why do dev release games like these

LordPoncho posted...

I've never heard someone say it's mechanics are done poorly. Stop projecting your opinion as the widely accepted one.

creepjack posted...

LMFAO, wow. No one except you thinks the mechanics in Borderlands is poor. Its very solid as a shooter.

The thing with borderlands is that it's core elements are mostly meh or worse. The AI isn't anything special, the gunplay is average at best, and the weapons are rather bland, with very little difference in how they actually play between each other besides the fire rate and damage done. It might be 'very solid' in the same sense that A:CM can be considered very solid - if you look at the mechanics, they aren't too terrible, other than the AI. The difference however is the design and how those elements come together.

Borderlands had a lot of attention put into the design of it, resulting in a package which is worth more than the sum of its parts. Individual mechanics are meh, but overall, it's quite a solid game. Gearbox tried to attempt the same with A:CM but it simply couldn't work - the aliens franchise has a specific feel to it, the xenomorphs are supposed to act in a certain way, etc, but gearbox simply failed to implement those elements correctly resulting in a bad game, if mechanically average. Borderlands pulls through with its average combat by having an interesting open world with plenty of quests and a satisfying and rewarding leveling up mechanic, and an in-world excuse for the simple behaviour of the enemies. A:CM lacks either of those, resulting in this shipwreck of a game.

TomoEK9 posted...

Mastadi posted...

The guns don't really have enough power behind them - not only do they tend to lack actual power due to the RPG elements which is understandable, but the sounds, recoil, etc. just don't make them seem all that strong and in effect not that fun to use IMO. The fact that all the weapons are quite similar to each other doesn't help either.

And I don't really see how the fact that it has RPG elements excuses the average AI - non-action RPGs are only really fun if the AI provides a challenge, and for action games, it's a mixed bag depending on the players' expectations and type of game, but with something like borderlands, it really can go either way. They decided to go with the simple behaviours, which IMO turns the game into more of a level and item grind than a combat-orientated FPS-RPG hybrid. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, and as the sales figures show, turned out to be quite successful - it's a design choice with neither option being clearly superior over the other, despite the fact that one of the choices available requires a lot more work to implement.

I bolded the part that straight up tells us:

1. you are spouting an opinion

2. its a poorly informed opinion since you clearly never played the game.

Woah, slow down fanboy. No need to get your panties in a bunch. First of all, of course it is my opinion. It's hard to objectively say whether a game's mechanics are good or not unless they flat out refuse to work.

Second, I have played the first borderlands game enough to form an informed opinion of the game. Stop making assumptions, just because I'm not fond of some aspects of the game doesn't mean I haven't played it.

As for your other mess of a paragraph, still an opinion. You have yet to state anything other than "I don't like it, therefore its bad".

The loot and grind formula works, its how a lot of MMOs work, hell even a game as old as D2 worked on that system, are you going to go and tell me that D2 was a bad game for using those exact same loot and grind gameplay elements?

Reading comprehension. While I'd quite like more complex AI or Borderlands, I'm not saying that the enemy behaviours are a bad part of the game - mechanically, they're nothing special, but with the in-world justification of their lack of intelligence and the whole game being designed around grinding it works well and fine. If you had actually read what I wrote rather than just getting angry over me criticising a game, you'd see that from the quoted post.

And the AI being simple is a pretty objective statement, if you ask me. The enemies don't really work with each other, and they lack any complex planning or tactics. Not that this is a necessarily bad thing in the Borderlands series. It's a design decision. However, when you take that AI and port it into an aliens game and apply it to supposedly one of the most deadly and cunning creatures in the universe, it just doesn't work. Quite the opposite, seeing the aliens charging you head-on, serious sam style is quite ridiculous, and rather than creating an atmosphere of fear, it just makes the enemies look pathetic.

LordPoncho posted...

The term "poor game mechanics" doesn't refer to an opinion. It refers to a blanket statement that you've yet to follow through with a justification.

I have justified it though.

The AI is simple. It's functional, but it It lacks any complex behaviours or tactics, and most if not all melee enemies simply charge at you.

The guns don't feel powerful due to the RPG aspect meaning it will usually take a while to kill even standard enemy grunts of level equal to or around the player's level. As for the actual act of shooting itself,the recoil, etc, it is once again functional, but doesn't offer anything which would make it better than any other number of shooters on the market. The guns for the most part aren't anythin special or interesting either This combined with the AI makes most of the combat sequences simply a means to achieve an end for the most part rather than interesting experiences on their own.

I don't see what are you trying to achieve with this argument. In most aspects which can be related to A:CM, Borderlands tends to be very mediocre. And while BL made up for that with its design, Aliens simply doesn't as it lacks the grinding aspect of BL, and it requires great AI simply by being an Aliens game.