17 thoughts on “Borderlands 3’s Review Situation Sure Is Strange”

  1. TL;DR

    Reviewers were not provided code for the game, but rather Epic Game’s Store accounts with work in progress builds of the game, and were told to avoid DX12, that saves won’t transfer over to the final game on Friday, and also did not provide code to several outlets. Polygon writers reported losing hours of progress due to basically being forced to review a beta

  2. I think it would be better to repost with this quote OP:

    > Instead of sending out Borderlands 3 review codes, publisher 2K set reviewers up with special Epic Games Store accounts that included early builds of the game. And they wouldn’t give access to certain outlets, including Kotaku. Very weird situation:

  3. You know what platform wont have these kinds of issues when borderlands 3 releases on it? PC. So glad the epic store is going to work through all the bugs and crash and burn for us before BL3 releases on PC in march.

    And for those who say “but epic is pc”, no they’re not. They’re epic store. If epic store wants to play a stupid exclusive game, they can get their own stupid exclusive category besides outside of steam, gog and every other pc store or platform.

  4. Not a good sign.

    Reviews are simple. The outlet gets a code and plays your game. All these weird builds make it not a retail copy.

  5. Isn’t transferring accounts to a different person not allowed in the ToS of any video game store ? Oh it’s Epic, what should we have expected ?

  6. > Kotaku requested access to Borderlands 3 for a review but did not get access. A representative for 2K cited security concerns and told us we’d get code for the much-anticipated loot-shooter on Thursday, September 12, the day before it launches.

    *Security concerns?*

  7. These days even single-player games get heavily patched for months after release, with core mechanics and interfaces sometimes getting completely revamped (see, e.g., inventory in Witcher 3). So, to some extent, there’s always a question of whether the game the reviewer has played matches the experience the public will have. Nonetheless, when all a company will offer is a “work in progress” build that is explicitly different from the release in unspecified ways, I don’t think it’s ethical to run an “official” review based on that code.

  8. [Here’s](https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2019/09/10/the-borderlands-3-review-situation-is-confusing-but-not-sinister/?fbclid=IwAR1IaCvAAnJ8oVZnoEM7-DiLy1LjYN8wHHfiq3n3arO-1DCvekZBaZwcn74#1936e9e27fc1) a different take on it from Forbes’ Paul Tassi:

    > I don’t know why 2K didn’t give out more codes but I don’t think they needed to be as cautious as they were with the limited supply. There’s really nothing to report about the actual review copy other than fairly standard glitches, outside of Polygon’s unfortunate experience. And if this was some giant plot to inflate review scores, with so few reviews out, all it took was one to sink the average (PC Gamer, in this case), so that didn’t happen either.

    > I think when the game comes out that it will become clear it isn’t hiding anything. It’s about what people are going to expect from this series which will delight a lot of fans and probably not make converts of those who didn’t like the old games. I personally loved most of it, and I said as much in my review. But I don’t think those of us who did get codes early are a part of something nefarious, as this is all a lot more vanilla than it’s being made out to be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *