Borderlands - Review @ 1UP

The floodgates are opening on the Borderlands reviews - 1UP's Thierry Nguyen gives the rpg-shooter a B+ rating.

In fact, the great multiplayer smoothes over some of the biggest irritations with single-player; playing Borderlands alone is an invitation for occasional aggravation and boredom. The enemy A.I. is simply dumb for the most part. Most enemies follow the "run straight at the player" tactic, with only the Crimson Lance (end-game baddies) utilizing any actual tactics. Fine for when baddies swarm you and your buddies, but dreadfully uninteresting when playing alone. The additional enemy types added for multiplayer help with the variety problem; alone, you face hundreds upon hundreds of the same bandits and skags. With friends, at the very least, more interesting variants of those same foes show up.
The death mechanic gives you a chance to kill an enemy while bleeding to "get a second wind," and prevent actual dying and respawn. This, plus the ability for players to revive each other, is great for multiplayer. It's the right balance of tension, risk, and reward. It's not as interesting alone; it downright sucks such as in situations for when you get taken down but there's no one to fight, and you're forced to pay the respawn fee.

More information.

A few more review scores, for those interested:

Borderlands on MetaCritics.com

Internet:
Justpushstart 4/5
Playstation University (no score, but great impression)
Kotaku (no score)
IGN 8.8
G4TV 4/5
Gamepro 4/5
PlanetXbox 8.6
Destructoid 8.5
GiantBomb 4/5
Multiplayer MTV (no score)
1up B+
TeamXbox 9.0
Gamesradar 8.0
AtomicGamer 9.2

Magazines:
OXM 8.5
PSM3 8.4
PCGamer UK 8.6
AtomicMPC 9.1

"In fact, the great multiplayer smoothes over some of the biggest irritations with single-player"

Yeah.. great, except for those who don't buy RPG's for MP. If I wanted MP I would play MMO to actually have fun in the long run instead of a game that will be forgotten in a year as the developers start pushing for sequel (boring games like Left 4 Dead comes to mind, not a RPG but that makes it worse, featureless wasteland of rip-off).


PS: Game Rankings page for PC version.

Good scores. I really shouldn't be thinking of buying something two weeks before Dragon Age, but I'm tempted.

orticus, this is not an RPG; at heart it is an online co-op FPS, with RPG elements added in. The most you can say is that it is a blend of the two, but the FPS element is clearly predominant. It is built for online, not SP.

From what I have read about why multiplayer is supposed to be beter then single player it is mostly nitpicking and several of the reasons might make it better for people that come here. If you die without anything around then you die and that is it and you can either reload or suffer the consequences.

I stick mostly to RPG's, however, I really like to have an action game to change the pace once in a while. It's just most of the time I find them too damned boring to get excited about. I am hoping that this has enough RPG mixed in to keep my interest. I got burned with HG:L.

Originally Posted by guenthar
From what I have read about why multiplayer is supposed to be beter then single player it is mostly nitpicking and several of the reasons might make it better for people that come here. If you die without anything around then you die and that is it and you can either reload or suffer the consequences.

Nah, it's more than that. Most of the reviews make reference to how the game comes alive in co-op, has better loot in co-op, has more interesting dynamics in co-op, shines in co-op, etc, and how it's a relative bore in SP. The game has been designed for co-op play. Personally I wouldn't even bother with it, SP.

Santos - same here. I'm thinking of getting this to mix up the pace a little, but I'm not sure how long it'll hold my interest.

Well it's a console game so expect consolitis on the PC version.

Yup, heard it's definitely consolized on the PC along with bad AI across all platforms. Gonna wait for this one to hit the bargain bit or at least lower in price. Besides, in two weeks time, I'll be enjoying some Dragon Age for quite awhile

Originally Posted by Anderson
Nah, it's more than that. Most of the reviews make reference to how the game comes alive in co-op, has better loot in co-op, has more interesting dynamics in co-op, shines in co-op, etc, and how it's a relative bore in SP. The game has been designed for co-op play. Personally I wouldn't even bother with it, SP.

Santos - same here. I'm thinking of getting this to mix up the pace a little, but I'm not sure how long it'll hold my interest.

Well, I will certainly report back, once I have sunk some hours into it. I was a tad bit bothered as well for all the co-op talk, but keep in mind that reviewers are just people rushing through the game, as part of their job, and making many assumptions along the way. For example, the loot will not be better in co-op, unless a) you are playing in your friends higher-level game, or b) by better, you mean more of it, not the quality of it. I too saw a reviewer or two say that, but the developers have said otherwise (and, as their name is not Peter Molyneux, I trust them, for now). What does make me happy is FINALLY a game comes out in multi-platform that is designed first and foremost for the PC!

I'm a little surprised by all the relatively good reviews.

I think I'll give this one a shot. I'll still play SP. I liked Diablo's SP game even though the online portion of the game is better than the sp version.

As for the AI, well if this really is Diablo with guns/first-person then you have to make the monsters dumber than rocks, but have tons and tons of them.

Maybe you should wait for later reviews. The first wave is often quite superficial.

TBH this sounds like a mix of Hellgate London and Fallout 3.

Not a bad thing cause I enjoyed both of them (though won't rate them higher than 7/10 as far as overall package is concerned).

Either way, I have Kings Bounty to finish (don't have Armored Princess), then will move on to Divinity 2 and Dragon Age. After them only will I bother with this game. If it improved upon Hellgate London SP (don't care about MP) then it'll be awesome (mostly, improve the part about quests actually being varied and having more than shoot shoot shoot and more shoot all the way).

Hmmm, I haven't paid any attention to this one, but some friends said they'd be playing this co-op. I'm wondering if the Xbox 360 version can be played with the PC version multi-player. Then I wouldn't even have to upgrade my PC! (again)

Originally Posted by Thaurin
I'm wondering if the Xbox 360 version can be played with the PC version multi-player.

Nope. Sorry, Microsoft never allows that to happen.

If anyone gets this game, please post your thoughts about it. I'd be very interested to see some first-hand opinions from people here.

Originally Posted by Anderson
Nope. Sorry, Microsoft never allows that to happen.

Actually, they DID allow that in one game, it was a massive failure. Mostly because of the part where developers had to handicap PC gamers to make the playing field even for shitty console gameplay (it was a shooter of course).

So yeah, it can happen if a game that has coop only wants to, but I doubt it that a company will spend so much money on making that happen for COOP only. Needs more modes to make it worthwhile.

Originally Posted by ortucis
Actually, they DID allow that in one game, it was a massive failure. Mostly because of the part where developers had to handicap PC gamers to make the playing field even for shitty console gameplay (it was a shooter of course).

Was it Shadowrun? I missed that one. I'd dropped out of gaming for a while.

Seems like there are two big hurdles. First hurdle is getting a huge variety of PC gaming rigs hooked into the uniform XBL network — technical problems, not to mention trying to keep out the cheaters and hackers. Second hurdle is the problem of the unequal playing field. PC players have mouse aim, which is of course much easier than aiming with two thumbsticks. So there has to be a way to gimp the PC players, which of course PC players are going to love.

Too many problems, and not any real incentive to do it. Not worth the trouble.

It needs to be a MMO. My guess is that only a MMO will be able to bring console and PC gaming together. It will take a lot of work but some company like Blizzard will probably make it happen in the future.

Until then, if the developer ain't making money of the MP, it's a waste of time and resources for them to work on such feature.

There are MMOs that have support for multiple platforms, including PC and Xbox 360. I played Final Fantasy XI on my PC for a short while and ran into many console gamers. Pretty fun (although the game is too hardcore and grindy for me).