I played Overwatch today after 70 hours of Battleborn and I have to say, it’s a superior game in every way possible. I am so disappointed in this release and at this point I’m mashing F5 hoping to see announcement of patches for all this crap.
They are the exact same blend of genres so they should be compared. The biggest difference is the TTK and the fact that Overwatch actually has a movement system beyond sprinting and walking.
Here’s one comparison. Overwatch works! You can actually login and play the beta. Unlike Battleborn which I payed $60 for and I haven’t been able to play for 3 days. Lol
You do need an Internet connection so if you have a router try restarting it. Other than that you should probably contact either gearboxes or xbox live customer service.
Already done everything they suggested. And I can play any other game just fine. It’s on the server end not mine and that is from Xbox support.
I have 70 hours played since release and about 50 hours during Beta … I daresay I know Battleborn …
If a similar artstyle and gunplay are enough for you to compare BB with Borderlands (and I know that the similarities don´t end there, yes) than it should be obviously comparable to Overwatch too for other reasons. The fact that Overwatch is just PvP, has no minions and buildables does not change the fact that the way HOW you interact with the environment or other players is very similar.
If you are beating up a merc with your primary and secondary attacks in first person, with your hero class and its unique 2 abilities with an ultimate in Battleborn, how is that so different from beating up a player with your primary and secondary attacks in first person, with your hero class and its unique 2 abilities with an ultimate in Overwatch?
… Just because the target is AI and the reason why you do it is some objective does not change the fact that you basically do the same thing.
And about swapping heros … sure, they have different styles to fit their respective games, but, please, gameplay wise you could just swap Benedict with Pharah, Widow with Marquis or Mike with Soldier 76 … just to name a few.
Most importantly you still don´t get what a comparism is … you know, telling me what Battleborn does different (and I am well aware of all of that) IS already a comparism in and of it self. The fact that people get confused and even games media compares the two should be more than enough proof that they are similar enough …
Yes yes … maybe you think Battleborn is more of a moba (even though it isn´t) and Overwatch more of a shooter and the one has this and that while the other does it that way … THIS is already a comparism.
I´ll be done here now as this argument is futile … I hope you continue to have fun in Battleborn, just as I do! … even if you continue to have the delusion that Overwatch is nothing like it 
…
Yes, because shards, gear, levels and such impact the game sooooooooo little, amirite?
As an artist myself, I wanted to comment the artistic part : no, it’s not like Borderlands. It’s just plain different. If anything, it’s more like Wildstar. It looks so much like Wildstar that for the longest time, I was sure the game was a Carbine Studio game. @Gearbox, come one, you did work with some laid out Carbine Studio artists, didn’t you? 
It would be like saying that World of Warcraft also looks like Borderlands. Different approaches to the so-[wrongly]called “toon” rendering.
Honestly, Overwatch and Battleborn kinda look alike though. Battleborn got way more FX thrown our way, and is overall a lot more coloured. OW chose to stay a little more “subtle”, improving the overall understanding of what is going on. This is my biggest issue with Battleborn, to be honest : it’s often a big mess and could really use a toning down of all visual effects or maybe just a slider somewhere.
Appart from that, Ray is quite right in his approach. The game are, at core gameplay, extremely similar and it’s almost impossible to avoid the comparison. Hell, the reason why there even were comparisons in the first place is precisely because they do look and feel the same. Character-based shooters with two specific abilities, specific non-replacable weapon, cooldowns, an ultimate, unique designs, shooting bullets, “magic”, rockets, and blades at each other.
It requires a second look to grasp that the objectives are different and will require a different approach of the game in order to win. OW is a very static game where you literally only have to stay on a specific point throughout a whole match to win, whereas Battleborn will always require you to move or push a lane and take a lot of factors into account like shards, minions, gear, helix, etc. But all of this is already the second look.
As Ray said, you could very well swap heroes around and not be able to tell the difference after a few adjustements to numbers. Benedict and Pharah are the clearest comparison, despite the fact that Pharah is one of the biggest clue that OW is not very well thought out and overall badly balanced. Ironically, the “less fleshed out/polished” Battleborn got their Benedict way, way right-er. But how wrong would a Reaper feel in Battleborn ? Or a D-va ? They’d just fit right in. It’s just that IMHO, Battleborn did a better overall job at balancing their characters while introducing more subtle, but clear, variety. they also did a better job at character design. And at game design.
At everything, actually, except, maybe, the too-much FX part, and a lack of advertising… But who can fight the Blizz-acti all-powerful syndicate ?
That’s being changed: I saw a BB commercial during one of the basketball playoffs last night.
I think one thing that gets lost in the shuffle is that BB has a co-op story mode while OW is strictly PVP. As someone who doesn’t play PVP at all, I can say that the PVE element was very well done and very enjoyable, especially with friends. I can foresee a time where the PVP element goes by the wayside, but the PVE element grows stronger after more people give it a try. I know GBX was trying out something new, but I think their strengths lie in telling an interesting story that can be played with friends instead of trying to compete in the already over-crowded competitive PVP market. But time will tell and I may be proven wrong. Either way, I hope this game can stand on its own, but it’s way to early to predict such things.
As an artist you have failed to notice that boarderlands and batteborn have very similar color pallets, particle effects, and lighting effects. So I’m assuming you just haven’t played much boarderlands so know this.
They really don’t do that much but okay. The level system is totally broken and unfair. The gear is also unfair and either makes 0 difference in gameplay or gives so much of an advantage that it’s semi hilarious.
Don’t assume. I have hundred of hours on all Borderlands titles.
I still stand by my statement : they just don’t look the same at all. No cell-shading post-process effects or heavily hand drawn textures - battleborn relies on more “plain” textures, very different FX effects - maybe a few details here and there, sure, but most FX like explosions, fire, smoke, are hand-drawn textures in BBorn when they were more classic-looking in Borderlands.
Come one you just can’t say honestly that this :
is in any way similar to this :
But it’s way closed to this :
http://static.wildstar-online.com/img/articles/full/play-wildstar-boom-box4.jpg
Heck, even Borderlands is not as brightly coloured as Battleborn. Still a cartoonish look for both of them, but a different approach. You can also just compare the FX muzzle flashes from Borderlands and Battleborn.
No really, Borderlands and Battleborn may have a very select few similarities in regard to the visuals, but that’s all.
( I would have liked to prevent the display of the pictures just to keep things not too much overflowed but I’m not sure if there is any kind of spoiler tag on these forums… ? )
They… do alot.
What game have to been playing. Certainly hasn’t been Battleborn.
The whole point about certain characters in OW being “op” is that they excel at doing a certain job really well. You are free to counter it with another character. I eat pharahs alive with snipers like hanzo and widowmaker. The opness comes from lack of understanding of the game’s innate mechanics and counterplay. On the other hand, BB’s Galilea is the most broken character i’ve seen in a while.
^post above He said that they are not the same and then went on to point out all the similarities between them LOL You can’t compare a products by only focusing on the differences. The question is what’s the magnitude of the similarities and differences (but that’s subjectivity and hence the “debate”)
Uh, no?
He pointed stuff that only on the surface looks similar, but it really quite different.
Yeah I’ve never liked that “you can counter” argument, which for me is more akin to lazy gamedesign. It’s not really the place to go in deep Overwatch analysis, but Pharah isn’t broken because she’s too strong like Galilea ( I agree on that ), but because the simple fact you would choose her will force the opponents to also watch the skies, versus just watching the overwatch positions for quite static snipers. Oh, sure, it’s not the end of the world having to rise the eyes a little, but when you don’t have to do that, you just don’t have to do that.
OW balance issues for me come from that kind of things rather than pure numbers. Movement abilities are, imho, badly tweaked. One exception is when they announced they would enable Bastion turret mode to turn 360° when there were complaints it was already hard to kill him since one had to reach his back. Well, they said, we’ll remove his shield! But we add armor. ok, we thought, and then… “but now he can also rotate 360!” Wait what ?
Another exception is when they added Genji. They had nerfed McCree because he was essentially better than Reaper at close range, and better than Widow at long range ( fast fire rate, same accuracy, more damage, so essentially safer, no real need for a scope ). They made his primary fire deal less damage with distance, which was a good start. And they introduced Genji, with… Very accurate and deady shurikens at long rage and nice close range capabilities. Wait, what ?
Now I know all of this may have changed, but seeing this in realtime and facepalming with each new patch made me quit the game in January I believe, a few weeks after they resumed the beta after the winter pause. When they were all excited to announce they had listened to the feedback and added ONE (1) new game mode! CAPTURE! woo !
I’m ranting, I guess it’s a rant day. But yeah, in a nutshell, that was my OW experience. Something was fun and clearly, it had the potential of being a nice title, but then they began making weirder and weirder decisions…
Strongly disagree with this one. I don’t see anything lazy about counters - they are a way to balance the game in a way, and also to make the players think and change characters when needed. And it’s definitely no easy task to make sure that it’s possible to counter all the characters. And Overwatch hasn’t even been released yet. Balancing, just like with Battleborn, takes time. It won’t happen in a day.
They wanted the game to be compared to Overwatch. Why do you think they released it unfinished? They’re trying to beat Overwatch out the door for a few extra sales.
I think counters are lazy because then, you don’t really have to worry about a character being OP. You can just tell people “naaah you didn’t find the counter, that’s all”, and stop caring. To add on top of that, just enable players to switch characters on the fly, so that they can go grab that counter. No need to refine your characters then, or well, only when there clearly is an outcry.
Battleborn has the exact issue that a counter / free pick system can’t have unless you reaaally messed up the numbers : Galilea is widly considered OP but once the match is started, you can’t do anything more. You have to go with what you picked. All Mobas are affected the same, actually. It becomes more a matter of knowing your strengths and weaknesses than “just” the counters. In the end, you’ll need a far more refined balance than with a “X counters Y so let’s just pick X” system. I’m less annoyed with having to switch from, say, Pharah to Bastion in the last lane of the London map ( where you’re essentially in a tunnel ) because she can’t play her strengths to the fullest in a closed environment. It sounds like the logical and tactical choice to make.
In essence, a counter / free pick system, the way they didit, is like having two jokers.
- “X is too strong!”
I hope you see what I mean by lazy. Blizzard has been basing game designs on this for quite some time, WC3 was a little bit “afflicted” but WoW was very affected too.
Disclaimer, though : again, I’m only basing all of this on the very first stage of the beta as it was in January. Things may have changed. I’m just not interested enough to check…
