: this doesn’t mean there isn’t one, but I’ve yet to hear about one that would actually ruin a game for me.

One of the arguments I see often is that having the option to purchase loot would ruin the game. Why wouldn’t you just take the option to farm and not purchase something? If someone else was purchasing their loot, what difference would it make in your game if it came with a receipt or off the body of a dead enemy? Even if they brought it into your game for some co-op… does it make a difference? You can still farm for loot however you see fit.

For whom? I, for one, enjoy using the weapons more than trying to acquire them. If I had the option to buy them, I might take it so I could get on with the combat (which is what I’m after in the game more than acquiring loot).

Yeah… I’m almost certain I’ll love it, but an online-only option would kill it for me too.


Microtransactions at their core are not really the issue for most people, its typically when microtransactions become focused on so heavily by devs/publishers to the point where they seem (or are) prioritized over actual content or updates. See Battleborn’s last update, where we got little gameplay/map/character changes but ~70 skins. Also see Payday 2’s 2015 Crimefest, where they introduced a loot box based market update in a game already bloated with DLC, during a time where the community was supposed to be ‘rewarded’.

I could care less how people get their items in games, especially in single player stuff, but I do care when gameplay and content are compromised for the sake of microtransactions.

For clarity’s sake, this is not an accusation or attack on any specific developer nor insinuating that GBX/2k/whatever goblin delivers messages between them will focus on MTs in BL3.


In other words does the game die a hero or live long enough to see it become the villain?

I’d say if it pushed that hard for micro transactions I won’t oppose the release but I’ll only buy it pre owned so 2K doesn’t get a dime from me.

But this also raises the question of “what other changes will come with it?” Will they nerf drop rates across the board to incentivize the loot boxes? Because that would be a crock in my opinion.

Similar to the point raised by @Whitethroat

I agree, I’d refuse to touch it if it were online only. Borderlands was how me and some of the guys in my shop passed time on deployment.


It would be bad form because they sacrificed the integrity of the game for cash sales.

So let’s say they didn’t change the drop rates from BL2 to BL3, but BL3 came with the option to buy a crate (play a slot machine, whatever mechanism you like) with slightly higher odds of some rare gear. The core game of BL3 remains as it was originally designed, and there’s just an option to buy these better loot crates. Would that be a deal breaker? What if you could just flat out buy one of the pieces of gear and were given a choice between farming or purchasing? Does the availability of this choice make one of the options worse?

Would we even know if the drop rates had been altered to accommodate the loot crate economy? I think the drop rates of the highest-end gear in BL2 are atrocious, so let’s say they improved the odds for BL3 and still offered crates with better odds, would that make the availability of the loot crates acceptable?

1 Like

I could see something like a ‘find rare items’ purchasable temporary item happening if BL3 does go down this route.

Really not sure what I think about that.