The failure of this game is all GBX's fault

I’m going to comment here
but I ignored most of the posts here due to people starting drama
gotta love the people who would rather argue with commenters than post about Topic
they are the cancer of forums and forward thinking

anyway, to the topic
I fully agree. I have made many many posts suggesting ways to improve the game.
I have given not just mindless feedback, but actually posted multiple possible SOLUTIONS.
I was ignored, I was bashed by the same type of people I mentioned above.
People said the game would be fine, said I was wrong about the direction this game was headed.

And now, standing on the corpse of this game,
cut down before its prime, due to owners not taking care of it…

I reaffirm my previous stance:
That this game could have been great, but was mistreated and horribly handled.

Now, out of the woodwork will come the naysayers,
the ones that would rather attack my comment than the TOPIC.
and I preemptively address you with this

  1. You will say GBX has no experience with Mobas

  2. You will say they had to compete with Overwatch

  3. You will say I should make my own game if I know so much

  4. You will say this game is great

  5. True, except Mobas are NOT NEW. Just use the experience of existing games, and existing communities

  6. Not True, they FAILED in marketing. Horribly.

    • I didn’t even hear of Battleborn until a week before release, among other issues.
    • People compared this game to Overwatch, but game is nothing like it,
      Yet nothing was done to correct the media and playerbase.
  7. again, I have played many many games. The experience is out there. USE GAME HISTORY.

  8. This game is great. But it was an Olympic Athlete that was CRIPPLED by its Coach and owners.
    -This game could have topped charts, but instead is just a shadow.


Not sure what you mean by GBX using existing communities. If you mean have them encourage players from other MOBAs to play BB instead, then that’s not only impractical, but nearly impossible. The one thing I’ve always heard with this is, why would someone who’s played something like LoL or DOTA, who has spent countless hours and probably spent quiet a large sum of money on, suddenly drop all of that to go a new one and start again from scratch.

Because that’s not how mobas work, dude.

i mean yes you cant stop ppl from leaving but instead of leaving that empty space i think they should allow ppl in q to just fill in that space not only would it help against the ppl leaving in the middle of a match bu also would help for the qing time

@Tokesy97 asked for this matter to be discussed in a polite way.

There are the rules. They are easily accessible.

Users refused to comply with something as simply as “do not insult others”, and for this reason, the thread is being shut.

I do wholly apologize to those users who were engaging in polite conversation and had their outlet cut in half due to those who refuse to engage in polite discourse.

I will assure everyone that this thread will be reviewed in it’s entirety, and those who continued with any personal attacks after Tokey’s comment should expect messages in their inbox.

Okay, a sweep of the topic has been done.

To any of those who have been spoken/warned, should any otherwise dismissive, rude, or outright insulting behavior persist to any degree, you will receive the next step in the suspension-warning chart that instant.

(Found in Forum Rules)

We have a zero-tolerance policy for users insulting anyone at all.

You’re welcome to any opinion you please, but you’re not welcome to attack on another, even in a backhanded way.

Thanks for the cooperation of those who didn’t engage in it, and had to wait for the thread to reopen, we apologize for the inconvenience.

1 Like

I can agree that your first point was…on point as they say XD

The 10 people lobby an then dividing the teams would be a good course of action to remedy the unbalanced MM(as far as pub matches woth randoms anyways).


True, and it might lessen the need people feel to only queue in larger parties as the matchmaking feels more balanced regardless of the MMR not being a factor initially (divvying up the teams would still need to be done based on said MMR though).

HOWEVER, this probably requires the MM algorithm to be completely rewritten and this will possibly destroy the option of moving the MMR consideration back to ‘the front end’ of the process. Even if the second part isn’t the case, rewriting an algorithm isn’t something you do in a couple of days. (disclaimer: speaking slightly vague here because I am not a coder/programmer)

1 Like

I’ll just reiterate, that’s the publisher’s job. It’s 2k’s job to make sure people know about the game. 2k is the reason BB failed in that regard, and it doesn’t help they shoved it out the door.

On the long list of companies I hate, 2k is top 10. (Blizzard being top 5)

In case you didn’t see it, I touched on something we tried last week to help alleviate the problem of leavers/AFKers, etc. We’ve acknowledged that this is an issue and are discussing ways that we can reward players for playing the right way and there by offer some relief to the community.


[quote=“JoeKGBX, post:71, topic:1543957, full:true”]In case you didn’t see it, I touched on something we tried last week to help alleviate the problem of leavers/AFKers, etc. We’ve acknowledged that this is an issue and are discussing ways that we can reward players for playing the right way and there by offer some relief to the community.

@JoeKGBX, I think the problem isn’t that you guys aren’t trying to do things to alleviate the problem; it’s that you’re not doing what people want you to do, which is punish the people that are the problem.

Behaviorally, you’re doing the right thing: rewarding people for sticking it out is more effective than punishing people for leaving. Perceptually, you’re going at it the wrong way because people like to see bad people suffer to make themselves feel good, which is why the American penal system is more about making the public feel better rather than attempting to reduce crime by rehabilitating criminals (people don’t like admitting it, but the driving factor of our penal system is making the public happy rather than actually trying to reduce crime).

Also, the argument that “you’re giving your opponents xp that would have been yours” isn’t really that big of a deal to people because you’re giving away something that they haven’t actually gotten yet. People aren’t attached to it because they haven’t gotten it yet. The big bonus xp for winning is also kind of backwards since winning is already a substantial reward; if you want to get people to stop leaving (which many do because they’re losing or expect to lose), you need to reduce the difference between winning and losing so that a loss doesn’t feel like a waste of time. Giving losers ~80% of the xp/credits that winners get would make the prospect of losing less abject; instead, you’ve made it so that winners get twice as much as losers, which feels like a significant waste of time, encouraging people to cut their losses and bail out as soon as possible (thereby causing a cascade that makes the match more likely to end quickly by having other players leave or surrendering at the earliest possible opportunity).

The one thing I think you should really look into doing is trying to reduce the negative impact upon the group that ends up having someone leave, which you’ve really done nothing to alleviate. People want the leavers punished because they feel personally injured by the person who is leaving and are not getting a sense of justice being done.

If control of a character that leaves was replaced by a bot or there was some mechanic to buff the remaining players of a team (even if it’s as simple as reducing the death timer so that, if you have fewer players, you end up coming back faster), people wouldn’t feel as injured and would be less angry if it seems like the offenders are getting off lightly.

Behavioral psychology and motivation is fun. :3


I agree with this. Losing/getting killed is no fun in any game. But it feels especially bad in this game. Be nice to somehow ease up on that a little. Just IMHO.


Here’s another bit that I posted on that:

Bans will be forthcoming to people who break the rules. I lay it out a bit more above, but this is a multi-step process. Lots of ideas and options are on the table. As I’ve/we’ve said before: we’re committed to doing everything in our power to make sure you guys have the best playing experience possible.

[quote=“JoeKGBX, post:74, topic:1543957, full:true”]Bans will be forthcoming to people who break the rules. I lay it out a bit more above, but this is a multi-step process.

Not to sound even more critical, but there are problems with this as well.

First off, bans tend to not be visible. People don’t feel like justice is done if they can’t see it with their own eyes. Unless you plan on telling the people that report that the person they reported got banned and/or providing a list of newly banned accounts each month (so that people can actually see who got banned), just saying you banned 100 accounts isn’t going to make them get that sense of justice since they won’t know if the person that wronged them got punished.

Secondly, because there is a vetting process to determine if someone will get banned, there is a significant waiting time between the behavior (report) and consequence (knowing the person was banned). The less temporal proximity between the behavior and consequence, the weaker the effect is. This is kind of invoking Godwin’s law, but, consider the case of the concentration camp guards who were exposed immediately after WW2 and those who were exposed decades later: victims of the Holocaust felt much more satisfied with the deaths/incarceration of the guards immediately after WW2 than with the deaths/incarceration of the guards decades later.

Once again, I’m not criticizing you guys. You’re doing your best with a really complicated problem and some of the problems exist because addressing that problem would be even worse (e.g. addressing temporal proximity issues by reducing the vetting process is likely going to end up with innocent people getting punished, which is a lot worse than waiting a bit). I’m simply explaining why people are angry with you even though you are doing something (and, in most cases, doing the right thing).

People like to see bad people get punished, and they like to see them get punished quickly.

1 Like

Human psychology is a tricky thing. In many cases we are our own worst enemies.


This is tricky though. I could be wrong, but I don’t know of any game that publicly lists the players who get banned. I know games sometime announce that X number of people got banned to scare folks, but I don’t think they actually name names. Do they?
The ‘we just have to trust them to do the right thing behind the scenes’ thing is the norm in other games I’ve played. While I’d love to get a email back saying "Jerkwad has been banned for life! Hahahahaha!’ to make me feel better, seems there must be common reasons this can’t be done.

wouldn’t call this game a failure on Consoles.

1 Like

These are very good points that we’re discussing as well. The topic of notifying the reporters of the banned party may or may not be easily feasible, but we’re exploring that for sure. We’d like to make it happen if at all possible, but time will tell.