Will Battleborn Have a large enough player base?

Battleborn Battleborn General Discussion
#12

Selfish and mercenary response. I don’t give a tinker’s cuss about BB making it as a MOBA. I’ll be buying it for its co-op and solo campaign. I’ll get my AAA money’s worth out of it even if I only do one playthrough with my co-op pals and run a few characters through solo. I suspect I’ll do much more than that.

Forget Overwatch. For me, the comparison is with something like Serious Sam BFE - discrete maps, loads of enemies, boss fights. I’ve played SS:BFE through a couple of times on different difficulties and once in co-op. SS: BFE is on Steam at 30GBP and I’m happy that I got decent value for my cash.

I believe BB is going to have varying difficulty levels. It will have 25 characters for very different playthrough experiences. It will have assorted levelling systems making playthroughs different even for the same character. The downside is only 9 campaign maps vs. Serious Sam’s 12 maps but I suspect more will come. BB is on Steam at 40GBP. I can’t see how it can fail to be value for money.

Of course, I want BB to be a success as a MOBA. That will increase the likelihood of further content on the campaign side as well. But it need not stand or fall just on its MOBA credentials. If only GBX & 2K would start pushing the game’s campaign as hard as the MOBA …

2 Likes
#13

I do know where you are coming from by price, i didn’t mention it though. By community, all I want is for the game to have matchmaking not be a problem until about 5 or 6 months. I was in the CTT, and the matchmaking was awful. Both CTT’s I have played have been like that, so I won’t give them ■■■■. But because of that, I have only played a few Multiplayer matches. So if they do not fix this by the beta, they are totally screwed. But hey, that’s just my opinion.

#14

Na’, your worries are for nothing, if so. The reason behind the CTT was to clearfield the matchmaking process. They are using at GBX the microsoft servers for the first time, and thats include those matchmaking problems we had at the CTT. I’m pretty sure it wont be an issue, as long as people are playing it.

#15

Same here. I’m buying it for the story and co-op abilities and not the PvP. I think it’ll do well enough for us to get more story DLCs, so I’m not worried about that.

1 Like
#16

As someone currently playing battlefront on the pc, I can safely say buying this on pc will be a big mistake. The playerbase won’t be there. It should be fine on ps4 however, and it gives me a reason to buy one at last so there’s that I guess. Assuming the beta goes well and it doesn’t look like it will be ptw with dlc anyways.

#17

I think there won’t be problems with player base. Battleborn is more like Destiny than any other Hero shooters. In Overwatch there is no PvE and Destiny lack of Heroes, so I think there will be enough palyers especially on consoles. I will buy it for my PS4. The only problem is it’s coming only in May :frowning: it’s a loooong loooong time :frowning:

#18

Lol. You have a PC capable of running one of the most graphically demanding games on the market, yet you by a game on PS4. Also, you bought Star Wars Battlefront. Not only was that the worst game of the year, but no one plays that game. The only reason why it has a player base on consoles is because most people on consoles are console peasants! PC master race knows that the game sucks so they don’t play it. I hate to break it to you, but games that suck don’t get played often.

#19

What does Battleborn being similar to a ■■■■■■ fps have anything to do with it being good? PVE is an advantage, but I mostly care about one thing: the quantity and diversity of the heroes. For an extra 20 dollars, I do not think 4 heroes is worth it. SIngleplayer might be good, but idk.

#20

Hmm. I didn’t think anyone cared about PvE. Just saying don’t play the story with more than 5 people. This should not count as going against NDA since it can be figured out by anyone. The way gearbox games work is that the enemies health scales up depending on the amount of players in the game. For example, borderlands 2 on PC is way harder with 3 people than with 2, even with good people. I would like you to imagine the game with 5 people, how scaled up the amount of health would be. But I digress, if the story is good and the boss battles are fun, it might be worth it.

#21

I have seen a bit of gigantic. The thing is, there are so many other games in this new genre(Paladins, Lawbreaker, Paragon, etc.)that I am not sure I care to keep looking. Even Bethesda is making a game for this genre called battlecry, or something like that. Those two look to be the best, so I am going to stick to those games.

#22

A LOT of players play for the challenge

#23

Wow, large post. Let’s start off with the easy one: I am well aware of the PS4 exclusives, but i am just tired of this ■■■■■■■■ idea microsoft and sony have that giving games day early beta access and exclusive characters is going to make me buy their console. All the consumers who are going to be making well-informed and intelligent choices are going to buy neither; they will be joining the PC master race the out performs both consoles for less. I am well-aware that you can play the Campaign solo since I did myself. It was so much better, and I think i know why: To balance Multiplayer, Gearbox scales up the health on the enemies so people don’t just fly through the level. It sounds like a brilliant idea until you go north of 3 players. Especially if you have low damage output classes, the enemies have more health than what would be considered balance, which ruins the pacing and fluency. For an example, Oscar Mike is a character in the campaign about timing and giving yourself the strategic advantage. If he does not do enough damage, he can not get the jump no his enemies and will die. I am sure some characters are worse(tank roles like crazy-robot guy) and some are better(orendi), but that is my experience. Lastly, the loot system. Yes yes, I am aware that it is the only game releasing to have a loot system, but that doesn’t make it good. Their mistake was that they were trying to make it where it would have an effect that would change the game, but not by a lot. They should’ve done it where you got loot as a drop from a boss fight, a reward for kicking ass in campaign or MP, or doing achievements. What you got as loot would be weapon variants, sort of like Team Fortress 2. Some of the weapons are just flat out better, but most of the time it depends on your play style and what situation you are in. The stupid class mods are just another bullet point for a reason not to buy overwatch or any of it’s other competitors. So yes, it has a looting system, but it was executed horribly and done lazy.

#24

They were from my experience. The only reason I participated in the CTT was to see how the PvE was because that’s what me, my wife, and our friend play - we don’t do PvP at all.

#25

I’m confused. You said you can’t play it solo but you admit to playing it solo? Also why would you care about the beta comming to a console first. You originally said that you wouldn’t get the free character because it was “console exclusive” but I explained that it’s to anyone who plays in the beta on ps4 xbone or pc…

#26

We do not dgrade people based on their preference of console over a computer, i mean, come on man, so people just like console better.

Back to the OT, the player base will be there, as long as GearBox doesnt take too long to sen out updates. I havent really seen an advertising for BB lately, I know the ads are there though. If the player base isnt there, then advertising is why.

3 Likes
#27

Bradyfire8, I like your idea of collecting loot from playing well, exceeding in the battleborn universe; and I do believe this to be the case. My inkling is the campaign takes place on different maps home to the factions. It looks as if the loot is faction based. So perhaps you earn loot for factions based on missions completed, worlds saved. The other loot that is generally good for all is I believe purchasable through in game earnings(maebe through pack system ) and is more like the titanfall card system(although they continuously buff after deaths and respawn). Ive only seen YouTube clips showing it off, but this is my best guess.

#28

Yeah, my main worry was lack of adds. The console exclusive things is still really stupid. The entire point of it is to punish us consumers to make a point about why said console is better. I don’t have a problem with people playing on inferior platforms, but I have a problem with SONY and MICROSOFT when they do that stupid marketing stuff. It is not directly the consumers fault

#29

Let me explain. I said that more than 3 people is unplayable and solo is normally the best way to play because the enemies health are based off 1 person, the. Scaled upwards dependent on the amount of people playing. You would think it is balanced, but the enemies health gets so high that it dramatically quickens the pacing to the point of hopeless button mashing so you can get out damage instead of controlled, thoughtful play. Again, I complain about the console exclusives because of the simple question: when does it stop? Are games going to start having the entire solo mode exclusive or having 20 characters exclusive? I could write two more pages on this topic, but I will leave it at this. If you wanna hear it, fine, but that is it for now

#30

I can agree with the fact that exclusive content is bad for the community. This is a community I wanna see grow bigger. I want Battleborn to be a successful entry in Gearbox’ library and grow as an IP

1 Like
#31

Thank you for explaining. Yes the ctt was fairly basic with the last boss but even I found some players having difficulty understanding what to do and what not to do. This has been seen in games from the dawn of gaming history. Not everyone knows how to kill bosses on the latest WoW expansion without trying it first. It will only be a matter of time when even button mashing will fail to understanding the core concepts of you need to do xyz before the boss dies.

As for exclusives, the exclusive stuff in this case (maybe a couple weeks) is minor in comparison to realistic rewards. Say for instance was it fair that Minecraft had a year on pc before going to console? Not really but look at it today, no one cares because it’s presence is on all systems. The exclusive for BB is only a little bit longer than on other systems and it’s only the beta (not even a full game). There’s not really any benefit beyond that alone. Come May you’ll be able to play just as everyone else will and the beta won’t even matter. Hell after the brief window that PS4 users will have you can get into the beta and still play with the rest of your community.

In retrospec, I can see why pc didn’t get a increased beta opportunity. Yes there might be a larger audience but when the CTT was active, blizzard was doing their own beta at the time with overwatch. This might have taken some of the user base which gbx might have been looking forward to test with. Because of that they would need to have a more stable player base that has high testers readily available (PS4). Also, if there were a group that was going to put bids on exclusive rights who on PC would do that? Steam is really the only contender and they probably don’t see it being a viable cost for them to sell it because what would they get? A couple extra copies sold? Where a console company can net the cost of the game and a possible purchase of a system. This is why exclusives are primarily focused on console systems. Sony and Microsoft want to have more systems sold because of this alone. Steam doesn’t make anything if someone buys a computer (maybe when the steam console comes out that’ll change).