A Load Of Claptrap: New Borderlands DLC

The fourth piece of Borderlands DLC has trundled into our crosshairs. It’s Claptrap’s New Robot Revolution, which is available via Steam or the Gearbox store for about $10, or £6.30 in Imperial cash tokens. I’ll download it in a minute, and will try to have a look and update this post tonight with some thoughts on its worth.

Gearbox have produced a mildly amusing trailer for this, which you can see below.


  1. CMaster says:

    Ah yes, “mildy amusing”, the heights of with to which Gearbox regularly aim and sometimes achieve.

  2. Taverius says:

    I don’t think you’ll hear them claim to be prize-winning script writers. Its very much pulp quality and they’re aware.

    Still, Steam says I’ve played BL for 240 hours. I might not be impartial here …

  3. Fillem says:

    I can’t seem to figure at what player level this is aimed at. I’m assuming MAX POWER players?

    • Taverius says:

      Afaik like Zombie Island it scales to the level you’re at when you start it and based on the missions you’ve completed – I believe killing Crawmerax puts enemies @ 61.

      And of course when the scaling patch comes they’ll just scale to your level.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      The scaling patch only applies to characters who’ve finished the game twice, sadly: link to gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com

    • Dominic White says:

      Yeah, that’s a heaving pile of bullshit. I barely finished the game ONCE simply *because* there was no level scaling. You either outlevelled quests so quickly that they became all pointless (literally do 10-20% of the missions in an area, and you outlevel the other 80%), and if you try skipping ahead, enemies have so much HP that you can unload a whole magazine into their faces at point-blank range and STILL not kill them.

      Never before has a game more needed level scaling, and they’re adding it! For people with the patience to beat the whole fucking thing twice already.

      I’ve complained directly to Gearbox over this bullshit. I suggest anyone who wants a half-decently balanced game (trust me, level scaling is NEEDED in this game – anything 3+ levels beneath you can’t even scratch you, and 3+ levels above you is invincible instant death) do the same.

    • Dave says:

      For contrast, before any DLC came out I had gone through both playthroughs with seven different characters.

  4. pipman3000 says:

    gearbox should of stuck to making expansions to valve games.

    half life 2: combine: you play as a combine
    team fortress 2: the announcer lady
    portal: companion cube companionship

    • CMaster says:

      Oh please no. Let them stick to making their own poorly plotted and realised universes, rather than giving them another chance to mangle someone elses.

  5. Riaktion says:

    Just more of the same then… same dusty local, similar enemies, same sounds, same music… same weapons. Love Borderlands, but the udder was dry after the Knoxx DLC in my opinion.

    Would love a fully fledged sequel now, with some fresh ideas etc.

    Suffice to say, I won’t be buying this.

    • Archonsod says:

      Nah, there’s a whole bunch of easter eggs in it. And some nifty new toys. Pretty much the best DLC so far imho

    • Riaktion says:

      Any examples? You have intriged me…. *smokes pipe*

    • Archonsod says:

      So far the main funny parts are the assimilated bandits. And the giant pirate ship in the junkyard.

  6. Aerozol says:

    Am I the only one who kind of liked the video?
    Largely because the animation appealed to me, but I didn’t think it was terrible…

    • Zogtee says:

      I didn’t hate it, but it could have been sliced in half and been the better for it.

    • Chris D says:

      I quite liked it. What can I say? I have simple tastes.

    • Danarchist says:

      I like borderlands for its simplicity despite it’s repetitive monsters. I find more and more the Call of duty type games with all their flash bang are in the end less entertaining for me than running around with my younger brother capping midget bandits.
      I guess I need “angry internet man” supplements or something. Would that be vitamin D(ork)?

  7. Optimaximal says:

    Can anyone confirm that this is actually to be the final DLC? There’s a GOTY edition reportedly on the cards for Christmas time.

    • Archonsod says:

      Scuttlebutt from their forum is that 2K have given the go ahead for further content, but of course hard to say whether that’s true or not.

  8. Rane2k says:

    I have bought one piece of Borderlands DLC (the Knoxx thing), 2k/Gearbox did not find it necessary to inform me that the DLC piece I buy on their website (which was in english) did not work with my UK version of the game…
    Apparently I bought the german version, based on the region I´m in. Too bad they didn´t tell me.

    My interest in this game has vanished in about an hour of trying to fix this…

  9. The Sombrero Kid says:

    can anyone confirm this doesn’t have activation limits? steam only mentions it for the other 3 dlcs.

    • CMaster says:

      Knoxx doesn’t have activation limits for eh Steam version. It would seem that this doesn’t either.

  10. bleeters says:

    Excellent. Now I can finally dole out the punishment those bastard little robots deserve.

    Yes, thank you. I know that there are missions available on the Fyrestone bounty board. You can stop cheerfully reminding me now. Please. For the love of God.

    • Dave says:

      “Hello traveler! Crazy Earl has a job he’d like that chump…” ::BLAM BLAM BLAM:: “My servos… are seizing…” ::BLAM BLAM::

  11. mwoody says:

    What the hell, I’ll buy it. The first three were more than worth the money (though keep in mind I only paid $3 each – that wouldn’t be a problem for two of ’em, but that arena one was sort of content-light). This is one of the few game series that can make me laugh out loud, and the co-op gameplay is second to… well, few. They really do need to fix the leveling, but that sounds more like a job for a proper sequel than more DLC.

    • Nick says:

      Well, I’d say two of the three were worth the money, Moxxi really wasn’t.

    • suibhne says:

      I thought Moxxi’s was worth $3 on sale via Steam, but it would’ve been a rip at $9.99. Still, the other two were unreservedly decent buys even at full price, so Borderlands gone down in my book as the best use of DLC thus far. I noticed that this Claptrap DLC seems to be the largest of all – to the tune of 1.6GB of content, not including the game patch (which I’d already downloaded before purchasing the DLC).

      I also appreciated that Zed and Knoxx both added new environments that were dramatically different from anything already in the game, and I’m hoping for more of that variety in this one.

      Also, appropriate CAPTCHA for the Robolucion: “RebL”.

  12. Chris R says:

    What’s the song at the very end of the video?

  13. Faxmachinen says:

    I don’t get why every damn RPG or even semi-RPG has to have levels. In many cases, especially in Borderlands, it detracts much more from the fun than it adds. That the enemies’ levels are made to “scale with the player’s”, just shows how utterly useless it is. Besides, Borderlands already has the “badass” enemy types for giving the player a challenge, and that works a lot better.

    • Archonsod says:

      All the higher levels do is boost their shields and health. I guess it comes in handy for scaling, given it’s a fairly open environment.

    • Hidden_7 says:

      It’s an interesting question. I’d say the Stalker games were actually awfully RPG-like in the same way that Borderlands is, and they don’t have levels. You get better solely from equipment.

      At the same time, I’m not going to lie and say that a big part of Borderlands appeal (which it inherits from Diablo and all similar games) is the leveling your character. That occasionally bit of reward where you get a new skill point and get a new ability, or get a little better in a measurable numbery way. It presents constant goals, and while that sort of thing definitely can’t save a game with bad mechanics (for me) it can make a game with already fun and solid mechanics (like Borderlands) that bit more compelling. It would be a shame to lose that entirely.

      It’s a tough nut to crack. The best RPG’s have levels designed in such a way that the game gives you a fairly consistent level of challenge, while at the same time occasionally providing you with the experience of an area being too challenging for your current level. Areas that you can come back to after you’ve leveled some, and experience the reward of now being able to cope with what was before too difficult. There should be enemies that are a challenge at lower levels that become a cakewalk at later levels, to give a sense of progression, but they shouldn’t be in the majority.

  14. madned says:

    I thought borderlands used one of the messed up damage scalers.
    you know the ones that depending on the level difference, you and they do more or less damage.

    HGL had that too, I hated it :P (the damage scaling system)

  15. suibhne says:

    Me and some clanmates spent a few hours with the DLC tonight, and we’re pretty disappointed. The basic gameplay seems fine, despite bringing nothing new to the table (unlike both Ned and Knoxx), but the scaling is totally off; just as with Ned, it’s ridiculously easy on Playthrough 1. And, predictably, it’s too hard on Playthrough 2. (We’re sitting in the mid-40s, and Playthrough 1 for Claptrap starts at around 38; Playthrough 2 starts around 50.)

    This all comes down to Gearbox’s stupid leveling design, which deserves a complete overhaul for the inevitable sequel. It’s really braindead at this point. I mean, honestly, do they expect DLC buyers to have this DLC pack and no others? If you’ve finished the main game and have completed even one of the other DLC packs, you’ll be way too powerful to enjoy Playthrough 1 on this DLC – but you won’t be powerful enough to tackle Playthrough 2. Who’s doing their playtesting?

    • suibhne says:

      More to the point, what do they think they gain by so significantly limiting the levels of their DLC even when players far surpass those levels? It’s baffling that they insist on this approach. And even if they imagine design benefits that aren’t occurring to me, shouldn’t player enjoyment still be their primary concern?