Gaming Borderlands PC Review

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2009/11/05/borderlands-review/1

We take a look at Borderlands - the latest game from Gearbox Studios, it boasts gameplay that's a blend of Diablo and Halo. Does it reach that lofty aim or is it left outside our hearts, lacking the appropriate entry visa? Find out by reading our full review of the PC version.

 

Great and fair reveiw , although some aspects of the game can be annoying i really just can't stop playing it... so much fun and i haven't tried multiplayer yet....

 

Good review, it seems you skipped over the multiplayer game aspects of the game. It uses gamespy to find friends, and hosting a game usually involves forwarding ports on your router and a lot of luck to work. Most people use Gameranger or Tunngle but it's 2009 we shouldn't need to do this. The XP system is also flawed, allowing a level 1 person to join a level 30 players game (no clue until you get in) meaning the level 1 chap cant kill anything. However when the level 30 person does kill something the level 1 chap gets a huge XP boost.
Great fun playing with friends, but playing with randoms is a different matter. There is no roll/drop/loot system in place, first come, first served (including quest rewards it appears). Must be so frustrating to have random loot ninja's hoover up the loot/drops which you can use ,

I've enjoyed playing it single player, 2 player multiplayer. With 4 friends it became a bit pointless, I didn't have to play, just let them do the quests and I'll hand in the rewards. It's a tad annoying when aiming for a sniper shot to only have someone else fire the LOL Rocketlauncher at your target. Oh well..

 

wtf?! Steering with the mouse? Are you joking?

 

It worked for E-type on the Acorn Archimedes, and look how that turned out...

 

It really isn't that bad, played it alot last weekend and the crappyness of the vehicle weapons is much more annoying than the steering.

 

Completely agree with this.

I didn't know anything about borderlands before I bought it and I can't stop playing it once I start.

It runs well, plays well, looks good and put quite bluntly fun.

 

If it only had a minimap and like.. hm.. idk 1000 more levels?
It's one of the best games if not at all time than this year for sure. Competed it twice and I still want more!
Here's for hoping that DLC of their will be out soon.

P.S. 8/10? C'mon, it's better than that!

 

It's a fantastic game with a few oversights and niggles (most of which are the fault of the frankly terrible UE3). I do wish I knew a few more people with the game to get some good multiplayer going on for the second run through.

 

I have to say that borderlands has to be one of my favourite games. It's a good game, but I'm addicted. I normally play 2 - 4 player, and it's a great laugh.

Also google the Claptrap movies - can be found on youtube. They made me laugh too

 

Ok, just fired it up and encountered Mothrakk, my word he killed me rather fast several times, and then I ran away.

 

The comments i have seen in this section are the same words a good friend told me, the game is all fun, even watching the video review on another website i realized is a game im looking to buy.

But again i find Bit-Tech review kind of unfair, the last page says its a fun game, but the other three pages says all kinds of flaws the game has making me have second thoughs about buying it.

I gotta say the same happened to me with Fallout 3, i didnt want to buy the game because of Bit-tech review, then i saw a video review and all i my instant thoughs was "awesome".

Bit-Tech hardware reviews are awesome, but somehow i dont fully trust Bit-Tech video games reviews.

 

Got to admit this is pretty much my feeling as well.

 

Apologies if you're feeling that way - I'm always open to feedback either through the forums or over email ( Joe dot Martin at Bit-tech.net ) if you want to discuss it in more detail. That said, the overall tone of the review seems to have come across clear to others - that it's a game with a few very irritating, recurring and stupid errors when it comes to balancing the enemies against you and the enemy AI, but that doesn't stop the game being very addictive thanks to an unusual presentation, moreish loot system and the sense of humour wired throughout the game.

One thing I've decided I really hate since the review - special weapon descriptions. Some rare weapons carry labels like "I feel like I'm going to break this thing" or "THE LEGEND LIVES!" and it's entirely unclear what that means and how it affects the weapon. When I find a SMG with a special ability called "Close Quarters Feline" then what the hell am I supposed to think? It's especially annoying when you just end up ALT-TABbing out and looking it up online only to find out that it means it slows your walking speed by one percent or something similarly inane or specific.

 

@paisa666 and UncertainGod

Surely it's harder to trust the magazines/websites which routinely give games 90%+ reviews, and never score a game less than 70%. On the odd occasion a game gets a slagging, it's a novelty title reviewed only to show how impressively derogatory and witty the reviewer can be.

Indeed, if every game that's half decent gets a 9, then what do you do when something truly groundbreaking comes out? I still think Edge magazine got it right years ago. Give 9 to a mind-bogglingly great game, nothing less. Reserve 10 for the game (Half-Life, for example) that comes out and redefines the boundaries of what you hitherto considered to be mind-bogglingly great.

And, let's be honest, a game and a piece of hardware could not be more different. One is designed to entertain, one is designed to carry out a function. Reviewing hardware simply requires you to review the available data. Reviewing a game requires you to make a personal decision as to whether the game succeeds or fails, and is thus inevitably more complex and open to interpretation than a review of a hard disk.

 

That's an interesting point. I also think that, as far as games go, there's an inherent conflict presented between dedicated games magazines, their schedules and readerships, and the release dates and games they cover. I'm probably incredibly biased on this topic, but I can't help noticing the trends on Metacritic where, on the whole, the magazines always give the super high 90% and 100% scores and then, as you move down the chart, you see the more honest scores come from websites who have spent a longer period with the same version of the game that will be released.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/dragonageorigins

 

I have read on various forums about lots of people complaining that the FOV (Field of view) is borked on the PC version, and it constantly makes you appear to be 'zoomed in'. They also commented that the mouse sensitivity is also borked.

This put me off the game straight away, but isnt mentioned at all in the review... so Im wondering whether its true or not. ???

Big thread about fixing the FOV issue here : http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1463861

 

I didn't notice any FOV issue. The mouse IS super sensitive, but it's also a very personal thing. Personally I prefer quite a sluggish mouse, so I dropped the sensitivity slide to minimum and it worked fine.

 

BT needs to do a article on the Return of COOP. I think it's funny back in the day people couldn't stand it and now it's this big new thing.

 

The FOV issues as well as every other documented problem of the UE3 are present but are fixed in the usual manner, thankfully with Borderlands you don't have to use a hex editor to edit the ini files like you do with some other UE3 games.