Hands On With Borderlands Co-Op

This week we’ve had a chance to play through the beginning of Borderlands, courtesy of 2K Games. What follows are some preview impressions of that co-op experience. We expect to unleash a full RPS Verdict on the game later this month.

Playing the single-player version of Borderlands causes one single game feature to stand out. When you are reduced to zero health you have some time in which you bleed to death. This gives you a chance to revive yourself with a “second wind” by getting a kill. In the co-op part of the game this makes perfect sense, as it’s also an opportunity for your buddies to run over to you and help you up. In the single player game, however, there are times when there is nothing to kill, and no buddy to help you. You simply kneel there, bleeding to death. And it’s kind of heart-breaking.

This feature alone, I feel, demonstrates how Borderlands is meant to played with friends. Once router port-fiddling is defeated that’s easily done online by making your normal game an internet game, playing your own campaign, and then inviting chums when they’re available. We’ve had a chance to do that, and we’ve just finished the opening section of the game known as “Arid Badlands”, by playing through as a team.

Arid Badlands very much an introductory experience, with the chirpy robot character and a mysterious static woman explaining everything after you pass the character selection screen. You’re asked to help out a ramshackle frontier town which is sparsely populated by redneck characters. You’re a treasure hunter, looking for a mythical vault, and lots of people seem invested in your finding it. Arriving via an armoured bus, you kill some bandits off and starting settling in. Once you open up the main hub town, Fyrestone, then it feels a little like the opening stages of an MMO. There’s a strong whiff of those starter area cues you get in games that are longer-term and slower-paced than traditional shooters.

There’s not much “worldiness” to it, with only a handful of friendly and rather characterless NPCs. In fact, from what we’ve seen there’s little general activity in the world, but there’s nevertheless some evidence of more complex infrastructure: wind-turbines, powerlines, and a neat vehicle system. All this bodes well for the rest of the game, which should hopefully expand on the idea of Pandora as a world. Although there’s constant combat from the start, Fyrestone and the surrounding area feels low key and preparatory, and once early missions unfold then that air of RPG is even stronger. The back and forth of minor quests, the mission dispensing characters and bulletin boards, the hit numbers bouncing from enemies, the stats and colours for weapon types – I almost expected the badlands to open up and reveal some kind of “World Of Guncraft” beyond.

And yet the best fun we’ve had in the first part of the game has been thanks to the focus on gunplay. Borderlands is embedded deeply in the shooter category, and it will send you running for cover and aiming for headshots. Some of the fights we’ve had have been ludicrous tooth-and-nail running battles, with a joyous chaos to them. In this opening area there are two main kinds of enemies: skags, a kind of mutant dog-lizard thing, and bandits, who come in various shapes and sizes of mean and mutated. Playing co-op hugely amplifies the chaos of a firefight because so many more high level enemies appear. You’re often dealing with multiple targets and trying to drag your friends to their feet while you yourself are under fire, as rabid midgets stab axes into you, and heavies hammer you with machinegun fire.

All this this drives the loot-hunger, of course, because co-op battles bring about more impressive enemies, and therefore even better drops. With millions of weapons, various shields and other mods to play with, there’s a whole load of tweaking to be done to your character, and swapping loot back and forth is going to become routine among friends. I suspect, however, it’s going to trickier to play with strangers: there’s currently no formal system for loot sharing, meaning anyone can run in and grab whatever they like from the hundreds of stashes that you uncover. A limited inventory space, however, means that the greedy run out of room rather promptly.

I’m coming to love the art style and general attitude of the game. The hand-drawn textures give the game a look that is clean and crisp while still being down and dirty. It’s comic book and playful, with a bold sense of thrills, and a good feeling for why we enjoy getting an even bigger gun. While Arid Badlands is a brownish desert it nevertheless has a bunch of interesting design going on in it, not just in the visuals, but in way the sidequests and the main story arc interlock. It’s structured so that you have plenty of opportunity to back off and level up a bit before taking on more serious tasks.

Having taken down the early bosses and fought our way through what I suppose constitute the first “dungeons” in the game, we’re certainly interested in seeing what comes next. And for that, you’ll have to wait for our next article.


  1. Vinraith says:

    Does the world scale to player number or… how does that work? If I’m playing with 2 people, how is the game different than if I’m playing with 4? Also, would I be totally wasting my money if I expected to usually be playing solo?

  2. Jim Rossignol says:

    There’s more badguys, and more tough badguys, and more loot, for each person that joins.

    John will argue the case for single player, I think, he’s got more of a kick out of that than co-op. I’ve enjoyed the multiplayer best.

  3. piratemax says:

    Great read, I pre-ordered it on Steam, and it looks this game will be a lot better than Hellgate:London.

    • Jacques says:

      It doesn’t really seem comparable to HG:L.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      I dunno, there are definitely some parallels with Hellgate, but they’re tenuous. This is its own game.

    • Jacques says:

      Maybe as far as there being first person shooting and collecting better gear, but that’s about it.
      I still miss my gun guardian character :(

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Jacques: I disagree with Jim here. From what I’ve played so far, I think it’s incredibly like Hellgate London, just better.


    • Jacques says:

      Does the player have skills and stats? To be honest, any game that lets me fool around with ridiculous guns is a no-brainer purchase for me, but from what I’ve seen, it’s more of a traditional FPS as opposed to an action RPG game, I’m probably wrong though.

      Admittedly, HG:L failed hard, but there were quite a few very good ideas in there that I hope surface in other games, the loot system, for example, it seems silly for games not to implement a similar system that worked so well.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Jacques: It’s got skills you improve by use and also ability skill trees. Hellgate was a diablo-clone-maker decides to make an FPS. Borderlands is a FPS-maker decides to make a diablo-clone. I’ll probably have a lot more to say on that point in the verdict.


    • Jacques says:

      Thanks Kieron, I’ve definitely got my eyes on this game now.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Jacques: Worth stressing – it’s not quite as RPGy as Hellgate, but being first-person, the sense of control matters more – which is where I think the FPS experience pays off. That said, each of the four characters, does have 3 (smallish) trees to advance down, which would lead to quite different builds. It’s pretty nifty stuff.


    • Dominic White says:

      I always thought that Hellgate would have been a much better game if they’d just held off and released it six months later. The enormo-megapatch (it was a couple of gigs worth of content) they released just before the game died for good was rather impressive, and brought in a lot of content and features, as well as improving graphics and rebalancing a ton of stuff.

      They rushed it, and it sank them. Here’s hoping that Borderlands can get the formula right, because it’s a really good idea in general.

    • Jacques says:

      The Stonehenge expansion was cool, but patch 2.0, would have been insane, they were in open testing for the patch when all the shit went down, and the patch content never surfaced for SP.

  4. The Fanciest of Pants says:

    I must have it. Played it for the first time(on a 360, but I’ll take what I can get) at a convention a couple of weeks back, was not dissapointed.

    Bring on the 30th!

  5. pignoli says:

    Jim Rossignol said:
    There’s more badguys, and more tough badguys, and more loot, for each person that joins.

    John will argue the case for single player, I think, he’s got more of a kick out of that than co-op. I’ve enjoyed the multiplayer best.

    So it's: "player has joined our world, Diablo's minions grow stronger, and er, more numerous too"

    I find I can get just as much out of the single player of these types of games. In fact I usually like to get through at least a good portion of them in SP before diving in with other people as you tend to get whisked along as the blood-lust increases by way of being in a group!

  6. duel says:

    i want to know how that guns feel, are they really graduated so the first couple of guns you get are pretty pants and do no damage? pew pew pew…

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      the order you get the guns in is luck you can get the best gun in the game on the first drop if you’re really super lucky.

  7. Lobotomist says:

    Really looking forward this game. And I am going to buy it on STEAM ;)

  8. Jim Rossignol says:

    Duel: basically the guns start out okay and just get more insane. What we perhaps haven’t got across is that you’ve got guns everywhere. Hundreds of them. It’s the super-powered few that you’ll pick up and use all the time. And they tend to have mad powers like super-fast reload, or setting people on fire, or immense single-shot damage, or whatever.

    Pignoli: precisely. I have been playing single-player too, but when someone comes online I want to play with them because the fights are more hectic.

  9. vicepresidentisamilf says:

    Why would anyone want to play this? Modern Warfare 2 is twenty days out.

    This game steals its graphics from Wind Waker and it’s gameplay from Halo.

    Who wants to play Zelda with guns?

    • Archonsod says:

      Oh look, another pseudo-realistic shooter involving some american types shooting at nondescript foreigners with the odd scripted section to make sure the player isn’t having too much fun. Yawn.

    • Adam says:

      Obvious troll is so obvious I can see it in my current swineflu addled state of mind
      I’m very very excited about this game, and I can’t see how its even comperable to MW2, it’s like comparing Braid to Bionic Commando Rearmed.

    • RogB says:

      everything I come to RPS to avoid, right there.

    • Adam says:

      Also I’d bloody love to play Zelda with guns. It makes me sad how lacking the PC is in zelda style collect gadget -> complete puzzle type games.

    • Dante says:

      Wow, I’ve never seen such a series of wrong assertions bundled together like that, bravo sir.
      First off, asking why anyone would want to play this when MW2 is on the way is like asking why anyone would buy Scibblenauts with Dragonage on the way, they’re very different games with totally different appeals.
      Secondly, you do realise Wind Waker didn’t invent cell shading, right? And even if it had, Borderlands would be no more stealing from it than it steals from Jet Set Radio. And as for ’stealing’ from Halo, I am uncertain what mechanic you seem to beleive bungee have patented, co-op? Or perhaps the first person shooter itself?
      Lastly, if you are going to lazily label a game ‘x with y’ at least do it accurately. Hell the phrase ‘Diablo with guns’ is used by nearly every preview of this game. Oh, and ‘who wants to play zelda with guns?’ Metroid fans, I suppose.
      Lastly, if your point really is 'why play x interesting, innovative game when y big blockbuster is round the corner', boy are you on the wrong site.

    • Bhazor says:

      Reply to Adam

      Arkham Asylum does a pretty good job on that front though it feels more Metroid than Zelda.

    • Psychopomp says:

      What Biscuit said.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      borderlands isn’t cell shaded.

    • Wooly says:

      We don’t like y’alls types round here.

  10. Jim Rossignol says:

    This game steals its graphics from Wind Waker and it’s gameplay from Halo.

    Who wants to play Zelda with guns?

    There are some Halo influences, but Zelda With Guns doesn’t even make sense.

    I’m sure MW2 will be great, but Borderlands does something different. *That* is why people will want to play it.

    • Dave says:

      I’m holding out for Dwarf Fortress with guns.

      Or World of Goo with big trucks.

      Or AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! A Reckless Disregard for Gravity with unicycles.

  11. sigma83 says:

    Why would anyone want to play this? Modern Warfare 2 is twenty days out.

    Because co-op focused. Modern Warfare is not.

  12. Sacred_flame101 says:

    i will defiantly buy this game assuming i can run it

    • duel says:

      apparently, if you can run L4D and TF2 youl be fine ;)

    • MacBeth says:

      i will defiantly buy this

      I do love that typo. Makes me imagine people marching in to a game store and slamming the box down on the counter saying ‘I’m going to buy this, and I DON’T CARE WHO KNOWS IT!’…

    • Bhazor says:

      Thats exactly how I bought Sims 3.

    • yhancik says:

      According to some website

      Processor: 2.4 Ghz or equivalent processor
      Memory: 1GB System RAM (2GB recommended with Vista)
      Graphics: 256mb video ram or better (GeForce 8 series or higher/Radeon R8xx series)

      Which is a bit more than L4D (which runs on my ancient Radeon X1650 :p)

  13. Dustopedia says:

    Is this a client/server based MMO game, or is it peer-to-peer style (like Diablo/Battle.Net, for example)? The comment around playing with routers makes me a little nervous!

    How does team finding/matchmaking work?

  14. futage says:

    This has made me rather more hopeful than most of the marketing material over the past 6 months or so. I’d almost given up on Borderlands but you made it look fun again.

  15. Jim Rossignol says:

    It’s peer-to-peer via Gamespy login. Which is a lot less painful than it sounds, actually. Once you’ve got it set up the game logs in without your needing to sign on.

    • robrob says:

      Gamespy? Really? The last multiplayer game I played featuring Gamespy was Medieval 2: Total War. Trying to organise a game in that was awful. You randomly couldn’t see some people based on their country and getting two people into a game took at least half an hour of trying. The only sensible option was Hamachi. Does Borderlands allow for direct connect or LAN games?

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Yeah there’s LAN support.

      I did a little sigh at Gamespy, but it’s worked seamlessly so far. We did have to open some ports to get it working, however.

    • Wurzel says:

      Peer to peer? Well bugger. It’s going to be the same problem as demigod; a cool-looking multiplayer game that I can’t play due to university internet restrictions. Sigh, and I was looking forward to it too.

    • Wooly says:

      Peer to peer MP!? Shit! Bloody college internet security… And I preordered this… What am I going to do now?

  16. P7uen says:

    Yay for Walker, hero of the single-player-preferring single-players.

  17. GreatUncleBaal says:

    From the second gameplay pic: “Piss Wash Jumped”? o_O
    The comments about lack of “worldliness” make me a tad wary – it seems like the perfect game for a strong cast of NPC characters wisecracking and interacting with the world and player.
    However, it looks absolutely lovely, and fun co-op always pricks my ears up. And I don’t think I’ve played an FPS co-op game with loot drops before.
    I’m fairly certain I’ll pick this up, definitely looking forward to more impressions on the game.

  18. Darkelp says:

    I’ve had this pre-ordered for a few months now, but the closer its been getting to release the colder my feet have been getting.

    Thanks RPS for setting a fire under my feet and getting me excited again! Can’t wait for the next article, and Walker’s view on its single playerness.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      likewise, but i’m still confident i want it, i just don’t have anyone to play with, so walkers take will be interesting to me.

    • Darkelp says:

      I’d be more then happy to play with any RPSers, as quite a few of my friends won’t be purchasing the game for a few more months, so I too will be alone.

  19. Digit says:

    Forgive me as I’m up to my eyes in the development of my own game and have but a bare few minutes of allotted time each day to catchup on general gamey-news, but IS this an MMO, or is it a single player game, with coop? If the latter, my wife and I may need to check this out, as we do enjoy our coop goodness, oh yes we do. :)

    Thanks for any info!

  20. Po0py says:

    I’d personally love to hear more about what it’s like playing with complete strangers. I have no Pc friends. None. Zip. Nada. Sounds like the lack of loot sharing support amongst strangers could be a patch job. I suspect you guys are using some kind of team-speak app. But is there chat available? How does it compare to, say, going on a raid with strangers in WoW?

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Po0py: A complete stranger joined mine and Jim’s game, and we got on fine. There’s voice-chat as standard, in a straight “Talk to mike and people hear” way.


    • neems says:

      Join us PoOpy.

      I mean, not me, I don’t really like people, except for the members of my clan, who don’t seem to like computer games (I don’t get it either). But you’re in the right place, I’m sure you could find some people here to steal loot from. There’s a steam group as well.

    • Dante says:

      I’m sure there’ll be enough RPS readers without regular playing buddies to form up, I’d keep an eye on the forum.

  21. Colthor says:

    Sounds fun. Looking forwards to it.

    I just hope they don’t do something stupid like shove online activation on the retail version. If they said it doesn’t have it I’d pre-order.

  22. Mac says:

    How does the coop work – is it from inviting people from your friends list (assuming there is a friends list), dedicated servers you jump into, or something else?

  23. Nootrishus says:

    Just had to cancel my pre-order off steam as they have a 4 game package for £80, cheapest anywhere right now (As long as you have the friends for it). Can’t wait to get my hands on this mmmm

    • Mac says:

      shopto.net selling for £19.99 – which saves the hassle of getting 4 peopel together and sorting out paypal, etc

  24. unclelou says:

    Sounds good, and seeing how I loved HG:L, this is most likely a day-one purchase for me. However, I’ll terribly miss proper armour. I can kind of understand why they left it out, this being a first-person shooter, but an optional 3rd person view and different armour would have pushed this far higher into the hype stratosphere for me.

  25. Jared says:

    I have been following this game since it’s conception. I’ve been extremely interested in it, and judging by the reaction from the public, that interest won’t go unfulfilled.

    So interested I decided I’d make a website about it, which will eventually have guides, forums, a personal blog, and probably more.

  26. armlesscorps says:

    I am a bit dissapointed it feels like an MMO according to this article. I was hoping the open worldidness would be evident from the start and you could just get on with exploring rather than doing little inconsequential quests.
    It sounds fun though, ill pick it up when i have the cash.

  27. XM says:

    Is this the only way to play co-op by portforwarding the router? I can never get this to work without loosing my internet. I followed all the steps on portforwarding.com and just can’t get it to work. I hope there is dedicated servers like left 4 dead.

  28. JM says:

    How does it handle character levels? If we play as 4 regular friends, and one person plays a bit more with their character, are they going to be way too powerful for the rest of a la WoW?

  29. EBass says:

    Makes me think its an MMORPG, plot synopsis, “Find the Macguffin”, “Interested in what comes next.”, doesen’t really make me particularly interested in this game in any way.

  30. gulag says:

    Hope it still has a big digger in it. I’ve had this on order for a few months now.

    I notice it’s being sold through Steam, which leads me to wonder if co-op will be supported through the Steam friends list invite/join game functions.

  31. Tei says:

    My real life friends have move to table top RPG, so I will probably try to do like in L4D, build a list of cool people with the friends system of Steam. This means that for half a year, I will probably PUG a lot. In a sense, I love Pug-ing. Is like another random element on a game. The game feel more varied with random people. On the other side, the loot is somewhat PUG unfriendly, as described here. Oh well..

    After a lot of “Killing Floor”, It seems that I like the “sniper-o-matic” type of character. I like to pick mobs, one by one, in a letal way. But a bit of spray-and-pray is always fun. Is all about how the weapons will feel. And If theres something like “Spider Mines”, since PETS > ALL.

  32. Lilliput King says:

    Cool story bro.

    • Lilliput King says:

      Meant to be a reply to the troll, woe is me :(

      In other news, waiting for the verdict, but excited! Got a group together ready to get the 4 copy deal on steam, so really looking forward to the release.

    • Post Maker says:

      cool story bro

  33. Dustopedia says:

    I wonder what the cheating situation will be like here.

    Peer-to-peer is risky in that regard, particularly when (it sounds like?) there are persistent statistics and equipment carried over from game to game.

  34. Super Bladesman says:

    I’m so looking forward to this still, just hope to god my PC will run it…

  35. Kieron Gillen says:

    Re: Peer To peer. Worth noting that abstractly only the person hosting needs to open ports. I haven’t opened my ports and can join Jim and John fine.


    • Hentzau says:

      I’m having terrifying Blood Bowl flashbacks.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Henz: Exactly.

      (I could actually often join people in Blood Bowl before I opened my ports too)

      I wish they’d fucking standardize ports on PC games. They did with the 360. I don’t know why they haven’t. I presume there’s a really good reason. There has to be, yes?


    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      yep, you can only run 1 360 game at the same time, not so on the pc, why they don’t use upnp is a mystery.

    • Tei says:

      Ports standarization?

      But you have to open ports on the router, that run some unknom “real time os” you have never eard of (or maybe a linux port). And probably protocols like upnp are not popular.

      I don’t know why seems so easy on Xbox, I have never played one. I suppose the servers of XBox runs some discovery service, or something, so is not true p2p,.. if you are firewalled, the XBox servers redirect all the server trafic to you. Or something.

      The real problem is USA. USA has almost all IPv4 adddress, so see no reason to invest time and energy to migrate to IPv6. The rest of the world need IPv6, but also need USA to migrate. So we don’t have IPv6. With IPv6, It would be easy to have a real internet IP for every machine on your house. So this shit “NAT” that routers do, will not bee needed. It seems that NAT is a horrible hack, that barelly works, so network games have to jump lots of problems and broken implementations to run.

    • nutterguy says:

      Roll on IPv6
      No post sillyness to worry about then, or the finite number of dwindling IPv4 addresses! :-/

    • Martin Edelius says:

      Please ignore almost all of what Tei had to say.

      IPv6 will spread all over the world as the hard- and software mature to support it. It is as of now a very young technology.

      UPNP is unpopular because it is quite a security risk (applications opening ports in my firewall as they please? No thanks.)

      NAT is not some “hack” – it has been around for ages and works very well, no matter if you’re one person playing behind a tiny home router or 100’s of people playing behind a corporate firewall. Port Address Translation is a bit more iffy but is not used as often.

      (Not in reply to Tei but since the comment system now is crap I can’t see the poster I wanted to reply to:) What does it matter if you can’t run more than one 360 game at once? How do you play more than 2 PC games at the same time on the same machine in a peer-to-peer situation?

      The problems with a firewall and NAT/PAT only shows up if you’re hosting a game where you need to publish a service (the game) outside the firewall but this isn’t a limitation of NAT but of how TCP/IP works; one port at one address equals one service.

      If you’re trying to do this for standarized ports (i.e. not using peer to peer as you have multiple servers serving up different services) then it won’t work unless you happen to have enough IP-adresses for every game (not cheap). This is why there are different default ports for different games.

      Good game servers allow you to set your own ports though so if you’re hosting a game behind a firewall you should be able to open up just one port and tell the game and your friends to use that one.

      Ok, way too tired to go into more depth about this but these are the basics.

  36. pinbag says:

    I hope the rpg part is realy solid. (storywise)
    Bleeding numbers when you shoot something… bothers me also a litle…

    • TotalBiscuit says:

      You’re going to be disappointed if you’re looking for heavy RPG stuff here. It’s as heavy as RPG as Diablo by the looks of it.

  37. groovychainsaw says:

    Must admit, this has long been a preorder for me, but on the xbox (sacrilege!), mostly because of the split-screen co-op and ease of matchmaking. Why they can’t implement either of those things in a pc game beats me really… think co-op sounds brilliant, me and my wife will have a great time looting the world….

  38. RLacey says:

    Sounds like it’s well worth the £20 that one can get it for. Good good.

  39. Clippit says:

    I’m interested in the actual game but peer to peer co-op and Gamespy are both a bit of a worry for me. Peer to peer is designed for console users with 21st century broadband, and doesn’t work as well on the PC, or in Australia where many people (myself included) are still downloading like it’s 1999 (i.e. slowly). As for Gamespy, well it’s like this middleware that doesn’t work, but keeps being used in big games – UT3 and BF2 for example – where it causes big headaches.

  40. Darkelp says:

    Borderlands = £19.99 on Shopto.net

    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 = £34.99 on Shopto.net.

    That’s a pretty big reason.

  41. Darkelp says:

    Borderlands = £19.99 on shopto.net

    MW2 = £34.99 on shopto.net

    That a pretty big reason.

  42. Darkelp says:

    Haha, dammit!

    Sorry for double post, and that was suppose to reply to the troll!


  43. Heliocentric says:

    I’ve seen mw2 for £25 so don’t quote me silly prices like its a legitimate arguement.

    I’ll bet i can find hl2 for £20, does that make it the right price.

  44. Ian says:

    I think I’ll be waiting to see more stuff from a single-player point of view as I’m not sure who I know that’ll be getting this.

    Unless of course I try and join in with RPS folks.

    If I jump into somebody else’s game how much of my stuff is carried across? I assume I’ll have my gear but does it also carry over what quests have been completed and that sort of thing? I mean, if I’ve beaten Quests A, B, C and D in single-player and then hook up with somebody else who is just about to do quests D and E, do I do quest D again? If I help them with quest E will I then have completed quest E if/when I go back to single-player?

    I’ve not articulated that question very well at all so hopefully my meaning comes over okay. :-P

    • HolyShitMatt says:

      Characters are saved locally, you retained what you’ve earned in single-player while in co-op, and you can assist people with missions you’ve already done.

  45. Rive says:

    Jim and Kieron, i got a question for you lot concerning the xp distribution. Havent found infos on that yet.

    When you play with other people, are the xp distributed evenly or is it every man for himself? This kinda makes or breaks coop games for me since im playing games with the same friends for years now and it kinda spoils the fun if im getting ahead of the pack, which i usually do, the other lads arent gamers as long as i am.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Rive: It’s distributed XP. We’re still trying to work out the actual split, but we managed to powerlevel a level 1 character of mine to about 15 by playing with Jim’s Level 20 guy.


    • Rive says:

      Thanks for making my day Kieron. Now its back to staring at that “not yet released” on my Steam Games Tab. Been looking for this game for so long now, and the only concern i had has now been nullified. Yes!

  46. Jazmeister says:



  47. Geoffrey Prout says:

    I have a HUGE question…I read in a few forums the possibility of duel weapons..is that possible in borderlands? Like 2 pistols or even i noticed that the Berserker dude used the rocket launcher with only one hand; kinda makes me wonder if you could have duel launchers!

  48. Jim Rossignol says:

    Quests: the game is at the state the host is in. If you join his game, you are at the stage of the game has got to. If you complete quests with him, they are completed in your game too. I’m not sure if this creates inconsistencies in the experience, we need to check it out.

    Loot: whatever you pick up in an online game, you take back to single player on that character.

  49. malkav11 says:

    Gamespy? Really? Shit. I don’t mean to say that this will prevent me purchasing the game, but my experience has been that Gamespy is a pain in the ass and an archaic relic of a service that’s not worth using in this day and age. Amazon’s got it listed as using Games for Windows Live, which I realize many people here don’t like but which has been much less problematic for arranging coop than Gamespy has been, for me. I’d also have taken Steam matchmaking.

    • Rive says:

      You can always use Hamachi if theres the option of Lan Play. We use it for every coop type game that we play and that does not need to connect to some master server because it works so perfectly.

    • Rive says:


      It just occured to me that this only makes sense if you have a fixed group of people that you play all your games with like i do. Doesnt help at all of course if you just want to jump into some random game…

    • malkav11 says:

      I’m extremely likely to only ever play with one particular person, but I can’t imagine setting up and running a fake LAN with Hamachi will be more convenient than futzing with Gamespy. The advantage of GfW Live was that all I had to do was fire up the game, click my friend, click invite, and I was golden.

  50. Jim Rossignol says:

    There’s no GFWL.

    • The Sombrero Kid says:

      is that like section 8 not having gfwl though, or is it a super definate never will have gfwl thing?