Progression

*note*
I noticed that since I started writing this post last week there has been a few different articles published about Borderlands and how it will “change the future of gaming.” Surprisingly these articles do the game a great injustice by not explaining why Borderlands has a lot of potential to be a really great game.
*note*

Why Borderlands?

If I only had sixty-three dollars and twenty-nine cents (the cost of a new release after tax in California) to spend on one game for the rest of the year my pick would be Borderlands.

I know what your thinking... “Modern Warfare 2 is an ace in the hole, a sure-fire way not to get burned on your investment,” and I don’t disagree. However, I would rather spend my money on Borderlands and be let down than buy a game like Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2, or Uncharted 2.

While I know that the fore-mentioned sequels will be great games, I think it is safe to assume that those titles are well known and will push a large number of units this holiday season. Unfortunately, being surrounded by so many sequel releases, games like Borderlands are at risk for slipping under the radar.

“Why is this bad?” you might ask. Simply, I feel that it’s important to give games like Borderlands an honorable mention (in the form of my cash) because it is these types of games that encourage other developers in the industry to try something new... or rather put some old stuff together to make it new stuff... which is also fun.

When I think about a new game, I imagine on a very basic level there are two types of progression which can be achieved through design that can potentially affect the future of video games. The first type of progression is achieved by the successful execution of new and original ideas(which I will call vertical progression). The second type of progression can be found in the successful execution or refinement of old ideas(which I will call horizontal progression).

While sequels like Modern Warfare 2, Assassins Creed 2, and Uncharted 2 will add new features and mechanics to each their respective franchises, the success of those games are built mostly on horizontal progression. If a sequel can; fix some bugs/balance issues, maintain old design philosophies and keep fundamental gameplay values, the sequel will deliver exactly what is expected. Old fans will be happy and new fans will be impressed.

Fallout 3 is a good example of a game that helped develop the FPS-RPG genre by way of vertical progression. A large selection of perks combined with an open world environment and real time damage allowed for players to engage in a unique type of gameplay. It is in this way that fallout 3 and Borderlands are alike and I think this is why people are constantly making the comparison between the two games.

If we drew a line graph for vertical and horizontal progression -- vertical progression being new ideas represented on the y-axis and horizontal being refined old ideas on the x-axis -- Fallout 3 would have a very steep line compared to the line of a game like Resident Evil 5. I am not claiming that one type of progression is better than the other, only that the graph can be used to display some level of balance between different forms of innovation.

For me it is all about balance and at a glance Borderlands exudes a fine equilibrium between vertical and horizontal progression. Features like drop in co-op, looting, FPS point-of-view and leveling are examples of horizontal progression in the game, while the way that Borderlands has you doing these things (via multiplayer mmo/rpg/fps style) applies directly to vertical progression.

Buying Borderlands is my way of saying great job to Gearbox Software for trying something new while still delivering a good deal of horizontal progression. Hopefully if the game does well, other companies will be encouraged to be innovative.

Borderlands may not be the most original idea but it is very unique in it’s art style and execution. Like I said, games like L4D2, Uncharted 2 and Modern Warfare 2 will be great and are going to sell like hot-cakes this holiday season... but if you don’t want to be shelling out more money for the reunion tour equivalent of L4D2 in 2021 than you should think about adding a few more games to your “must buy list.”

*note*
Ok, with that said - I have made a list of more coherent reasons for purchasing Borderlands... However they probably appeal more to my personal tastes so I decided to make it a different blog post: Why Borderlands?.
*note*

(4)

Toby Davis

August 27, 2009

Now will you go into which system it should be bought on and how they differ from each other in a pre-release stance?

David Matos

I was reading an article on 1up that said Randy Pitchfork himself said the PC version blows the console versions out of the water. In terms on graphics, processing etc. Not in those exact words, but that was the message.

Lance Darnell

This post definitely has some vertical progression! But how dare you mention graphs and charts and not include them! ;)

And I may be wrong, but I thought that the main comparison between Borderlands and Fallout was the post-apocalyptic setting...

You raised some nice ideas! I am sorry if this comment is nothing more than horizontal progression... :)

Evan Campbell

Thanks for reading guys!

@Toby - Well I am going to buy the 360 version just because I own a mac and I will have more people to play with on xbl. As for writing about what version 'should' be bought read my reply to David.

@David - Yeah I read that article too. From what I understand the PC version only has the potential to blow the console versions away if your PC rig is up to par(with an awesome gfx card and stellar processing power).

I think that on a grand scale there are very few of us who have PC's powerful enough to make a notable difference. As long as the game play is not severely affected, I would prefer to play on a console because I think there will be more people to play with.

@Lance - Your right on both counts. I apologize. I will try and post some pictures later tonight and the comparison between Fallout 3 and Borderlands is generally about the post-apocalyptic setting.

However, I think that is a weak comparison simply because the games environment and non human enemies look so different. For me I felt Fallout 3 was highly repetitive in its environments and I have a strong feeling that Borderlands wont be completely set in the same locale... thus when we see new areas the setting comparison might become less relevant.

What I meant to say in the post was that people know the games are similar and just cling to the setting comparison because it helps them explain how they feel... but really the games have more in common as far as how they are helping to drive progression and form new genres in gaming... not just RPG-FPS but others devs will start taking genre mergers(likkee ummm RTS-MMO?) more seriously due to the success of these games...

Don't worry! Horizontal Progression is not a bad thing! It is vital building block for Vertical Progression.