I'm trying to find a word for Borderlands that isn't "tripe", but I'm coming up blank. Because to me, that describes it perfectly -- it's got nothing in particular to offer, but fails to be offensive in any particular sense. It's a game made of nothingness and, in a mechanical sense, plays like a completely cynical cash grab at popular mechanics only exceeded by Dead Island. Adding RPG mechanics to shooters isn't something I'm against, but games like Deus Ex and Stalker pull that off wonderfully while Borderlands shoehorns in the tired and boring skill tree archetype popularised by dull and clinical MMORPGS. It also uses a Diablo-like loot system -- you know, poring through a bunch of loot drops to see if there's a weapon a couple of points more damaging than your current one.
There's no systematic personality there. I'll concede that the art is somewhat distinctive and the game has a good sense of humour, but what it doesn't have is strong qualities of endearment concerning its core gameplay systems. Although these are all RPG mechanics. The shooting mechanics in Borderlands aren't bad, but there's nothing distinctive or attractive about them, either. Many years ago, Medal of Honour and Call of Duty had already mastered the same essential gameplay system. It's a shame, because the last few years have been good for RPGs -- The Witcher 1 & 2, both Souls games by FromSoftware, Persona in spades, Fire Emblem: Awakening just came out, the latest Deus Ex had a reasonably robust set of RPG mechanics and I've no doubt missed a few. RPG mechanics are being introduced into just about every genre these days, and for the most part, I think that's perfectly reasonable from both a design and gameplay perspective.
So I was always surprised when Borderlands garnered a significant amount of attention, moreso when it got a sequel and even moreso when so many gaming publications cared so much. I understand that mine isn't the only opinion out there and for some, the ground Borderland covers provides them with a fun experience. But such an overwhelmingly positive reaction to such a confused, ill-considered and mediocre game had me looking twice.
With all that in mind, I'm not surprised Aliens: Colonial Marines wasn't a stellar game. What did surprise me, however, is how poorly it was handled. From a business perspective, having one's hands on the Alien IP is more or less a godsend that guarantees sales. Perhaps this was Gearbox's perspective, and they would rely on that to make the game profitable while putting actual work into Borderlands and Duke Nukem. But we all know what happened to Duke, and I've discussed my grievances with Borderlands above. All the same, it's a disgusting betrayal of consumer trust in a product, not to mention an awful use of an excellent IP.
Perhaps Gearbox were once a good developer, but that was many years ago. From where I'm standing, Gearbox haven't put out a clever, memorable, well-constructed game for this entire generation, yet consumers continue to throw money at them. No business is entirely fair, but the way gaming consumerism works has been a thorn in the side of developers and consumers alike for much longer than this generation alone. I'd love for publishers (particularly the bigger ones) to change their ways and allow for more creative, passionate projects to flourish with some degree of financial security, but the gaming business isn't run by people who care. It's run by suits for whom a game is a product on the level of detergent or pillow cases, if more profitable. So that leaves it up to us to be more conscientious as consumers and to reward not only the products that are inoffensive and more or less fun, but to reward especially the products that really exceed our expectations.
Here's a simple, easy way to help, if only a little bit: be a diverse gamer. Rather than being a "shooter guy", an "RPG player" or a "strategist", we should try to diversify our gaming palettes and reward products that do well in their genre rather than buying such a large range of games in the same genre (as many of us do). Rather than buying that second FPS, try something else and buy a strategy game that garnered positive reception. If you like RPGs and spend a lot of time in Skyrim, why not try out a JRPG? You might find something to enjoy in Monster Hunter or Persona. This is a win/win situation. I know from experience this doesn't always pan out and there's always the chance of buying a dud, but this kind of diversification could lead to the discovery of things you didn't even know you liked, and you spread your money more evenly around the games industry. We don't all have the privilege of putting down $60 on a "risky game", but then again, it doesn't have to be $60. Dig through the bargain bin, or get something off Steam, especially during a sale. The point is that we ought to be trying to open our minds to different ways of handling mechanics and narrative in games. And perhaps then we'll find that we reward mediocrity much less and put money into the developers that do well by us -- rather than the ones that just give us the "safe" purchase.
