Topic: New Gearbox FPS/RPG: Borderlands is "Diablo meets Mad Max."

[idolminds]

Color me intrigued.

Info is in the new Game Informer, but it'll likely go public soon.

[scottws]

Gearbox?  Horrific, nightmarish memories of Halo PC are running around my head.

[Xessive]

Well, hopefully they've learned since Halo PC. They've had some decent titles and ports in the past too.

This is an intriguing idea so far!

[MysterD]

Wait, I though Id Software was making this game (Rage)?

Regardless, hey -- another FPS/RPG, eh? Cool.

It seems like this FPS/RPG is the new trend that STALKER seems to have kicked into making very popular, all of a sudden. Not surprising, given how well STALKER turned out.

First STALKER in 2007, now Bioshock coming next week, and Hellgate: London is coming later this year too.

After 2007 is done, we got also in the future Rage and Borderlands. Cool.

[Quemaqua]

I wouldn't really call BioShock an FPS/RPG, and Hellgate is really more of a straight-up RPG for the most part.  I think genres are simply adding more facets these days, not necessarily merging.  The more games that get created, the more depth that must be added to them in order to keep them fresh.  I really don't think STALKER had anything to do with it.  This is just a natural progression of design across the board.

[MysterD]

I think genres are simply adding more facets these days, not necessarily merging.  The more games that get created, the more depth that must be added to them in order to keep them fresh.

...

This is just a natural progression of design across the board.

Great point, Que.

There have been a few genre-benders, bending elements combined in say FPS's and RPG's in the past few years. Some w/ more FPS elements than RPG, some w/ more RPG elements than FPS, some w/ a damn good mix of both.

To name a few from the past -- System Shock series did it (FPS/RPG), Deus Ex series did it (FPS/RPG), Vamp: Bloodlines did it (RPG mixed w/ some FPS elements).

In 2007 alone -- STALKER did it (FPS mixed w/ a few RPG elements),  Hellgate will do it (more RPG than FPS elements).

Now, Rage will do it, and Borderlands will now do so.

It really just seems that all of a sudden, especially now more-so than ever, more of these genre-benders are being made and published -- mixing both elements from RPG's and FPS's, regardless of which genre the game will rely more heavily on.

[Quemaqua]

Really, I don't even view those as "RPG" elements anymore.  Just as many action games use character building on some level.  It's hardly a thing exclusive to RPGs now.  Lots of action games are using more adventure elements, too, but those aren't generally associated with actual adventure games anymore.  To me what a roleplaying game means now is completely different from what it meant even as little as 8 years ago.

[MysterD]

2K will be publishing this game.

[MysterD]

Gearbox will use Double Fusion for its upcoming games, to place in-game ads into their games....

Gearbox, Double Fusion strike in-game ad deal
Developer of Borderlands, Brothers in Arms commits to plugging sponsors in upcoming products.

By Brendan Sinclair, GameSpot
Posted Mar 25, 2008 3:19 pm PT

Gearbox is throwing something new under the hood of its upcoming lineup. Today the developer and Double Fusion announced a deal that will see the studio incorporate in-game ads into upcoming titles.

Games covered by the deal weren't specified, but Gearbox has a broad slate of offerings in development, including Brothers in Arms Hell's Highway, Aliens: Colonial Marines, Borderlands, Heat, and Samba de Amigo. Double Fusion will handle both dynamically streaming ads and sponsorship opportunities for games that fall under the agreement.

"We're incredibly focused on authenticity and we believe our partnership with Double Fusion and their advertising partners will allow our game worlds to have all the plausibility of the real world," said Gearbox VP of licensing David Eddings in a statement. "The advertisers, in turn, bring value that will enable us to invest even more in creating the best possible video game experiences."

Double Fusion has previously signed ad deals with THQ, Take-Two Interactive, Midway, NCsoft, and Eidos.

[Quemaqua]

Go to hell and die, Gearbox.

[Cobra951]

Really, I don't even view those as "RPG" elements anymore.  Just as many action games use character building on some level.  It's hardly a thing exclusive to RPGs now.  Lots of action games are using more adventure elements, too, but those aren't generally associated with actual adventure games anymore.  To me what a roleplaying game means now is completely different from what it meant even as little as 8 years ago.

Well, OK, but words need some stability, or we won't be able to talk to each other.  If Bioshock isn't FPS or RPG or a mix, what is it?  Just because popular RPG elements filter to other genres, must they be demoted somehow?

[Pugnate]

Bioshock wasn't an RPG. I don't even see any RPG elements in Bioshock. In fact, I even noted Kevin Levine state several times that Bioshock was a pure shooter, denying that it was even a hybrid.

System Shock 2 and Deux Ex on the other hand, were hybrids. The latter far more than the former.

If Bioshock isn't FPS or RPG or a mix, what is it?  Just because popular RPG elements filter to other genres, must they be demoted somehow?

In case anyone misinterprets that, I am sure Cobra means "demoted" in terms of genre, rather than in terms of quality. But really, how is Bioshock an RPG? I looked at it as a good shooter, with some great art direction and sound, but with an illusion of choices. It was like eating the Jack in a Box meal, without getting the calories.

Any shooter that deserves to classified as an RPG hybrid needs to provide actual choice, with actual consequence, rather than the illusion of it, which is what Bioshock did. I am not unhappy with Bioshock's direction, because the developers never at any point before or after release, claimed the game was an RPG hybrid, or that it even had RPG elements. They always maintained the game was a shooter, which is how I always took it, and the rest came as a pleasant surprise.

Take Deus Ex or System Shock 2, for example. Both allowed for weapon modifications, meaningful character stat manipulations, and various augmentations, that weren't superficial. The choices in each case were plenty, yet the decisions were permanent. For example, weapon modifications were permanent decisions, with the choices having actual variety. The choices weren't like some buffet, where the only consequence of your decision was trying one dish, before trying the other anyway. It was either the soup, or the salad, where the decision actually affected the rest of the meal somewhat (I am sorry, its lunch time here).

Again, I hope this doesn't sound like I am criticizing Bioshock. Any roleplaying elements it could have had, were simplified to the point of being options by name only, but while it may have made for a weak Action/RPG hybrid if the game had tried to be one, it made for a very rich shooter.

There is one other thing I'd like to mention. Bioshock's mechanics are to RPGs, what Bioware games' dialog options are to Adventure games. 

[Cobra951]

Actually, "demoted" was meant to modify "RPG elements" in my sentence.  Because of the ambiguity with "genres", I guess that makes it a dangling modifier?  It's been too long since school.  If I had paid better attention, I think I would have probably used plural and singular to clarify.

Just because popular RPG elements filter to another genre, must they be demoted somehow?

Better?   

Any whey, my point is that popularity of components should not change the definition of "RPG".  There seems to be a lot of resistance to applying the term "RPG" to action games, even as hyphenated subtext.  I'm not sure why.  In one way or another, most of the hardcore games that we get into are role-playing games, complete with developing characters, growing capabilities and expanding inventories.  There are long threads around on this very subject, though they may be old enough to be buried with TME.

[Pugnate]

There seems to be a lot of resistance to applying the term "RPG" to action games, even as hyphenated subtext

I think most modern games that use RPG elements tend to simplify them for the current mass market generation. Even if the games are good, they lack the complexity of the true hybrids of the past. At least that's what I think.

[Quemaqua]

Nearly every action game out there now features some persistence in the way you build your character, and that doesn't make it an RPG hybrid.  Did anybody call GTA San Andreas an RPG hybrid?  No.  But you could buy clothes to change your appearance, build your muscles and stamina, etc.  You can buy all kinds of new moves and stuff in Devil May Cry 4 using experience/currency you get from dead enemies, but there's nothing RPG like about that game in any capacity.  My point is simply that just because you take a little something from here or there doesn't make your game a hybrid.  Like Pug said, BioShock was not a hybrid game, it was a pure shooter with a slightly different path to growth.  Yes, it offered the ability to buy weapons and a couple other abilities, but those elements weren't anywhere even near remotely deep enough to classify the game as a hybrid.  It was a somewhat open-ended shooter with a great narrative, that's all.

You might use a counter argument with another genre that implies duality of some kind, like an "action RPG" say, but I don't think that works.  An action RPG isn't a hybrid action game and RPG, it's simply an RPG that involves combat with button presses in real time as opposed to turn-based combat.  It doesn't mean you've got a mini Devil May Cry inside it anywhere, it just means that it doesn't use turns.

Sins of a Solar Empire, however, is a true hybrid game.  Why?  Because everything that it claims to borrow from is actually present in a deep and meaningful capacity, not only in terms of window dressing or an extra spin to throw in for good measure, but in terms of raw core gameplay.  It is an RTS game in a considerable number of ways, and it is a 4X game in all the ways that the genre's title suggests.  It's like the difference between having a two-scoop vanilla sundae with chocolate sprinkles on top and having one with a scoop of vanilla and another full scoop of pure chocolate.  Both have chocolate, but the first one is still simply a vanilla sundae at the end of the day.

[Xessive]

From a philosophical point any game which lets you take on the role of a character is a "role playing game." So what defines a typical RPG? What sets it apart and gives it the label? I think we have to figure that out before we can get into a discussion about what games fall under which genres.

Are RPG's games in which you build a character and select its stats? Are they games in which your character can make plot-affecting choices?

[Pugnate]

Did anybody call GTA San Andreas an RPG hybrid?  No.  But you could buy clothes to change your appearance, build your muscles and stamina, etc.

Like you said, San Andreas was definitely not an RPG hybrid, even if it did have some elements of an RPG. Having said that, I found that even San Andreas allowed for more roleplaying -- slight as it was -- than Bioshock.

I wonder if Rockstar would actually want to turn GTA into an RPG. It could easily, with the huge open world, the NPCs, the stat manipulation etc.

If GTA presented gamers with actual morale choices that affected the storyline, at least somewhat, then it would be on its way. Unfortunately, that would probably take away from the fun. Running down a hundred cops in GTA is fun because there is no actual consequence. If the game presented weeping widows, and realistic consequences, then no one would be playing the bad guy.

It is like when I tried to play the evil role in KOTOR or Baldur's Gate II. I just couldn't, because I actually felt bad. In GTA, I never felt bad, because crushing GTA policemen was more like taking a sledgehammer to a watermelon, rather than an actual skull.

From a philosophical point any game which lets you take on the role of a character is a "role playing game." So what defines a typical RPG? What sets it apart and gives it the label? I think we have to figure that out before we can get into a discussion about what games fall under which genres.

Are RPG's games in which you build a character and select its stats? Are they games in which your character can make plot-affecting choices?

Yes, but the term "RPG" is used in gaming circles in a very specific sense, and not in the most literal sense. (Damn you for starting this. )

It's like that with the genre term "Adventure", as well, where by literal definition, every game is an adventure game. Yet, as we all know, Adventure games stand for those that follow a singular path of puzzle solving, character interaction, and exploration, surrounded by a focused narrative. Even that definition isn't absolute, because I am sure you can probably fit games into that definition, that aren't "Adventure".

But back to the subject at hand. I think a game that most industry folk would define as an RPG, is a game, which as it is played through its storyline, allows you to shape the development (most commonly, but not limited to stats) of a character(s)-- created or preexisting --, through the variety of character affecting choices made in that game, to the point where two identical starting characters, can end the game being drastically different or absolutely the same, with the degree of difference depending on the choices made.

I feel by that definition, you can explain why games as dramatically different as Diablo and Final Fantasy, can attach RPG to their genre labels. Also by that definition, you can see how Bioshock isn't at all an RPG, in that its choices are inconsequential.

[Xessive]

Haha I just started this to get a reaction

I agree with you though on your final point. Role-playing games indefinitely let you play throughout a story and allow you (to a certain extent) to shape the game as a whole; very likely resulting in no two players having the exact same experience.

Multiple endings don't make a RPG. That's just multi-linearity and it can apply to any genre.

I also agree that Bioshock is a true shooter, albeit with many character choices and weapon mods. Besides the technical details, what would set its gameplay apart from Quake? Not much.

I think the confusion with Bioshock comes from a lot of peoples' anticipation of it being System Shock 2's "spiritual successor." While there are similarities, it is a very different game with different gameplay mechanics.

[MysterD]

It's like that with the genre term "Adventure", as well, where by literal definition, every game is an adventure game. Yet, as we all know, Adventure games stand for those that follow a singular path of puzzle solving, character interaction, and exploration, surrounded by a focused narrative. Even that definition isn't absolute, because I am sure you can probably fit games into that definition, that aren't "Adventure".

The thing w/ adventure games is that you often NEVER result to violence to solve many problems. In shooters, most times, a weapon will always solve a puzzle/problem.

Also, many games that are labeled adventures have some complex puzzles that you likely will not find in say in any game in any other genre. Good luck finding some tough and complex Myst-style puzzles in a RPG -- or any game in another genre (that is not an adventure).

We are seeing lately some adventure games do what Maniac Mansion (on the NES) did in the early days -- games such as recently Post Mortem, Shadow of Destiny, and Culpa Innata -- where the game is definitely a pure adventure, but has one of those common RPG's elements of where you will sometimes give a choice in either dialogue or a few ways to solve a certain puzzle. And depending on what you decide, your game's end-result will likely be different. Personally, I'd like to see more adventure go this route, myself.

I think we're going to see a lot of games tapping and dabbling into elements of other genres just to try and keep the genre fresh.

Haha I just started this to get a reaction Tongue

I agree with you though on your final point. Role-playing games indefinitely let you play throughout a story and allow you (to a certain extent) to shape the game as a whole; very likely resulting in no two players having the exact same experience.

Multiple endings don't make a RPG. That's just multi-linearity and it can apply to any genre.

Agreed.

But I think it's often a huge element in RPG's -- especially CRPG's and Western RPG's.

The other huge element found in RPG's is the character and stat building AKA "the leveling up process."

I also agree that Bioshock is a true shooter, albeit with many character choices and weapon mods. Besides the technical details, what would set its gameplay apart from Quake? Not much.

Agreed.

I think the confusion with Bioshock comes from a lot of peoples' anticipation of it being System Shock 2's "spiritual successor." While there are similarities, it is a very different game with different gameplay mechanics.

I think Bioshock is a lot similar to SS2 in many ways (i.e. lots of action, games takes place pretty much in one big indoor location, both games have a similar wrench ), but it's also different in some regards (i.e. Bioshock has not too much of an Inventory here, less messing around w/ RPG building elements, option to modify weapons, not much building levels on your abilities) -- especially since in some of the common RPG element found in SS2 are pretty much gone or quite simplified in Bioshock.

Regardless, I'd like to say this -- Bioshock and SS2 are both great games nobody should really miss.

[Xessive]

If you think about it they did a Hell of a job with simplifying weapon modification and plasmids.. Imagine how deterring it could have been for mainstream players or someone just new to gaming. Any number of interface factors could have gone horribly wrong but they managed to pull it off.

The thing I really appreciated about Bioshock was that it was simplified not "console-ized." The simplicity of the design made it compatible with consoles and PC. I like the principle of it and from a design standpoint they did an outstanding job.

[MysterD]

If you think about it they did a Hell of a job with simplifying weapon modification and plasmids.. Imagine how deterring it could have been for mainstream players or someone just new to gaming. Any number of interface factors could have gone horribly wrong but they managed to pull it off.

Good point.

I liked that the switching b/t Plasmids and Weapons while playing was so easy in the PC version -- by default, just Right-Click on the mouse to switch. Worked out great.

The thing I really appreciated about Bioshock was that it was simplified not "console-ized." The simplicity of the design made it compatible with consoles and PC. I like the principle of it and from a design standpoint they did an outstanding job.

I liked both Bioshock and SS2.
Both were great, if you ask me.

Irrational really has an outstanding track record -- Freedom Force series, Tribes: V, System Shock 2, Bioshock, etc.

[MysterD]

Gearbox's President Randy Pitchford responds to all the "in-game ad" complaints floating around w/ future Gearbox's games.

Gearbox defends in-game ads
Studio president Randy Pitchford insists the company won't turn Brothers-in-Arms into a commercial battlefield.

By Brendan Sinclair, GameSpot
Posted Mar 28, 2008 5:40 pm PT

Earlier this week, developer Gearbox and in-game ad firm Double Fusion announced a partnership to explore advertising opportunities for the studio's upcoming games. While reader reaction wasn't entirely negative, there was no shortage of sentiments like, "Ads have no place in games, period," or, "In-game advertising's victories are gamers' losses in the long run."

Concerned by the reception to the announcement, Gearbox president Randy Pitchford today posted a blog entry addressing the company's approach to in-game advertising, and assuring players that it would not be allowed to detract from upcoming projects.

"The smart and successful advertisers' goal is for you to trust and respect them," Pitchford wrote. "If their ads invade or injure our entertainment, we get angry and reject them. If, however, something feels natural and unintrusive, they get the value they were looking for… So, please don't judge us by the fact that some folks out there do it wrong and with exploitation as their key driving factor. This is not our motivation or intent. Don't judge us based on fears that may not turn out to be true."

Pitchford said that Gearbox hasn't committed to in-game advertising for any of its upcoming titles, and that the deal will only allow Double Fusion to contact the studio with proposals. Furthermore, he said any possible deal would need to benefit the game, whether through increased authenticity (like vintage corporate logos on historically accurate factories in Brothers-in-Arms), increased budgets to make better games, or out-of-game promotion, like the Halo-themed Mountain Dew flavor.

[scottws]

In game ads don't bother me as long as they don't appear out-of-place, don't harm game performance because they are streamed in from someplace, and don't include spyware that spys on your system.  That last one is the real kicker.

[MysterD]

In game ads don't bother me as long as they don't appear out-of-place, don't harm game performance because they are streamed in from someplace, and don't include spyware that spys on your system.  That last one is the real kicker.

Hard to argue what you've said there, Scott.

The problem is most of these games w/ in-games ads, they break at least one of those rules you mentioned above.

[MysterD]

About 25 were laid off from Gearbox.
It's supposedly due to the fact that BIA: HH didn't sell that good.
Aliens: Colonial Marines was rumored to be shelved, but Gearbox says it is still in the works.