Day 1 of DCM’s 2012 Editors Choice Game of the Year: BLADE


“12 Seconds till it’s off cooldown!” My brother was  in trouble, and I knew it. I just needed him to hold out a little longer.

“I’m out of AMMO NOW!” He ran around like a chicken with his head cut off. Hist shouts continued to divulge into something unspeakable. “Great now I’m dead. Happy Mr. Gunzerker?”

“Not my fault you ran out of ammo. Didn’t you spec into the melee tree anyway?”

“Yeah, just let me go melee a giant robot.”

Welcome to Don’’s Game of the Year articles. Today we begin with my favorite game of 2012, Borderlands 2.

Borderlands 2 didn’t get the game of the year because of it’s game play. In fact, in some degrees I think Borderlands 2 failed to truly capture replayability of the original Borderlands. No, it wasn’t being about a bad ass and shooting killing aliens for the sake of the loot gods, and stopping Handsome Jack. No that wasn’t it.

Every time I loaded up Borderlands 2, shortly after any NPC chimed in, a smile came upon my face. Whether it be from Lilith commenting on her fire cult, or Tiny Tina speaking of her badonkadonks I was always happy.

Hell, whenever the evil villain Handsome Jack himself, jumped in on your com link and began insulting you, I couldn’t stop smiling and laughing at this game. Borderlands 2 has writing that hasn’t brought a smile to my face since the Curse of Monkey Island, and voice acting that brought the world’s craziest characters to life.

While there were things that upset me in the game (Lack of the Wub Wubs and Cage the Elephant for example) I didn’t have more fun with any other game this year. Well maybe slightly for that thing called Mist of Pandaria that has a gripping hold over me, but we don’t talk about that…

Borderlands 2 is a phenomenal game that kept a smile on my face even at the most frustrating quests, and gets my vote for Game of the Year.

( If you’d like to read our Full Review of Borderlands 2 check it out here. )

To enter this 12 Days of Giveaway Contest (Comment Below):  Do you think annual sequels to games kill franchises, or do they keep things fresh for fans? 

A randomly picked commenter will be chosen at the end of each day and announced below. Prize must be claimed within 5 days please.

Today’s Winner:Einherjar (@newtothegame950)

Please shoot us an email to or message on Facebook to redeem!

Today’s Giveaway: Full Humble-Bundle Package (


23 responses to “Day 1 of DCM’s 2012 Editors Choice Game of the Year: BLADE

  1. I think they only hurt them if the changes made to the sequels aren’t significant enough, or if there isn’t enough of a story/mechanic hook to each game. Often with the first game of a series we see the foundation for an idea and then the sequels expand upon it and create a much better, rich experience (Borderlands and Assassin’s Creed are a good example of this, I think)

  2. I think it depends entirely on the franchise. Games like Call of Duty should have just stopped years ago with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. There was absolutely nothing gained by just rehashing the idea two more times in a row. Same thing with sports games, the graphics don’t get any better, and it’s just a copy/paste with a higher number slapped on. Games such as Assassin’s Creed, The Legend of Zelda, Mario Kart, Pokémon, even if it’s the same gameplay mechanics, the ideas and stories are fresh enough to keep players interested.

  3. I think they keep things fresh for fans. Look at a game like assassins creed, the original game was good but the sequels explained and expanded on the original stories.

  4. I think annual sequels kills the games for true fans. If you look at CoD and Guitar Hero (don’t see them around anymore do you?), they’ve really lost their touch after the first few games. It’s more of the same without any real innovation. Everyone, both the fans and developers, get bored of making the same game. On the other hand, franchises like Borderlands, Bioshock, and Assasin’s Creed, have longer release cycles in which the development teams put a lot of effort into making a game that they can truly be proud about and know the fans will love. They bring back what fans liked, fix what fans hated, and add new things for the fans to like. It’s a win-win for everyone.

  5. I don’t think it’s possible for annual sequels to do anything except hurt a major game franchise. There’s simply no way to make enough positive changes to justify a $40+ price tag every single year. For fans of the series, sure, it’s great to have another game, but to everybody else it’s “Oh, look, another one of these games.”

  6. It depends on the lenght and change given to the sequel. If it uses the same engine and the same models, a year is plenty of time to come with new areas and stories to play. If it changes radically and has a new engine, it probably will be rushed to a underdeveloped game.

  7. Only when there isn’t too much game play improvement. AC Brotherhood was great. Combat was improved, the setting was awesome, and the story line was amazing. Revelations was more of the same. When that happens, it doesn’t really help the franchise, but diehard fans will always still appreciate it.

  8. The problem that comes to dealing with sequels is how often they are put out. I feel as if I never have gotten my moneys worth since the first assassins creed, but I digress. Gearbox knows how to make a great squeal, left in the best about the old game and somehow made it better overall. Thank god the A.I. has voices now, at least more than claptrap.

  9. As many have mentioned already – if it is done right/well, it can be a real benefit to the franchise. If the company is just rehashing the same thing over and over again, it’s a killer. If the company can produce an experience that is more serialized (providing progressive and new content), then it will keep the whole thing fresh. However! I’m not a fan of the seeming trend of releasing “expansions” and charging prices akin to those of a whole new game. THAT doesn’t count as a sequel.

  10. Do I think annual sequels to games kill franchises, or do they keep things fresh for fans?

    well every year is a little much that dose not give them much time to work on the game. to make a grate game takes years. But! a big DLC patch every year wold be bad ass. if they did that and worked on a new game i think it would work. but to answer your question. ya it could kill them slowly. it will just be a bunch of hit and miss games till they run out of money.

  11. If the games are not given enough time to develop properly, it’s highly probable that an annual sequel will suck. Bad.
    They always feel rushed, full of bugs and lack originality.
    As always, there are exceptions 😉

  12. Annualy would be in my opinion a bit too often. A game needs to develop ang gather new features for it to be a good game ergo it needs to be a bit revolutionary. I think if sequels were to appear annualy, this concept would bo lost, thus making any sequels boring because you are still doing the same thing as in the games before.

  13. It depends on the game. I fully trust Valve if they would make Half-Life episodes an annual thing. Assassin’s Creed should be once in two years maybe but it should go on long.

    However, once they start running out of ideas or start getting repetitive or keep getting low ratings, they should not pull a How I Met Your Mother with a good franchise.

    HIMYM is still fun though.

  14. Decent question, it really depends on the game, For the general FPS game annual games could cause a rift between players that keep up with the current installment, where as for sports games it just makes sense given differences in team makeup, though we have yet to see a sports game that just did new seasons as expansion packs to the first game.

  15. From a monetary standpoint, I’m sure that any additional revenue looks good to the franchise, but in the long run, if the sequel is rushed, as they tend to be when on a set deadline such as being annual, I would think it would hurt their profit because fans of the original will be disappointed and all but the most hardcore fans will no longer keep reinvesting in further releases. TDLR: Rushed sequels = bad. 😉

  16. You know, it depends. I don’t believe that a developer can make a good sequel that improves on quality and gameplay in just a year. Lets look at The Witcher series. It takes quite some time to create a good sequel that expands story and overall quality. And lets be honest, it takes a huge load of money pro promote your product, only a handfull of franchises can afford to promote their product every year. That is my opinion on sequels. But expansions and dlc are a whole other world. I believe that Valve can sell a new half-life episode each year, but it takes a great IP to do that.

  17. Do you think annual sequels to games kill franchises, or do they keep things fresh for fans?
    Kill? No. Keep things fresh for fans? Also no.
    Cheapen the IP and disgust me because they are milking fans? Yes.
    Big name titles just can’t come up with something new every year that is really worth being called a whole new release (and charged for as such). There’s just not enough time creativity within what would be accepted as part of the franchise. With a deadline of an annual release you’d have to make either an expansion pack (if that), some great DLC, or be willing to put out really buggy titles. There’s also the option of mostly repackaging the same thing you (or a competitor) put out last year with minor changes or 5 hours of new single player missions and charging $60 anyway because your fan base has turned into the video game equivalent of Apple fans. But then you’d be Medal of Dutyfield 20xx and I hate that game.

    Thanks for the giveaways DCM. Keep the good content coming too.

  18. It all depends on how it is handled. I feel penny pinched to death with the Assasins creed installmeants after 2. Borderlands 2 is a prime example of how it is to be done. Solid gameplay, hilarious talking guns etc There is enough there to keep it interesting. In the end if we like it were going to eat it up regardless. Look at Call of duty.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s