Hey, look at that, gamers divided into two tribes. You don’t see that every day. This time it’s over Battleborn and Overwatch, their similarities and differences (If there even are any).
TL;DR – Battleborn is to Overwatch what Battlefield is to Call of Duty. Read on to find out why.
Battleborn is an intensely divisive game – surprising given that there was nothing particularly special or hateful about it. It’s a competent MOBA shooter. But it gets a lot of hate. Because it’s basically Overwatch, according to some. No-one ever confuses Overwatch with Battleborn, incidentally.
Gamespulp was intrigued by this, and decided to investigate, thanks to Overwatch’s generous beta, timed and designed to steal some of Battleborn’s thunder.
The Battleborn and Overwatch Similarities
All right, let’s look at those similarities first. The rap sheet, if you will.
- Both FPS
- Both cartoonish in style
- Both have wide range of class-based characters
- Both require teamwork
- Both require tactics (Sort of)
- Both made by a team of mostly humans
- Both video games
Hey, you know, that sounds half familiar.
It’s Battlefield vs Call of Duty for the Nickelodeon age.
The New Battlefield vs Call of Duty
That’s a pretty apt comparison here, because gameplay-wise, Battleborn and Overwatch are completely different – a fact that doesn’t become really apparent until you pick up a controller.
Sure, both games require tactics to ensure victory (if that’s in the list above then good job on us remembering to add it after writing this bit), but while team composition is crucial in both, only Battleborn needs a real game-plan to win.
There’s a level of complexity in Battleborn that’s not present in Overwatch (and that works in both games’ favour).
In its play, Overwatch is Call of Duty – it’s sharp and arcade-like in its simplicity. It’s a whole lot quicker-paced, with rounds lasting about ten furious, frantic minutes, and the controls feel fluid. Plus, you can change characters mid-game in the same way you’d switch loadouts in COD to give yourself more short-range damage or whatever. Objectives play out like Team Fortress 2, with teams defending or attacking positions on the map, then moving up to the next area.
And that’s the total opposite of Battleborn. Like, the complete reverse.
You know how, in Battlefield, you can’t go lone-wolfing it to any real success? You think strategically about what classes are on field already; playing medic if your squad needs it, and so on. The games are longer, the objectives even more important than the shooting… To achieve Battleborn victory, you’ll have to think the same way. You’ll need to alter and dominate the map with turrets, the way recon kits can open up the Battlefield.
Because there are no character swaps in Battleborn – you’re locked in for a whole campaign or versus round. All you can do is choose the best character for your team (Please, you don’t need two snipers, even if Thorn’s a badass). Your only option is picking the wisest path on the double helix skill tree, one that complements your own playstyle and the team’s, as a whole.
The Sum Up
Controlling Battleborn can feel clunkier, with more time spent considering, rather than killing, spending time to find just the right character for you. A world away from the drop-in mad-dash mad-capperies of Overwatch. But they’re both great games in their own right (And have their quirks and flaws as well, natch).
Battleborn is the what gamespulp would play with a group of friends in a party; Overwatch is for the quick blitzes between cups of coffee.