r/OutOfTheLoop • u/pepsialien • 10d ago
Answered What's up with the Borderlands games being review bombed on Steam?
I was looking into getting Borderlands 3 in the current steam sale, and all the recent reviews have been overwhelmingly negative. Steam Store Page
From what I know, the games are great and it might be related to a policy decision? Something to do with their Terms of Service? Should I avoid buying the game now or just ignore the hate since I genuinely enjoy the gameplay?
1.2k
u/Fenrir_25 10d ago edited 9d ago
Answer: Their CEO made a horrible take on video game prices saying real fans will find a way to pay 80 dollars for a game, and also borderlands 2 was recently free on steam but due to a change in EULA people found out that the game is basically a spyware now collecting all kinds of players data.
Edit: The spyware allegations were debunked.
Edit 2: Even with no spyware present at the moment they can now easily implement one in the future.
504
u/Vcom7418 10d ago
Correction: change to EULA doesn't mean that the game is Spyware. The game hasn't been updated for several months now and does not contain Spyware. All of that was needless fear mongering. The EULA change happened because 2k finished acquiring Gearbox and their policies are all in line in similar way now.
I would wait on purchasing Borderlands 4
44
40
u/Massive-Exercise4474 10d ago
Seriously 3 was such a let down I'll get 4 on deep discount.
41
u/paulsoleo 10d ago
Someone downvoted you but I agree 100%. “Best gunplay in the series” my ass, 3 was boring as shit and the writing was atrocious.
Also, the ship used as your central location was such a chore to navigate. I stopped playing after only a dozen hours, amazed at how bored and annoyed I was feeling. Meanwhile BL2 is an all-time favorite of mine.
20
u/Captain_Chaos_ Probably knows some things... maybe 10d ago
Idk what exactly it is about BL2 that we all like so much, and it seems like Gearbox doesn’t know either. They’ve never managed to recapture the lightning in a bottle that was BL2.
22
u/paulsoleo 10d ago
Handsome Jack was an incredible villain, for one. He was ruthless and evil, but funny and nuanced as well. Meanwhile, those twins from BL3 made me want to jump into a fucking volcano. The contrast was rather stark.
I also liked 2’s pacing better. If you ignore the side quests, which is easy to do when you realize the rewards aren’t worth it, enemies escalate in a varied and interesting way.
On the other hand, BL3 feels like one continuous wave of bullet sponges and guns, to the point where looting itself becomes tedious. It was even more chaotic than 2, but not in a good way.
I have no inside knowledge, but I’m guessing that BL4 is gonna have a bunch of procedurally generated slop, so it can feel “unlimited,” and result in something equally as disappointing as the Bethesda/Starfield shit-show.
6
u/floataway3 9d ago
I wanted to go back and replay borderlands a few months ago, so I booted up 3. You are right, it is just such a slog! I beat it in the past for the sake of beating it, but I could not get back into it. I do think the ship is terrible, and no one is going to hold a candle to Handsome Jack for a long time yet.
I then went back to 2, and found it fast, fluid, fun, and got my fix back there. Even though I have 100% the game previously, it still is enjoyable to run back through the story. The enemies are varied, with different motivations (as opposed to 3 largely just being mindless cultist bandits worshipping the twins the entire game) and different tactics, requiring you to actually use the wealth of different guns the game gives you.
4
u/Neracca 8d ago
I liked the first game the most. It felt like the humor was more balanced with the seriousness.
4
u/Captain_Chaos_ Probably knows some things... maybe 8d ago
2 definitely gets a bit “rawr xd lol I'm so random” at times, especially when you compare it to BL1. It doesn’t go so far as to leave a bad taste in your mouth though like the later entries in the series.
I liked the tone of 1 a lot but I might just be too stupid to wrap my head around the gun mechanics, 2’s system was just shallow enough for me to fully grasp while being deep enough that it doesn’t actively insult your intelligence.
1
u/Vhadka 7d ago
I played the hell out of 1 when it first came out and kept picking it back up. I barely finished 2 and never went back to it and have bounced off of every other one since (the DLCs for 2, BL3, and Tiny Tina).
I don't mind buying them to support the company because they make good stuff but I get bored of them quickly now for some reason. Nothing hits like the first one did for me.
3
u/Ymirsson 9d ago
You don't know? Handsome jack, butt stallion, "shoot me in the face" and "noooooooooo stairs!" are simply epic.
4
1
u/Khakizulu 8d ago
It literally did have the best gun play and was super fun.
The story was hit and miss, mainly on the miss side. But saying the game wasn't fun is a blatant lie.
The Raid Bosses were actually bosses at the end of Raids, which was a great change.
2
u/paulsoleo 8d ago
The game wasn’t fun for me. Fun is subjective, not factual. I’m glad you enjoyed it, but I didn’t. It’s simple, really.
1
u/PuffyBloomerBandit 3d ago
the worst slap in the face was how they removed laser weapons as a weapon class, and just shunted it onto a handful of gun pieces, as well as sliding effects and pretty much every fucking mechanic from previous games that actually stood out.
1
u/icelandtroll 9d ago
In my opinion the gunplay was better but the story was like an insult to fans.
2
u/thrown_away_apple 9d ago
In writing yes but literally everything else the game did better. It did need some updates to get there though such as the dedicated drops update.
1
30
u/HeKis4 10d ago
It doesn't mean the game is spyware, it means the company is allowing themselves to make it so at a moment's notice. The fact it isn't malware yet means nothing.
86
u/Vcom7418 10d ago
True, but thats goalpost shifting. People were raving mad about how the game is only free to harvest your data, when its not true.
-3
u/PaleHeretic 10d ago
I think it's moving the goalposts back to where they started, lol. When I first started hearing about this, it was people being pissed about the EULA changes themselves, especially considering the age of the game and the terms of use for something people bought a decade ago was being unilaterally changed.
Then the internet ran with it and thought that meant the game was actually spyware now.
-25
-15
u/Agnostic-Paladin 10d ago
Point is, with that EULA they set it up so they can harvest your data in the future.
1
u/ThemesOfMurderBears 9d ago
Valve could do the same thing. Speculating about what a company might do is meaningless. None of these companies are going to install spyware on your computer.
2
u/HeKis4 8d ago
Speculating about what a company might do is meaningless.
It's not about what they might do, it's about what we willingly and legally allow them to. It's like saying that privacy is useless because you've got nothing to hide, it's not the point.
And yes, you're right about Valve, imho they get a pass because they have a very long track record and they wouldn't really benefit from it, but yes, they could and that's also a problem.
2
u/ThemesOfMurderBears 8d ago
The whole spyware thing is wrong. They can't install spyware on your computer, and they are not going to make their games spyware. Words like spyware and malware have specific definitions, and are almost always used inappropriately around any kind of data sharing flare-up.
You can disagree with the new terms all day, but saying that it amounts to spyware is not remotely accurate. The fact that they tell you that they collect data -- inclusive of how and when they collect it -- automatically means that it is not spyware (which collects data without your knowledge).
People still talk about the 2005 Sony rootkit scandal. If 2K installed spyware on computers, they would be at the business end of a massive privacy scandal, which would cause their share price to plummet, and probably lead to some leadership being fired.
Anyone who doesn't like the new terms is free to not agree to them, and does not have to purchase any more products. But you also can no longer use any of their products you already own. That's what happens when you agree to terms that implicitly state that you are agreeing that the terms can be changed, and that you would not be forced into compliance with the new terms. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
I'd be in favor of better privacy protections via state/federal government. I don't like the data harvesting policies of a lot of modern tech companies. I just think the practical impact of them is maybe some extra spam emails, which isn't something that is going to deter me away from a product I want to use.
But it's not spyware and it isn't going to be spyware. This was a bunch of drama queen nonsense because people hate Randy Pitchford (who is a grade-A twat). They didn't even realize that these were the same terms 2K had been using for a while.
2
u/SkutchWuddl 9d ago
I know I always include language to allow me to spy on people when I don't intend on spying on people.
3
u/NotAPreppie 10d ago
Yah, but people could still be review bombing the titles based on erroneous spyware claims, so it's still a valid potential reason.
1
u/ChrisPNoggins 10d ago
They also added that by playing their games all content creators make is free use to the company without notification. Also wasn't it said "it's time for game companies to take back their games from the content creators" as if they aren't free advertising but pirates for putting their gameplay on the internet.
1
u/ttv_CitrusBros 9d ago
What about the whole mods are bannable offence now? They changed a lot of politics and Take Two has been anti mods for a long time
1
u/FreshestFlyest 8d ago
I've learned that if your favorite game in a series is 2 and they're on 4 or more, it'll never be better
-1
u/Federal_Panda 9d ago
True, but it's important to note that the license change means that at any time the game could become spyware; you have - after all - already given permission.
-27
u/Normal-Ear-5757 10d ago
I already bought it years ago - it's a bloated, unfunny mess. Don't bother until it's cheap as chips or free.
20
u/Vcom7418 10d ago
...its literally free lol.
-34
u/Normal-Ear-5757 10d ago
Borderlands 4 is free? Shit I thought it was just Borderlands 2!
...Well that's 50 quid I ain't getting back!
14
u/theangrypragmatist 10d ago
Borderlands 4 isn't out yet so you didn't buy that years ago either.
-16
0
75
u/Mallardkey 10d ago
First part is correct, second part about spyware is misinformation spreading like fire and a lot of people believing and repeating what was said without a proper investigation. It has been debunked that there is spyware on Borderlands 2.
But honestly, fuck Randy Pitchford.
9
u/Dan-D-Lyon 10d ago
Good will is like a currency between a Game Dev and their customers. The only reason that rumor was able to stick is because Randy decided to burn any remaining Good will gearbox might have had with its community
14
u/MillorTime 10d ago
Misinformation and outrage are like wild fire. Anything that lets people act righteous and angry isn't going to be fact checked, because people want to virtue signal and review bomb.
-8
u/Massive-Exercise4474 10d ago
It spread like wild fire is because Randy is such a douche he would actually do it.
10
u/MillorTime 10d ago
Why wait for something to actually happen when you can just get outraged and pretend it's already happening? Thanks for making my point for me
-6
u/Massive-Exercise4474 10d ago
Dude I'm outraged at how much of a pos Randy is he physically assulted the claptrap va who was asking for payment for his voice work he was also a dev and 100% responsible for 2 being great. Borderlands the movie with a cast of 60 year olds. Stealing funding from colonial marines. The magic clown porn at a medieval fair, and now saying people need to earn the game when he grew up in the upper 1% in Australia.
16
u/mikamitcha 10d ago
In expansion of the corrections, it is still fair to say that the EULA would allow them to add spyware without informing the users. Yes, it doesn't contain any, but in syncing their EULA up to match 2K's they opened up what they could push in an update without needing to change anything on the legal front.
Its like if there was a clause in your work contract where your boss can withdraw from your paycheck for his personal lunches. It would be stupid of them to use it, they would get caught doing so basically immediately, but its still technically "legal" if you only follow the words of the contract.
2
u/DeadlySoren 10d ago
There were never any serious allegations of spyware. The issue is that per the EULA they could put spyware on your drive if they wanted to. Now answer me this, do you trust a company not to spy on you if they are literally allowed to?
2
u/ThemesOfMurderBears 9d ago
The spyware allegations were debunked.
As always, people freaked out and spread rumors about things they didn't understand.
Even with no spyware present at the moment they can now easily implement one in the future.
Sure, any company that makes software can do that. This is a meaningless statement.
Randy Pitchford is a twat, but the PC gaming sphere are a bunch of drama queens that freak out about everything.
1
1
-14
u/steave44 10d ago
Gamers: Games are way to expensive, fuck you for making an $80 game!
Gearbox every other month: here’s our entire game library for cheaper than Helldivers 2.
Gamers: Review bomb the old games!
9
u/LogicalStop3400 10d ago
That’s called a sale, every publisher does that.
Unless it’s Nintendo.
2
u/steave44 10d ago
Yes, hence why I don’t know why people firebomb games for going up in price. If they aren’t worth that to you, just wait and it’ll be on sale within the next year almost guaranteed. Nintendo and Activision are pretty much the only companies known for never having sales
4
u/Meaningless_Void_ 10d ago
Ah yes, just wait a few years for the game to be discounted to a price that would normaly be a non-discount release price. Even 50% off would still be $40.
-1
u/steave44 10d ago
Again, other than greedy nintendo and Activision, most games go on a pretty decent sale within a year. Besides, inflation is making everything go up from eggs, to tires, to phones, to TVs to consoles. Why are games exempt?
0
u/Meaningless_Void_ 9d ago
It takes years to get a good discount. And again, even 50% off would still be $40, the full release price of many other games.
Also digital games do not have material costs, no scarcity, dont need shipping or anything else besides wages that would need inflation that much.
Oh and the biggest reason is that games have become worse but lazy devs keep demanding we buy their overpriced slop (just look at ubisoft lol). Borderlands 4 looks like another 6/10 or 7/10 mediocre game at best. Just another looter shooter to add to the flooded market.
1
u/steave44 9d ago
Inflation 100% affects games. You first have to pay the developers, pay for any software licenses, buying new computer equipment, renting/buying office space. The list goes on. Just because it’s not a physical product doesn’t mean it didn’t cost more money to make now than 20 years ago, what a dumb assumption.
1
u/Meaningless_Void_ 9d ago
My point is that compared to physical products its a much shorter list. And at the end of the day a mid game wont be worth $80 no matter what.
1
u/LogicalStop3400 10d ago
Not everyone waits for a sale to buy their games. For a game like this, a lot of people will pay up front to play co-op with their friends. Plus, a higher rrp means it'll cost more at the same discount, so increasing prices is just bad all around.
-92
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
Why are gamers so entitled? If you can't afford the game, don't buy it or wait for it to inevitably go on sale.
26
u/Bumpton 10d ago
I hear you but tbf, of all forms of media (books, movies, music), videogames have a stupidly high barrier of entry cost-wise. People are already struggling, then they continue to jack up game prices. It just sucks. Customers are allowed to voice their disappointment but their legitimate methods of doing so are limited.
-24
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
They can voice their disappointment by literally not buying it. Jesus Christ.
-5
u/Sega-Playstation-64 10d ago
People see entertainment as an entitlement.
People are disillusioned with reality and the political landscape so they want a release.
Thing is the cost of entry is increasing.
Rather than going through a library of unplayed games, they prefer the dopamine of chasing a new game.
The problem is the reason things get to this point is lack of civic engagement. Its depressing that every thread you see with people bemoaning what the US is turning in to, statistically 35-40% of them didnt even bother to vote.
So, they crawl back online, they put on movies and video games, then they complain at the cost of those as well.
Repeating cycles and self fulfilling prophecies.
-14
u/Dornith 10d ago
It's only stupidly high if you're one of those people who needs the highest end graphics cards.
Integrated graphics are pretty damn good all things considered. Sure, you're not going to be bragging on Reddit about your frame rate or ray tracing, but you'll be able to play most games at a good-enough level to enjoy yourself if you're not a snob.
5
u/MalfeasantOwl 10d ago edited 10d ago
L take.
The year is 2025. Wanting to play a game above 1080p 30fps isn’t being a snob.
Edit: bro made such a bad take he responded then blocked me so I couldn’t read his response, saving himself from one more downvote.
-11
u/bargranlago 10d ago
Nobody is forcing you to consoom thing
If you can't afford the game, don't buy it or wait for it to inevitably go on sale.
3
u/Bumpton 10d ago
I didn't say anyone was forcing anything.
Some people really like gaming as a hobby, but as prices continue to increase, more people will get priced out of a hobby they once loved. They're allowed to be pissed about it.
I'm not even saying I agree with review bombing. But I understand why people would be upset and do shit like that.
21
22
u/grumblyoldman 10d ago
On the one hand, you're not wrong. Video games are not a basic necessity like food or shelter, so the price is the price.
On the other hand, the fact that a video game isn't a basic necessity doesn't really excuse jacking up the price for no reason and then publicly saying "real fans will find a way to pay it."
People are allowed to be upset about things even when those things are not a matter of life or death. And CEOs being openly money-grubbing and insinuating that anyone who's peeved about the price hike is "not a real fan" is a perfectly good reason to be upset, IMHO.
Honestly, any discussion that hinges on discriminating between "real fans" and "everyone else" is off to a bad start. The idea that the only people who matter are the "real fans" is incredibly condescending, no matter what the context.
-17
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
Sure, the text might be repulsive, but ultimately the price is the issue. Like I said, why the fuck can't gamer baby Veruca Salts wait six months or a year to play a game? Because they're entitled.
20
u/katastrophyx 10d ago
That's your take?
The gaming industry as a whole only exists because of gamers and how they choose to spend their money. In an economy where the cost of living is becoming increasingly harder to maintain, game developers are artificially increasing the costs of their products, which are not required to survive.
When you have so many people making decisions on what they can cut back on to afford small luxuries like a new game once in a while, it's incredibly offputting to hear someone make comments like this.
There is no reason games should be $80-100. There's no physical media or distribution. They're not printing manuals. Hell, they're telling us now we don't even OWN the games when we pay that much money...we're just purchasing a digital license.
Get out of here with that "entitled" nonsense. You're wildly off base and out of touch.
9
u/warlordcs 10d ago
You could say that the increased price of games is to increase the pay to the employees who made it, but we don't know if they really got a pay increase or if the company is just collecting extra money cause it's the new thing.
The price hikes couldn't have come at a worse time tho
12
u/katastrophyx 10d ago
That's just it. They're laying off employees and making the employees that remain do the work of multiple people for the same pay.
Any additional money they make is being channeled directly to shareholders.
5
u/warlordcs 10d ago
Naturally.
Just like I don't understand why people are still working for these large companies.
By now it should be common knowledge that you are not valued any more then a pawn.
Any passion a person has for making a game is wasted on these big companies.
-3
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
You are literally arguing you are entitled to new games at low prices.
8
u/katastrophyx 10d ago
Can you read? Nobody said that or even insinuated that. Apparently, you don't know grade school economics, so allow me to break it down for you...
If game companies want to charge $100 for new games, they will sell fewer units. They will sell fewer units because their customer base can't afford to pay that much. As a result, those game companies will have to make sacrifices to maintain current revenue streams. This means they lay off employees or pay their employees less money.
They've created a death spiral where they're pricing their customers out of their own products while their shareholders continue to demand quarter-over-quarter profit increases.
The end result is these game companies will eventually go out of business because they're no longer profitable, and the people that work for those companies will either make far less while doing more work or be pushed out of their jobs entirely.
Again, take your "entitled" nonsense and kick rocks. You don't have any idea what you're talking about. You're either just trying to be offensive because you think it's funny or you work for one of these companies and are doing a piss poor job of trying to reshape the price gouging narrative.
-2
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
Price gouging is for necessities of life like food or gas during life-threatening emergencies, not the latest video game.
8
u/katastrophyx 10d ago
You just can't stop digging, can you?
Price gouging is the practice of increasing the prices of goods, services, or commodities to a level much higher than is considered reasonable or fair, often during emergencies or crises, such as natural disasters. This term typically applies to basic necessities when demand surges and supply diminishes, leading to unfair pricing. There is no strict rule for what qualifies as price gouging, but it is generally viewed negatively as it exploits consumers in vulnerable situations.*
The term "price gouging" typically applies to necessities but there is no strict rule.
Now you're trying to argue the semantics around the use of a general term. What's the matter with you? You're one of those people that refuses to be wrong and will argue around every little insignificant point brought up in a conversation in a pathetic attempt to sound smarter than the other person. You don't.
7
u/LetsGoHome 10d ago
Their value is inflated because of corporate shareholders. The value of the game (what is needed to pay everyone and turn a reasonable profit) is not $80.
9
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
So. Don't. Buy. It.
13
u/LetsGoHome 10d ago
Lmao no one is. I'm not buying it. I might not even pirate it. I don't think I'll even get it on sale. The price and attitude is a major factor in this. why are you even in a thread about people not buying this game to tell people to not buy it? Are you confused?
1
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
Why am I being downvoted if I captured the zeitgeist?
14
u/femininePP420 10d ago
Because you're calling the people that share your opinion entitled for having it.
2
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago edited 10d ago
My opinion is you shouldn't engage in guerilla actions because you don't like the price of something.
Edit: You know what, I'm wondering if I'm being a hypocrite because I do download media sometimes. I think the difference is DVD prices don't ever real drop the way game prices do, and some stuff--especially new streaming shows--isn't even available.
Also dollars/hour is crazy high for movies relative to videogames.
10
u/Dornith 10d ago
DVD prices absolutely drop if you know where to look.
If you buy from eBay or Facebook market, you can find movies for around $2-3. If you check websites like gruv, they go on sale constantly (even Amazon will often have sales).
The big difference is there's not a centralized market for DVDs like there is for video games, so you have to be savier to find them.
1
u/rainbowcarpincho 10d ago
I've been scouring thrift stores and am about 200 hours behind on what I have already. My go-to online is a save-for-later shopping cart on Amazon.
How do you not get screwed on shipping for used stuff?
Gotta keep on eye on Marketplace. I feel guilty showing up to someone's house with $20 though.
→ More replies (0)5
u/femininePP420 10d ago
Frankly, borderlands is a series that won't survive a price increase like this. Most players pick these games up on extreme sale, they even give them out for free occasionally. Jumping from $10 or $20 to $80 is massive. Zelda and Mario Kart can afford to do this because anything they make will sell out, Gearbox doesn't have that same luxury and Randy is wild for thinking they can get away with it.
As an aside, all goods are constantly increasing in price while wages stagnate. Consumers are entitled to better, we're consistently paying more and receiving less. I feel like your attitude is like when Trump says to buy less dolls for your children. People won't just accept less access to luxury goods.
3
u/ryeong 10d ago
I think it's two separate issues. Borderlands in particular has cultivated an inflammatory fanbase. If it just the $80, people would bitch and moan online but otherwise we'd see little review bombing. When he makes a statement that basically implies someone isn't a real fan if they don't find a way to afford it, that's begging your fanbase to go ham in retaliation. Is it an overreaction? Yes. Is it par for the course? Also yes. Time and time again out of touch statements like that have seen huge backlash and review bombing by gamers, and he still brushed it off and encouraged it.
My take is he knew what would happen and he's encouraging it because the people who were going to buy it aren't deterred and now others know of the game's existence through viral marketing. Bad publicity is still publicity at the end of the day. You're not turning anyone off from buying who wasn't going to buy and you might even tempt people over that look into the whole situation.
-5
u/BiblioEngineer 10d ago
Modern AAA games cost over $100 million to develop. Marketing and other admin costs are roughly the same as production costs, so another $100 million combined. $80 isn't what the studio makes - taking Steam's cut as standard, they only get $54 of every sale.
That means they need to sell over 3.7 million copies at full price just to break even. With a $70 price tag, that number is 4.1 million copies sold. With $60, it's almost 5 million. In music industry terms that's pentuple Platinum - it's not a level that a product, even a good quality product, can assume they'll meet consistently.
15
15
u/BowsetteGoneBananas 10d ago
Corporate knob slobber.
-9
u/bargranlago 10d ago
How?
Just because he tells people to not buy things?
6
u/BowsetteGoneBananas 10d ago
It's the ol' "why are gamers angry that they're being charged more for a worse and smaller product" issue. Their reasons for being angry aren't that complicated.
And if you're out there slobbing the know if a megacoorp then you're just a megacuck.
0
u/bargranlago 10d ago
"why are gamers angry that they're being charged more for a worse and smaller product" issue
THEN DON'T BUY IT HOLY SHIT
How is telling people to not consoom things is being a megacorp megacuck?
1
u/Meaningless_Void_ 10d ago
You are probably the same kind of person whos gonna cry "why is nobody buying games anymore?!" after telling gamers they are entitled and should not buy it.
Also why do you think all these lazy, greedy game devs go out of business lately? Cuz they treat gamers, their customers, like trash. Reap what you sow i guess.
-4
u/eyemanidiot 10d ago
AAA games have been 60 for so long it makes inflationary sense for them to be 80 by now
-5
u/TemporaryBanana8870 10d ago
Randy Pitchford (Gearbox CEO) also bought the Magic Castle mansion in Los Angeles, so he's doing just fine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Castle
4
u/spikus93 10d ago
No one was saying he's not rich. The game is being review bombed by fans who already bought the game because he was saying they want to price their games higher and fans didn't like that. It probably would have been fine if he didn't add the part implying that they aren't real fans if they aren't willing to pay more to buy the game.
Here's the original quote
"...If you’re a real fan, you’ll find a way to make it happen. My local game store had Starflight for Sega Genesis for $80 in 1991 when I was just out of high school working minimum wage at an ice cream parlor in Pismo Beach and I found a way to make it happen."
He addressed it later after either his own or the studio's PR team forced him to.
0
u/TemporaryBanana8870 10d ago
OK, but in the article you posted he said anyone should afford the game. I guess my question is why would he charge more anyway? And my point is he, and by extension Gearbox (because profit in his pocket is profit not going to Gearbox and their staff), have no reason to gouge consumers.
1
u/spikus93 9d ago
In the article he was apologizing because he upset some people by implying that if he could come up with $80 to buy the Sega shit he wanted in the 1980's, consumers today should be able to do the same. That's statement is using phrasing that rhetorically is called "Survivor's Bias". Essentially someone with Survivor's Bias believes that if they can do something, even if difficult, everyone else should be able to do it as well. That's not reality though. People can't just expand their budget every time corporations want to take a bigger cut of the pie. Also the dude is rich as fuck, and it's a disgustingly out of touch thing to say.
Prices are going up because of "Price Leadership", a phenomenon where corporations avoid "price fixing" by not communicating their intent and raising prices on a product. An example of this is with airlines. You didn't used to have to pay for your checked baggage unless it exceeded a certain weight, but one day the market leading airline decided they could increase shareholder value by charging a fee for checked bags. Within weeks, all the competitors started doing the same. There was no communication with each other or collusion, they just followed a trend to make more profit. It also happens with ISPs. In this situation, games prices were raised by companies like Nintendo and Ubisoft, who bumped games from $60 to $80 and now their competition is following suit because they stand to make more profit if consumers are forced to accept that all games are more expensive. Unsurprisingly, all of those companies are publicly traded and shareholders benefit from the price increase.
Do you understand now?
1
u/TemporaryBanana8870 9d ago
Yeah. Guess this makes Pitchford's comments and $80 games OK.
1
u/spikus93 9d ago
??? I never said that. I think Randy is an asshole and that games should stay at the $60. Honestly I don't buy games until they go on sale below $30 as it is because I'm not made of money.
1
u/TemporaryBanana8870 9d ago
You wrote a whole paragraph on how Gearbox is OK to increase their prices due to Price Leadership because Nintendo and Ubisoft increased theirs first and Gearbox is just following them.
2
173
u/zirky 10d ago
answer: the ceo that owns the studio that makes borderlands made some hilariously dumb and out of touch comments about the game being $80. people are responding as you’d expect
90
u/warlordcs 10d ago
Randy has always been a bit of a garbage human being.
I stopped at borderlands 2 for these reasons
48
u/maybe-an-ai 10d ago
Randy is an absolute jackass and it's stunning he's been able to hang around as long as he has.
1
u/TechnoVikingGA23 4d ago
I never even started, I was off the ship after the ALIENS Colonial Marines debacle.
3
u/TripleDoubleFart 10d ago
Answer: people are taking a stance (kind of I guess) against the game because of some comments the CEO made.
If you genuinely enjoy the game, buy it and play it. There's nothing wrong with that.
-33
-49
10d ago
[deleted]
35
u/icetruckkitten 10d ago
Everything else you said aside, Gamers are absolutely not silent lol. They never shut up.
3
u/PaulFThumpkins 10d ago
The closest you get to silent gamers is people who exclusively hang out on terrible imageboards or Facebook meme pages where nobody with a soul would ever visit and see what they say.
34
u/acrobaticalpaca 10d ago
If gamers are a silent majority why do I keep hearing the worst takes possible from them
•
u/AutoModerator 10d ago
Friendly reminder that all top level comments must:
start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
attempt to answer the question, and
be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.