Zero Punctuation: Borderlands

[Traumaward313]

I agree with this review. Play co-op with a bunch of strangers or roping in some 'friends' just to make a game playable and beyond boring mundanity is just a little annoying. If it does not stand up alone it is hardly worth it.

I'm over all this multiplayer stuff Some games just need to be played alone without the hassle of wondering what everyone else is doing, is everyone as good as you, are you surrounded by dickheads, is that guy taking all the gear/health, why am I doing all the damage/killing, why are 9yr olds joining random groups to be idiots and ruin everyones game etc etc -_-

Bring back single player!

 

[reg42]

This was more or less the experience I had with it, though I gave up long before level 30.

 

[VanityGirl]

NO point in saying that I wish it would have been a different game.
By now, most people already have their own firm opinions of the game. I did like how the game incorporated some humor into normal gameplay, like having to find a crazy man's leg that was eating by a skag.
I also got a kick out of 9 Toes' entrance video.

The game seemed to talk elements from Diablo. Lots of level grinding and many varied weapons. For someone who would like to max out their character, this type of game may not be a bad thing.


That being said, the video itself was quite funny and I do enjoy your sense of humor.

 

[Pebkio]

You kill stuff, it drops weapons with fractionally better stats than the weapons you have, you use those weapons to kill more stuff. Occasionally you ding and spend a skill point on a slightly different way to kill stuff.

Did I just describe Diablo 2, or Borderlands?

I... think you just described a lot of games... I mean... a LOT. Wait... yeah, several "lot"s of games...

 

[UMNiK]

Yahtzee, you social networking whore! Stop that and go jerk off on the "Thief 4 is actually coming out!111111" news page. Seriously, misanthropists like us shouldn't give shit about that shit for shit's sake.

 

[Sash'Rahaal]

This game did get really old, really fast for me.

 

[Godhead]

first

Somebody is getting a ban...

When will people ever fucking learn that saying "first" always gets you a ban?

I think they do know. But that they want to be "cool"

 

[Wayte]

Lol, all the complaints I saw coming, and they're pretty valid. Though I personally played it for the humor, which I"m totally urprised Yahtzee didn't comment on.
Seriously, how did he think melting midgets didn't deserve a mention?! XD

 

[vandimar77]

I think that what constitutes good in a computer game for me is evidentally quite differant to what does for Yahtzee. I actually have found Borderlands to be a whole lot of fun. Sure there's not really much story; but then plenty of recent games that have tried to present a story have told a bad, cliched or fundamentally confusing one. I would imagine playing online with random strangers WOULD be shit though. I am fortunate enough to know the people I team up with in the game in the real world, as they are old friends, and I expect this changes the game experience considerably.

At the end of the day, it's an amusing little game that doesn't take it self particularly seriously. The downloadable content has been pretty good quality as well. It will always lose points if you can't stand multiplayer though, unfortunately.

 

[D0MIN8R]

Well, the premise of either is fairly similar... You don't play them for the story - at least, not more than once. You play 'em for the killing. That and it has diablo-esque elements, a la the random weapons.

Buuut... yep, that's where the similarities stop.

You kill stuff, it drops weapons with fractionally better stats than the weapons you have, you use those weapons to kill more stuff. Occasionally you ding and spend a skill point on a slightly different way to kill stuff.

Did I just describe Diablo 2, or Borderlands?

yes sir, u infact did decribe both at once.

 

[GideonB]

This game is like a Diablo clone with a ton of fallout 3 mixed in. Haven't played it, but now I don't want to xD. Back to Phantasy Star Online for me.

 

[clank1013]

rofl i love this review. but why at 2:24 are you holding a paintball pistol?!?!?!? rofl

 

[Lusulpher]

after watching my brother play borderlands, i decided to never play it. it looks like a graphic novel version of fallout 3 mixed with bioshock, but the killing point was my brother pouring something like 200 rounds of automatic gunfire into somethings face and it not dying until 300 rounds. afterwhich i said "yeah, fuck that."

Reminds me of watching a dormie play WoW...mediocrity...it's so EASY TO SPOT. And the bad interface...sounds like they went to the EVE Online UI school[that game has gotten much better, but oh lord the UI is painful, not X3 painful but, annoying].

 

[Niccolo]

Well, the premise of either is fairly similar... You don't play them for the story - at least, not more than once. You play 'em for the killing. That and it has diablo-esque elements, a la the random weapons.

Buuut... yep, that's where the similarities stop.

You kill stuff, it drops weapons with fractionally better stats than the weapons you have, you use those weapons to kill more stuff. Occasionally you ding and spend a skill point on a slightly different way to kill stuff.

Did I just describe Diablo 2, or Borderlands?

Well, you described both. You also described Fallout 3, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins... hum.

Sarcasm fail.

Yes, Borderlands and Diablo are similar in some aspects. We all get that. But the main difference lies in what you will spend ninety-five percent of the game doing; killing things. Borderlands is an FPS, Diablo is a point-and-click.

The games are similar in that they're meant for the multi-playthrough crowd who like collecting weapons; after that...

Different stories, as well as different methods of telling those stories. One's serious, while the other seems to have more than one attempt at humour.

Different methods of killing things, as mentioned before.

Along with the different stories, a completely different atmosphere. Borderlands has something of a Fallout-if-set-in-Hillbilly-country vibe, while Diabloe could be cut-and-pasted into most fantasy worlds and suffer little.

The fact is, all games - if you dug enough - would have similarities. But they do have their differences, too.

 

[GloatingSwine]

Well, you described both. You also described Fallout 3, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins... hum.

Guess you missed the dialogue trees and not-killing-things-for-loot quests that all those games have and Diablo and Borderlands do not.

Yes, Borderlands and Diablo are similar in some aspects. We all get that. But the main difference lies in what you will spend ninety-five percent of the game doing; killing things.

Exactly, you spend ninety-five percent of the game killing things in both games. And in both games you spend the other five percent of the game looking to see whether the things you just killed dropped any good loot. The mechanical interaction of the game, isometric or first person, is not the game, it's just mechanical interaction (and if you're playing Blands on PC, that's all pointing and clicking as well).

Different stories, as well as different methods of telling those stories.=

Neither of which you will pay attention to, because stories do not drop good loot.

Different methods of killing things, as mentioned before.

Entirely cosmetic, as mentioned before. The drive to proceed in Diablo and Borderlands is that you kill stuff and every so often find a slightly better sword/gun/bow with which to kill harder stuff. Anything else is window dressing. In the other games you mentioned, the drive to proceed is the drive to advance the story and explore the world itself, not so in Borderlands or Diablo.

Along with the different stories, a completely different atmosphere. Borderlands has something of a Fallout-if-set-in-Hillbilly-country vibe, while Diabloe could be cut-and-pasted into most fantasy worlds and suffer little.

Again, irrelevant. This is not what makes you play the games, what makes you play the game is the sweet anticipation that this time you'll find that shiny gun/sword/pair of pants.

 

[Rayansaki]

I'm surprised I thought this week might Army of two:40th day or Dante's Inferno or MAG???

Never going to happen. I would pay to see an Yahtzee review of MAG but you should know by now it will never happen

 

[Niccolo]

Well, you described both. You also described Fallout 3, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins... hum.

Guess you missed the dialogue trees and not-killing-things-for-loot quests that all those games have and Diablo and Borderlands do not.

Yes, Borderlands and Diablo are similar in some aspects. We all get that. But the main difference lies in what you will spend ninety-five percent of the game doing; killing things.

Exactly, you spend ninety-five percent of the game killing things in both games. And in both games you spend the other five percent of the game looking to see whether the things you just killed dropped any good loot. The mechanical interaction of the game, isometric or first person, is not the game, it's just mechanical interaction (and if you're playing Blands on PC, that's all pointing and clicking as well).

Different stories, as well as different methods of telling those stories.=

Neither of which you will pay attention to, because stories do not drop good loot.

Different methods of killing things, as mentioned before.

Entirely cosmetic, as mentioned before. The drive to proceed in Diablo and Borderlands is that you kill stuff and every so often find a slightly better sword/gun/bow with which to kill harder stuff. Anything else is window dressing. In the other games you mentioned, the drive to proceed is the drive to advance the story and explore the world itself, not so in Borderlands or Diablo.

Along with the different stories, a completely different atmosphere. Borderlands has something of a Fallout-if-set-in-Hillbilly-country vibe, while Diabloe could be cut-and-pasted into most fantasy worlds and suffer little.

Again, irrelevant. This is not what makes you play the games, what makes you play the game is the sweet anticipation that this time you'll find that shiny gun/sword/pair of pants.

Yes, the games are similar. I'm not arguing that. What I was arguing was that below the surface, the games did actually have differences. And that your sarcasm was trite more than anything else. My little knock with Dragon Age, Fallout and the rest was simply gentle fun aimed at your very, very open and vague original comparison checklist.

I can only speak for myself but I've played both Diablo 2 and Borderlands - incidentally, both on the PC - and, while I can see quite well that Diablo fans who like FPSes will see a certain allure in Borderlands, they both play as distinctly different games.

It seems that we are comparing them in two different manners. You are comparing Diablo and Borderlands in their manner of continuation - or drive to proceed, as you so succinctly put it.

I compare them differently - mainly, in the method of murder. It still boils down that Borderlands is a desert-land shooter while Diablo is a little-of-everywhere point-and-clicker - which is, for me, the key difference between the games and what separates one from the other for me. Because of that difference, I see them as similar but still different games.

 

[GloatingSwine]

It seems that we are comparing them in two different manners. You are comparing Diablo and Borderlands in their manner of continuation - or drive to proceed, as you so succinctly put it.

I'm comparing the games from the perspective of their most central concept. It's really something that people should do more when they assess what a game is doing. What is the reason that the player continues to play this game?. Really, if you don't start with an assessment of that core concept then any analysis of a game you will make is all but bound to miss the point. As you have gone on to do:

I compare them differently - mainly, in the method of murder. It still boils down that Borderlands is a desert-land shooter while Diablo is a little-of-everywhere point-and-clicker - which is, for me, the key difference between the games and what separates one from the other for me. Because of that difference, I see them as similar but still different games.

You are comparing mechanical interaction, which really isn't a useful method of assessing a videogame unless you think that people really like the difference between how their mouse hand moves in game A vs. game B. If people really played games simply for the mechanical interaction, we would never have progressed beyond Quake, but we did, because the real reasons people play games, and the real reasons why game A is different from or similar to game B have nothing to do with the mechanical interaction.

 

[CopperBoom]

Another great review of a terrible game.
Funny how that works out.

 

[MAUSZX]

I'm not saying this game is bad. But im saying is to long and thats why Yatzee couldnt review it well