Showing posts with label online. Show all posts
Showing posts with label online. Show all posts

Thursday, September 15, 2016

The Post Game - Battleborn

Fun game with a low enjoyment ceiling. Recommended because I had fun with it for a while and it works, but repetitive PvE matches, poor PvP matchmaking / empty lobbies, lack of weapon modding and repetitive character leveling means it's not worth the full asking price.
Total size on my hard drive (base only, without the Season Pass content): 25GB.

Battleborn is a game of two parts: PvE and PvP.
PvE
First off, this is not a game for soloing. It can be done, but takes FOREVER. It's much better to try to find a match with other people. Unfortunately, this means the campaign is experienced in bits and pieces, frequently out of order. The story is episodic anyway, but any kind of sense to the story becomes hard to grasp. There's some guy Rendain who's trying to do – something – and our team of Battleborn, assisted by genius Kleese and the AI, Nova, are trying to stop him. Sounds good. The maps and levels flow well, the banter with Kleese and supporting characters is funny (the first few times), the graphics are colorful, and the combat has a good feel (wish sprint was faster, though Speed power-ups help). Bosses are suitably epic, but most enemies behave the same – and in many cases, ARE the same. PvE is best used to practice playing specific characters; expect it to get old fast – even with alternate dialogue for in-game transitions.

PvP
Several different modes with decent net-code – I didn't have many problems with lag (a few, but nothing catastrophic). There are the usual concerns (and complaints) about OP characters. Team-work and a balanced squad is rather more crucial than in other team-based games. Kill/death ratio has zero importance; work together to take down the enemy. If you try to go off on your own and rambo it, you'll die fast. Gearbox is still releasing new maps and characters at the time of this review, so there is some variety still to be had. The problem is that people just aren't playing Battleborn; the Steam “now playing” list indicates 800 people playing at once is a busy day. Out of the millions that log on to Steam every day, that's an incredibly small amount – and that's down from the 1,000 – 1,200 that showed up for a double XP weekend. This indicates that people do own the game, and play it for special events, but they have other things they'd rather play on a daily basis.

Ten people are required for PvP; if you don't have them, you can't start the match. Two is the minimum for PvE, but there's no drop-in / drop-out. Character skills are leveled up in the middle of the match. Press 1 to open the skill menu, press Q, E, or F to choose a skill, the skill is upgraded and the menu closes. It happens in mere seconds and works well. But the very next match, I have to level my character all over again. Obviously I'm supposed to experiment with new ways to play a character, but once you've figured out the best way to play a character, the in-game leveling just becomes annoying. Equipping the load-out doesn't activate the gear in it; the gear has to be activated by accumulating enough shards to do so. Shards are acquired by searching the area for deposits; sometimes enemies drop shards as well. This isn't a problem in PvE with three players or in PvP. In PvE with the maximum of five players, though, there just aren't enough shards to go around. Add to this that the better gear costs more shards to activate, and that it helps to spend shards on building turrets and such, and PvE becomes a mad rush for shards.

Gear can help with things like damage and shields, but it won't provide new weapons; all weapons are bespoke based upon which character you've chosen. I'm not sure if Gearbox was deliberately trying to make Battleborn different from Borderlands (“the weapon varieties were one of the most notable things about Borderlands, so let's not have ANY weapon variety in Battleborn”), but some simple weapon choices and alternatives would have helped add new ways to play beyond choosing a character. (Look at Mass Effect 3's multiplayer; simple as the multiplayer mode is, the number of weapons and the fact that they could be modified added simple but effective depth to the loadout). Instead, playing a specific way requires a specific character; it helps focus attention on the gallery of rogues Gearbox has assembled, but it felt limiting.

I didn’t have much of an issue with PvP balancing (Benedict was OP, but his reload speed was recently nerfed, largely solving the problem). I had no issue with Battleborn’s graphical optimization, either - I also didn't try to max out the graphics and blame Battleborn when the game started stuttering (reduce Draw Distance, Particle Effects and Ambient Occlusion for starters). The cartoony art style of Battleborn might lead you to think you can max it out (like I could do with Borderlands 2), but don't be fooled. Battleborn is very demanding when maxed.


Battleborn provides a good amount of entertainment, but needs more maps (both PvE and PvP), weapon customization, and a larger player base. Get it at 75% off or more so you don't feel too bad if / when you tire of it. Sounds harsh, but there really isn't that much to Battleborn.

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

On Cloud Saves and Redundancy

I nearly blogged about this yesterday in a "the sky is falling!" kind of post. A good thing I didn't, since the story has since been updated.

All save files and "careers" of NBA 2K14 are stored in the cloud, not locally. So when 2K took the servers offline, all save games were suddenly lost. Outrage led to 2K bringing the servers back online, saying they decided to extend server life from 18 months to 27 months. Users should be grateful, because 2K's original response was less than comforting: "Sadly this may come as an inconvenience to some of you and if so we truly do understand and can feel for how upsetting this may seem as there always is a special bond that occurs between a player and their MyCareer save but all good things must come to an end and rest assured your MyCareer or MyGM went out while on top!"

I don't play NBA 2K14 (Madden is more my thing). But it made me stop and think for a moment. There are three primary uses for online game servers: to store save games, to run DRM checks, and to create multiplayer lobbies.

Multiplayer Lobbies
With multi-player lobbies, it is no secret that the ability to run the game is dependent on third-party servers. You could be left handing in Left4Dead 2 if Steam's servers get overloaded (which is happening more and more often lately). Battlefield 4 - ditto for EA's servers. Unless someone is running a private server, it is generally accepted that online multiplayer gaming is at the mercy of the stability of the parent corporation's data stacks.

DRM Checks
DRM checks are unfortunately a run-of-the-mill experience these days. A company that sells a product deserves the right to protect the integrity of that product. That doesn't justify Ubisoft's invasive DRM back in the day (remember the Assassin's Creed II DRM debacle?), but if a company demands a license check when I start the game, fine.

The problem that arises is if I don't have internet for whatever reason, or if the game company's severs go down while attempting to play. Mass Effect 3 is a perfect example of this. Every time I log in to the game, a DRM check is run. Not just against my copy of the game, but against all the DLC that is installed with the game. If their servers are down, the game will authenticate (since game authentication is done locally), but the DLC will not. So there is no way I can continue playing the game until the EA servers come back online. Unless I want to start a new game - WITHOUT THE DLC. But when a game's DLC has been monetized like Mass Effect 3's has, who wants to play without it, if you have it? To be fair, this situation has only happened to me twice in three hundred fifty hours of single-player gameplay (EA's servers have been very reliable). And if their servers go down while in the middle of playing the game, everything has been authenticated, so there is no problem (just a little message that pops up saying that connection to EA's servers has been lost).

And what if the servers used to authenticate the game go offline? If you read my post on getting the original Assassin's Creed to run, you'll see that the only way to play that game on PC - even with the DRM-free version from GOG - is to disconnect your PC from the internet so that the game does hang trying to connect to a server that does not exist. A patch from Ubisoft would have been nice...

Save Games
And now, save games. Every single game I have every played has always had local saves that were backed up on line. This is incredibly convenient. Just Cause 2 is the type of game that I glut on, get bored, uninstall, re-install, and glut some more. It is great that the saves are backed up in the Steam cloud, so when I re-install, I can pick right up where I left off. But having the save-file system dependent on an internet connection? Maybe console gamers have better (more constant) connectivity, but as a PC gamer that kind of dependence just boggles my mind. Always have redundancies, whether you work for NASA and are on your way to Mars, or whether you're playing video games paid for with money that save and scraped together for months.

Not having local backups is just insane.

If 2K had patched NBA 2K14 so that all files were now local, then shut down the servers, they would be saving themselves the headache of keeping their servers running, and their userbase would not feel put upon. I understand why so many companies want to use the cloud for as much as possible, I really do. It helps them police piracy. But protection of a product cannot come at the expense of the user-base. That will result the rapid erosion of said user-base, until it no longer exists.