Should they give Borderlands MMO a real try?


(Legendary Lunatic) #61

Therein lies the problem. The main games would suffer because resources would then be spread thin. Too much of this multiplayer nonsense these days.


(Jakobs, now and forever.) #62

There are plenty of games out there that are either heavily leaning towards multiplayer, or are nothing but multiplayer. I want Borderlands to not turn into such a game, and most definitely not require an online-- throws up --connection in order to be played.

Elder Scrolls blew out their own kneecaps with making an MMO game. I would rather Gearbox stay away from that field of play as I had mentioned earlier in the thread.


(Legendary Lunatic) #63

I agree with all of this.


(The RAbbi) #64

Agreed in full, and it’s the ONLY reason I didn’t preorder BB after enjoying CTT and OB.

That said, there’s a LOT of potential for this IP in an MMO. And I feel this dreadful hunch that BL3, like BB, will be heavily serverside and will require a connection to play. It’s how things have been going in the industry, and GBX just ain’t big enough to set the trend against the giants like UbiShaft and Blizzard. It doesn’t help that TPS kinda tanked, and it’s therefore been quite a while since the last really successful Borderlands title; the IP is stagnant.

I think about times I was running away from rabid skags in Three Horns, just below the Happy Pig, and wishing I had some backup since I couldn’t kill one outright in a single phaselock (even with Ruin). And my recent experiences with WildStar become relevant. Last night after the daily reset party, I was leveling up my esper. She was 23, doing lvl 26 quests with a gear level average of about 21. 1-v-3’ing Ikthians at a 3-4 level disadvantage can be tough. But BEHOLD! Another esper was also working through those quests for our Protostar overlords (erm, benefactors)! We ran through it together, and it went pretty smoothly. Didn’t form a group. No friend requests or party invites. Did the thing while we overlapped, then moved on; helped get my toon to level 24, so that’s another big plus.

I couldn’t do that in any BL game. Some folks want that. I can take it or leave it.

I’d hope there’s some solution that would allow any of us to progress offline (lest we lose the Aussies for good) while also allowing meaningful MP interaction out in the world. Short that, yeah, I’d prefer to stick to the old formula. But if anyone, I’d soonest trust GBX to solve the problem. No other competent and significant developer has my trust any more.

Whatever. Just bring on the next BL game, even if it means putting a fork in BB.


(Legendary Lunatic) #65

Battleborn is dead anyway, even if they don’t admit it. Gearbox at this stage will probably turn into one of those weird families who talk about their ‘special’ child who nobody ever sees, and that’s because they tuck his rotting corpse into bed every night.

I just hope to… er… the Flakker that they don’t try and make Borderlands 3 like that. I want Borderlands to stay Borderlands. I don’t want it to become Borderworlds, a half-assed attempt at MMO that will never be popular and as such will result in the death of the franchise.


(The RAbbi) #66

Yeah, and I don’t disagree. But the whole thing is tricky.

Say BL3 turns out to be just like BL2, except with new characters/npcs/story/setting. Many will complain that it’s just reskinned BL2 with an engine update; GBX phoned it in.

So there’s an expectation that they’re gonna do something new/different. BL2 had a number of significant changes and new features from BL1. BAR, reworked loot, overhauled relics, overhauled elemental damage/resistances, etc. (Getting rid of that tech pool nonsense was a GREAT idea; most of the rest didn’t seem to need changed.) UVHM. Lots of stuff. Not to mention, drop-in-drop-out multiplayer with dynamic scaling based on party size.

If you count TPS (like I do), they added oz kits, lasers, buttslams, single-player vehicles, grinders, etc.

There’s gonna be something new in BL3. A LOT new, probably. If I could have my wish, it’s this: Give me an online/offline setting that I can change on the fly, so I can play any/all content offline solo with ZERO internet connection, or I can run around in the same world online and share that experience with just whoever happens to be there.

That’s asking a lot though. And my heart tells me that GBX is gonna forcefeed us this always-connected nonsense, smiling about ‘how well it worked’ in Battleborn.

And then there’ll be NO major game developer left that I can trust.


(Legendary Lunatic) #67

This is basically what BL2 and TPS is. If that’s what they keep i’m happy. I don’t however want forced bs online only elements. If they make it multiplayer only I won’t be buying the game, it’s that simple.


(The RAbbi) #68

Sadly, I’m with you. Forced online-only means I wait for the first -50% sale to buy. That will break my f***ing heart after a couple thousand hours of Borderlands goodness.


(Legendary Lunatic) #69

I can through gritted teeth put up with just requiring a connection but no need to play with others. If I have to. But if it’s forced multiplayer, then no thanks.


(The RAbbi) #70

I seriously don’t see MP-only happening. Look how much free publicity they got us putting up solo raid boss TT videos on YouTube. Look at all the 1Life streams on Twitch (60+ streamers at 3pm EST today for a 5 year old game!), almost all solo. It would be suicidal to ditch solo PvE play.

But I had a problem about this time last year that caused 1200+ ms lag spikes of 3-6 seconds a few times a minute. There is NO real-time online title, MP or not, that can play through that. Battleborn gets unplayable at around 80ms for me. I don’t know how the Aussies manage.

I NEED an offline SP option. Without that, there’s no chance I’ll spend full price on it.


(Meat *tricycle*) #71

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, besides, almost every game, including borderlands, has a large community. However, an MMO of borderlands would rub me in all the wrong ways. I think back to games like The Division, and think “Hey, I like the idea of havens where you can meet folks and assemble a team!” And I do, but having that many people in a shoot and loot/ Farming-based game seems shifty to me. I would be outclassed by those who could afford a season pass, or at least buy the DLC, and I don’t think that’s fair in 4-player mode, let alone a huge gathering. I’d need free access to what other people have, and the option to play alone, as raid-bosses and farming would become a pain with ninja-looters.
That’s my take, anyway :grin:


(The RAbbi) #72

And being able to transition on the fly from solo to COOP was a strength in BL2/TPS. I’d love a haven/hub for just that reason. Having trouble farming a Sham? I’d be glad to help!

Like, say it’s Sanctuary. There’s a second bounty board, call it the Community Board. Give it a simple interface to post help/team requests. Wanna go kill Terramorphous? Need a hand finishing off the Warrior? Feel like getting a 4-man together to crush Fink’s? Post it here. Other vault hunters can check it post their own requests or to accept requests. Requests time out after say 30 minutes, once fulfilled, or upon the requestor logging out, or can be canceled by the requestor.

Try this: At activation, player first chooses (post request) or (browse requests) or (cancel) in the popup. If you choose to POST, another interface comes up. Dropdowns for (type of help) (raid, quest, loot farming, mentoring), then a second one to select which raid boss or quest (from those available in your echo) or character to assist with. Then one for party size (2, 3, 4, or ASAP (short timer after first acceptance). Add a radio button at the end to match only similar-level characters (+/- 2 levels) (same game mode of normal/TVHM/UVHM/OP is a global requirement, though a OP8 character coming into a Normal playthrough could accept a request from a lowbie in Normal). OK or Cancel. Say you throw a reward at those who accept, of maybe +10% XP and/or money and/or a percentage of the value of any loot kept by the poster. Etc. OR poster could offer money/eridium/whatever as a reward. Not sure. Still.

Mentoring would just be general quests/mobs/whatever, and could include higher-level quests on the mentor’s echo (which would be arguably abused for powerleveling, but it’s gonna happen anyhow). It would be focused on matching a higher-level or more experienced player as a mentor with the poster, in the same character. So, a Siren gets ONLY another Siren for a mentor, but may get more than one; the level-matching button will be unavailable to mentoring requests.

Know what I mean? I’m using BL2 as a template here, but it’ll be whatever classes/etc. we get in BL3.

Also, E3 next week right? SO F’ING EXCITE!


(Meat *tricycle*) #73

God, so much more to discuss! I really enjoyed reading this (no sarcasm). If they had a multiplayer mode, like more than just 4 players, and a few varying activities other than farming and stuff, I would be thoroughly impressed. Not just by choosing a new direction for their multiplayer, but if they actually pulled it off well. Also, weapon customization, a bit of a touchy subject, but a good one to discuss. What’re your thoughts???


(The RAbbi) #74

Weapon customization? I’d LIKE to be able to change the sights. And I’m okay with grinders too. I don’t have a feel for where the fans are on allowing us to customize anything that affects weapon stats, though. Some would argue against even allowing sight selection because it DOES take a little away from the PRNG bazillions-of-guns loot thing.

I think we’ve established the 4-player team as a standard here, and it’s a good one to roll with. Best idea here, if it IS gonna go always-online MMO-ish, would be to limit the deviation from other BL titles. Keep it 1PV, 1-4 players, couch coop, entirely solo-able campaign and side quests.

BUT, I’m a little open on this. Some part of me wants to insist that it be just an engine update and new campaign on the BL2 model, because that’s just so awesome. But I’m a realist at heart, and I consider that they may keep leaning on MP and always-online. If they do, I can at least hope that they keep it a minimal impact on gameplay and stick with the core of what made this franchise so great in the first place.


(Meat *tricycle*) #75

That’s a really good way to look at it. I was actually thinking about some kind of DLC, in which you gain OP levels, however, once finished gaining Max OP, you can re-do it with custom weapons and items. The items wouldn’t port over to vanilla game of course, but I do think it’d be cool to see what people create (with limitations, obviously). As to multiplayer, it would be a MUST to have the option of closed-party or single player options. That’s why havens seem like such a good idea to me. If you put a player cap on sanctuary (or something similar) and allow people to interact one-on-one to create a team, I’d be pretty pleased.


(The RAbbi) #76

Yeah, I like the haven idea. And since bounty boards/etc. already exist, we can stick to existing assets.

It occurred to me at the end of TPS that:

  • We’ve pretty much exhausted Pandora for exploration,

  • Our heroes are likely gonna come back at least as NPCs in the next BL, and

  • Sanctuary IS a spaceship after all.

I was thinking then of seeing Sanctuary used to go between different planets, as a mobile base of operations and safe haven (a true sanctuary, safe from the trouble on the planets’ surfaces, in orbit). Would make sense to get your initial quest for each planet (and a few sidequests for various NPCs) in Sanctuary, then FT planetside and get going. Pick up more sides there, as main quest develops. Find this planet’s vault, slay boss, return to Sanctuary, NEXT.

Looks like we MAY be seeing mostly Promethea though. Still no reason we couldn’t have Sanctuary in orbit, as our base for the whole thing. And come to think of it, I bet we see Digistruct Peak as our intro tutorial…


(Meat *tricycle*) #77

Yeah, 100’s of vaults yo! Maybe BL3 will be somewhat like No Man’s Sky, or Mass Effect, or Osiris: New Dawn. I would love to see more space exploration, maybe even customizable space ships?


(The RAbbi) #78

Could be neat, but to me (and I think modt players) BL has always been about the characters and the environment. BL2 especially struck one of those unique balances of scifi and western, and it arrived at a place not unlike Firefly (TV show). Very popular with its cult-like following. Shifting focus to something that fits only one of the two genres (scifi or western) could risk ruining that, and there are plenty of great games already that focus on either one really well.

Even doubling down on vehicles was a little risky, and they were wise to minimize the requirement for vehicles in the core campaign. They ended up being more a means to shorten travel time (or accelerate pearlescent farming in BL2). BL1’s Knoxx DLC was really risky for all the driving we had to do. (Luckily, General Knoxx was such an amazing character that, had the campaign otherwise failed, he could still have carried that DLC. His brief appearances were much appreciated in TPS.)

Speaking of TPS, it had space and spaceships. And it’s probably the least well liked of the three BL games. Maybe that’s just coincidence (okay, almost certainly), but I’d wager that too heavy a scifi hand at the expense of the western one had a part in the TPS disappointment.

So I’m gonna lean on de-emphasizing spaceships here. I wonder if they shouldn’t just leave oz kits and lasers and low/zero gravity to the past and ignore those features, lest they risk invoking some people’s poor feelings about TPS. That alone could have something to do with why we’re seeing Tannis in a third BL title now, and why we’re told there’s at least one character in 3 that’s recognizable from a previous game (likely 2). Back to the winning formula, ESPECIALLY if some other detail HAS to change.

Guess we may find out more in the next week or so.


(Cast Iron Chef) #79

You know it’s going to be CL4-TP because Clappy. :blyoohoo:


(Today, everything was fine in Opportunity and nothing bad happened.) #80