Nine Toes Versus You
Tue, 07/07/2009 - 20:44
Your first days in Pandora will involve a lot more than Rakk hunting. "Very early in the game you're challenged to deal with this villain, this bandit leader known as Nine Toes who's been harassing the town," says chief Gearboxer Randy Pitchford.
Randy doesn't tell us which toe exactly the bandit boss is missing--my guess is the one that ran allllll the way home--but he does give a lot of other novel info in a new preview from IGN (thanks MaxPat for pointing us to this.)
It's a good one. The recent spate Borderlands previews too often regurgitated the same details over and over again. So kudos to IGN's Charles Onyett for actually getting some fresh ingredients and quotes for his written taste of the game that makes us drool. You can read the original here or L3vi's summary here.
A couple things caught my attention in particular. One is how the game adjusts enemy strength as you level up. Says Randy:
"Oblivion kind of self-balanced, right? When you were level 1, the monster you were fighting kind of deals with you like you're level 1. But when you're level 10, that very same monster would be tougher. They kind of auto-balanced everything in the game for you."
"We don't have that approach at all. If you're a level 1 and you're in an area that's tuned for level 1, that might be an even challenge. Later if you come back when you're level 15 you're just going to own that place and that's cool, that feels really good, that proves to you the power you built."
I'm in the midst of playing Oblvion right now so I speak from experience when I say that I like the Borderlands approach. I hate leveling up my character from a scrawny bumpkin to a heroic warrior only to have the same difficulty killing a crab. What's the point of leveling up if everything else levels up with you?
Randy also says that the drop-in drop-out play of Borderlands is a central element of the game.
"When I finally decided to go online [in Diablo] I had to start over and I had to create a different character. So I said, wouldn't it be neat if your character was persistent and you owned that character, and if you wanted to play in single-player you could, and if you wanted to take that character online you could, and if you got anything there you could take that back into single-player...
Wouldn't that be amazing if the game was that flexible and your character was persistent? That was a goal from the beginning."
This got me thinking. Online co-op has never been a big draw for me. If I head online, it's usually play against other players. But with Borderlands, the fact that my character keeps improving and getting new items wherever I am playing makes me more likely to step onto co-op servers.
Does anybody else think the persistant characters will make them more likely to play co-op?
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 00:15
#2
Sweet.
Thanks for the info BG, L3VI, and PaxPat (Whatever order you feel like). : )
This is starting to look even better!
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 01:09
#3
cheating....
@Shadow
Hopefully, they have done something to make it nearly impossible to crack the data files for the character/s, but there are some super computer freaks out there :\
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 02:37
#4
@Lambo412
Honestly, As far as i'm concerned, thats nonsense. (No offense to you or anything)
If the files are accessible, they WILL be cracked. New game released are often cracked and uploaded to the net within 24 hours of launch, regardless of protection.
The ONLY way they would have a solid hold (and mind you, it doesn't make hacking impossible, just WAYY the heck less) is to have the data server-based.
I like what Diablo 2 did though which was saying.
"Eh heres a problem, and both answers have a trade-off. So we gave you both solutions. You pick."
That is a GOOD approach to problems. I'm honestly scared because it sounds like Borderlands is going keep it client-based.
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 03:55
#5
All and All
Honestly, unless you are playing with a stranger that you met in a lobby, you really are not vulnerable to hacks tho. Thats the same with consoles and PC gamers. And really, what kind of hacker in a co-op gae would try to cripple you? If anything it would benefit you, you would get all sorts of epic drops.
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 10:54
#6
@Rockabilly
That was something rather common. The #1 thing hacked in the D2 universe was items.
This took two forms of abuse that effected others.
1. Setting yourself to "aggressive" mode against other players, and PKing them without them standing the slightest chance (you could fight any player over level 9 that was outside of town I believe)
2. Tossing out hacked items to other players.
#2 Takes a much more personal opinion on whether its bad.
For me, It's pretty boring when you or one of your friends uses some weak skill and it instantly kills everything within 3 miles, all the loot is worthless because you have hacked items, and all that jazz. It kinda defeats the point for me.
For others who have a tough time grinding through the game, or (from what I've seen) people playing for the first time, just interested in seeing the story and the different places, usually enjoy hacked items.
I personally would say they ruin replay value...but thats just my opinion.
"What type of hacker in a co-op game would try to cripple you?"
The most common type. The asshole.
I don't disagree that private-games usually prevent the matter, it would just be a huge bummer if that was a "norm" in the game Because of hackers.
Wed, 07/08/2009 - 12:05
#7
Hmm...
I'm with Shadow. I hate it when there's some code that gives you everything, or some hacker for that matter. I just want to play how it's supposed to be played.
Thu, 07/09/2009 - 03:25
#8
Well, I have brought up the
Well, I have brought up the subject of hackers before. By no means am I trying to justify what they do, but with any game, there is a possibility to expose yourself to them. I have owned an Xbox 360 for several years now and I have only come across one hacker. Considering I am a regular gamer in the sense that I game often, thats pretty slim odds. In terms of cheats and codes, I admit I do use them, not as a means to get through the game, but rather as a way to spice up the action during the 2nd + play through.
And Shirow, I agree, "ass-hole" is a very common hacker type.
Thu, 07/09/2009 - 03:57
#9
Heh
My mind neglected the concept that it's going to be multi-platform.
For the 360 and PS3, I really wouldn't worry. Like unless you can wireless access the XBOX360's files on the harddrive (I have no clue if you can, I only computer game now-a-days)
My big concern, and my experiences with hackers and diablo 2 are all stemming from computers. Where the files are right there for messing with.
Actually, for 360 and PS3, I agree wthat having a single persistant character would be best. It would make little to no sense.
However, I still worry about the PC. (Especially since I use it =P)
It's the one thats most vulnerable in that setup.
Bleh, I'd try suggesting this to Gearbox or the such if they hadn't already entered certification stage. It's definitely somethnig to be mindful of. (Then again, with the way they've approached it so far, they might have gone over this too.)
Fri, 07/10/2009 - 00:30
#10
I definitely agree with
I definitely agree with Shiroshadow about being worried about the PC. While I've been a hardcore console gamer for years now I used to game on a PC pretty heavily and I always hated the hackers I ran into online. There are still cheaters in the console world but nowhere near what I've experienced while on a PC. I hope that Gearbox can make the game just as secure for all three platforms so no one gets left behind.
As for the idea of being able to have a persistent character between offline and online, I'm goin friggin nuts. Lionhead Studios promised us a similar experience with Fable 2 and they royally screwed that up, creating a super shallow system that ended up making you a henchman-wuss for the player whose game you joined. The fact that Borderlands will let me play the single-player campaign, level up, go kick ass with my buddies online, and then come back offline and frag some Rakks with all the loot and experience I gained makes me want the game this second. Damn Gearbox and it's plan to make a perfect game....
I'm a big Diablo II fan, and that statement makes me a do a double take.
First off, lemme say there are TWO online-multipalyer modes D2(Diablo II) had.
First was their "Official" Multiplayer, and the other was the "Open" Multiplayer.
Open multiplayer used your character data from singleplayer (Client-side, since is kept on your computer, the clients)
However, problem with this is, Anyone can edit data on THEIR computer, so hackers reigned supreme on these servers like you wouldn't believe (Still great to just pop online on a private room with your friend, it was easy enough to avoid hackers if you wanted to)
Official multiplayer however used server-side data, character data kept on blizzards servers. This was to prevent any modification, and make sure the playing field was level. For obvious reasons you COULDN'T use your singleplayer data on that mode.
Now my opinion on whether persistant character data is really reflective on what I just went over.
It depends on how they handle cheating/hackers, because keeping ALL data on the client, presents a HUGE risk.
Regardless of what happens, I plan to do co-op with my friends who played D2 with me (Since most of them are also looking forward to this game) Whether or not I have to do a private room. However, the possibility of rampant hacking and cheating could be a huge turn-off for a large bit of the crowd.