Poll: Views on Gearbox?

[Sizzle Montyjing]

So, what with this new Aliens: Colonial Marines fiasco and the simple fact that Duke Nukem Forever even existed, what are your opinions on the game developer Gearbox? Terrible? Great? Good but unlucky? Good but lazy? Good but stop with the DLC now seriously it's getting annoying?

 

[J Tyran]

Went with average, never played the Borderlands series but people seem to like them. Duke Nukem Forever wasn't very good and neither was Aliens: Colonial Marines but they where not outright terrible, disappointing? absolutely and they could have been a lot more than they where but at least they where playable and where not awfully short (as in 3-4 hours) there are shooters out there that are far worse. Shooters like Mindjack or any of the shooters by Nihilistic Software, then there are those Harry Potter FPS abortions (yes you read that right, Harry Potter FPS). I would say both DNF and A:CM where dreadfully mediocre, DNF did at least have some variety in the gameplay and A:CM had some really sweet guns and customization.

So as they are capable of making good games and some really disappointingly mediocre games I would say they are average.

 

[Doom972]

The only reason I picked average, and not bad, is because of Half Life: Opposing Force and Half Life: Blue shift. These guys used to have talent. I think that some of that talent is still there, and hopefully it'll show up in their next game.

I think that Colonial Marines, like Ultima IX and Duke Nukem Forever before it, was just in development hell for too long and the developers were tasked with salvaging what they can and make a sort-of-finished product.

 

[daveman247]

Im gonna say "good" Duke nukem and aliens wasn't that great but borderlands and brothers in arms were pretty good.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

-snip-

Well, as someone who played and is still playing borderlands 2, I have to say when they put the work in they make a very good experience which is really quite complete, and yeah, DNF was never ognna live up to expectations but it performed alright I guess. A:CM However just seemed like a dick move...

The only reason I picked average, and not bad, is because of Half Life: Opposing Force and Half Life: Blue shift.

They actually made those?

 

[AndrewF022]

I loved the HL1 expansions, love Borderlands (both 1 and 2), I liked James Bond: Nightfire and the Brothers in Arms games are... well they're ok, nothing to write home about, but they do have talent...

If only they would stop trying to resurrect these games from the brink of extinction and trying to polish them up and make them more than what the are. Duke Nukem Forever should never have been touched, and A:CM sounds like it should have been scrapped back in '08 when they ran into trouble the first time...

 

[darkcalling]

As long as they keep Borderlands coming they can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned. Never played Brothers in Arms or Aliens so I can't comment on them but I actually thought Duke Nukem Forever was a lot of fun.

Far from perfect mind you and DEFINITELY didn't live up to 15 years in development, but plenty of fun. Except for that underwater section at the dam. That part can go die now.

 

[Windcaler]

Im kind of torn with them. The only games Ive played of theirs were Borderlands 1 and DNF. I didnt play borderlands 2 because I didnt really want another game that was a loot fest FPS, I have borderlands 1 for that. I dont care about the world and setting either so *shrugs* just dont care I guess. Still borderlands 1 was really good for what it was. DNF...well lets be honest here we should be thankful that game even came out. Gearbox went out of its way on that one and took it upon themselves to release a game many people wanted and they took a bullet for it. One they probably didnt deserve.

DNF was not as bad as people made it out to be, at best it was a run of the mill shooter with some annoying turret sections but it didnt deserve reviews that made the game out to be a broken mess.

ACM I think something similar to DNF happened. Gearbox took a game and tossed it out there when it wasnt ready. The real problem, IMO, is that borderline fraudulent demo they released.

I think gearbox needs a kick in the pants to get themselves back on track and hopefully ACM was that kick in the pants. However right now I look at them and question if I really want to do business with a company thats lied to consumers, reviwers, and everyone inbetween despite in the past having a game I liked and taking on a project for the consumers

 

[Doom972]

-snip-

Well, as someone who played and is still playing borderlands 2, I have to say when they put the work in they make a very good experience which is really quite complete, and yeah, DNF was never ognna live up to expectations but it performed alright I guess. A:CM However just seemed like a dick move...

The only reason I picked average, and not bad, is because of Half Life: Opposing Force and Half Life: Blue shift.

They actually made those?

Yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gearbox_software#Half-Life

They also did the console ports of Half Life and and did some work on Counter-Strike (Counter-Strike was made by modders).

 

[piinyouri]

They made Borderlands.
So therefore they are god.

I agree A:CM and DNF were both pretty bad, but they were both games that GB took over from someone else, and had very little creative input.
Most of their in-house games are pretty damn good. Borderlands aside, the Brothers in Arms games I enjoyed for not quite being another WW shooter.

I get that a LOT of folks are pissed at GB for A:CM and Pitchford, though I like the guy as a guy, is really pretty bad at PR of any sort, but them lasing out at GB the way they are isn't really accurate repercussion.
Most people are acting as though GB genuinely wanted the game to be horrid and did everything in their power to sabotage it.
It wasn't malevolence that made A:CM crap, it was negligence and incompetence.

But eh, I don't know why I care so much. Just don't damage Borderlands people!

 

[Pink Gregory]

They made Borderlands, I like Borderlands.

They made Brothers in Arms, I LOVED Brothers in Arms.

Haven't played the 'bad' ones.

 

[Arina Love]

bad. borderlands is ok, other than that this company haven't done anything good or even decent in recent years.

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

I'll admit, despite the failures of Duke Nukem Forever and Aliens: Colonial Marines, I still like Gearbox a lot. They've shown me with Half-Life: Opposing Force and the Borderlands series that they know how to make decent games which keep me entertained. They just seem to have a real problem at the moment with fixing other people's mess.

 

[Zhukov]

Unremarkable and uninteresting.

Don't care for Borderlands, never played that WWII thing of theirs, the less said about Duke Nukem and Colonial Marines the better, and Randy Pitchford gets on my nerves something fierce.

 

[Goro]

How long ago was OpFor? Blue shift? Brothers in arms? Gearbox has done alright with Borderlands, but they burned a lot of integrity with the A:CM debacle, and more so with their response. If all they want to do is make Borderlands games, fine. Good but lazy. I am soooo pissed at A:CM..... Years I waited, years....

 

[Marik Bentusi]

I thought the Borderlands were boring, DNF isn't their fault (mostly anyway), but they apparently screwed with Aliens on purpose to shift resources to BL2. Can't say I've had experiences with their other titles.

So yeah I wouldn't trust them with a franchise I like, but there's certainly worse out there. Borderlands was executed competently, I just don't like the concept no matter how I look at it.

 

[Yopaz]

They have made some good titles some bad titles. Duke Nukem Forever wasn't technically made by them though. It was just rushed into a state which I guess could be referred to as ready for release depending on your definition of ready for release.

All in all, I would say they are average because the bad even out the good. I also don't consider any of their games spectacular.