izigame.me

I wouldn't recommend this game for a few distinct reasons:
This game has the perfect example of a "mid" story. The story isn't exceptional in any regard, but, given the D&D setting, makes no sense. The entire script and writing is emblematic of people that don't actually understand how D&D works - the DM (Bunker Master, as they call it) and players both are walking stereotypes of DM/GM and players but in the most Reddit-meme way. They aren't based on reality, they're based on *memes*, what people have made *jokes* about.
The framing of the story is that you are a "Fatemaker," someone who can change fate itself. It's kinda cringe, but whatever.
The writing is also entirely built upon the modern trope of subversion. Anywhere that can be subverted will be subverted. As such, it destroys any expectations the player can have, leaving nothing to actually subvert. Even when the game attempts to subvert the subversion, it is not only obvious but boring. The second major trope is meta-humor. It would be one thing if the players at the table made meta jokes about D&D, but the NPCs themselves do, which is just annoying. The writing is generally quite poor. I must admit, however, that there are a few individual lines that are quite good, usually as the lines from your player character guy. But in general, it is poor.
As far as the characters go, there are really only a few:
1. Tina, who feels like OG Tina except with less charm and more generic childishness, as opposed to existing Tina who (in BL2 anyway) felt like a character that was at their core a charming but broken character who covered it with a caricature of childishness. This Tina feels like the core is suppressed or gone, but it isn't too far off the original. Tina's fine.
2. Valentine, one of the players at the table. He's annoying, he's stupid, he's generally lacking in charm, and I really, really don't like him. He's generally useless, adds very little, and was the primary reason that I installed ZetaDaemon's Dialog Skipper mod. He does get better later in the game, I think, but he never has even the charm that Mordekai had in Dragon Keep, which wasn't much, and certainly not near Brick or Tina.
3. Frette, a robot that feels like a black version of the stupid Robot from the Solo movie that was always going on about Robot rights. She's willfully obstinate and is often the party murderhobo. I don't like her either, and she's awful at party communication (despite the fact that WL doesn't have a party, just the player character and anyone who's joined them in the campaign, so since she doesn't have her own character her dialogue feels pointless - as does Valentine's).
4. The villain, the Dragon Lord. His whole shtick is that he's rebelling against the DM and is a sentient NPC! Which is retarded. Quite retarded. His actual character isn't that bad, though. Despite the fact that he isn't really Dragon themed but is instead basically a Lich, he's endearing enough, and I don't mind it when he speaks, unlike the Calypso Twins in BL3. He doesn't have Jack levels of charm, of course, but he's a good enough character.
5. Paladin Mike, a... non-binary? Entity? I don't know, it has facial hair but also feminine traits... I don't know, but worst of all is that its voice is atrocious. For one, it's British, which is just the worst, but the voice acting is particularly annoying, at least to me.
All other characters are relatively ignorable. Unlike BL2, which had important side characters like Marcus, Zed, Scooter, etc, this game really only has two major side characters: The "Punchfather," who's just Brick with fairy wings (He doesn't really matter or do much), and Torgue, who blows up the ocean, which was the only moment in this game that I truly liked.
A bunch of smaller story beats are just cringe. For example, Tina yells at Valentine and Frette for breaking character, except that when she yells at them, all they're doing is talking to each other as people. Breaking character is TOTALLY FINE, when restricted to outside of the game. My players break character all the time, but never as something their characters are acting. It's always an outside thing. At another point, Tina says that tracking your own health is cheating. This is just ridiculous. At another, Frette says that the way the game goes is always "just killing everything," which isn't true of D&D, but is almost true of this game (even Dragon Keep had dialogue - you only fought the dwarves because Brick chose to attack someone instead of communicating). Tina yells out "Boss fight," which, in my opinion, is a mistake. You should make the bosses cool enough, obvious enough, that the players do not need to be told, "Boss fight." They will know. At another, "The never beats the villain in the first quest" is an actual dialog line from the villain. This style of meta humor is quite obnoxious, as mentioned prior. At another point, after the players destroy a catapult they needed to continue the quest because they "felt like destroying it," they "undestroy" the catapult, and Tina just lets them. I understand that players are often hard to control, but you should never reward them for being murderhobos in any degree. The DM also gives the players stuff blatantly because of their dumb actions, whereas I prefer making them suffer, but maybe that's just me. At another point, you literally seduce a drawbridge, which backs up my theory that they based this game off of memes instead of the source material. At another point, they say that "Only the sword of Souls can defeat the villain," but when you actually fight the villain, you defeat him without the Sword of Souls. And, annoyingly, you never get to wield the Sword of Souls, despite the game having a melee weapon system. Another point, the one blacksmith in existence is female. I don't necessarily mind this, except for the fact that she's shrimpy. A blacksmith has to be quite physically fit, regardless of gender. If you want to make the blacksmith female, make it believable. Said blacksmith has a line, "I'm in a polycule with my blueprints." I won't touch that line with a 32 foot pole. Another point is just reusing the joke about the Forest of Despair from Dragon Keep but with less charm ("this place doesn't seem dark enough, make it darker."
General conclusion: The writing is bad.
On the gameplay, it's quite... mid. Nothing really sticks out, nothing is particularly fun. Every skill feels stolen from a previous game, spells are mostly just grenades, etc. The best part of the game is the melee weapon system, which is kinda fun. I just wish the game let you hold the melee weapon in your hands like you hold guns.
The endgame essentially doesn't exist, with the existing endgame being really boring and tedious. I don't think many people disagree with me on this - of those I asked, this seemed to be the consensus. There's not a ton to say about the gameplay - it's similar to BL3's, but it feels less fun to me. Melee weapons are a plus, but you can expect what you got from 3. With one exception.
The Overworld is absolute trash. Instead of having a whole bunch of areas, you walk around the physical game board. Maneuvering around in the Overworld sucks in every aspect - the entire thing is awful and should never have made it into the game (and it's bad in concept too).
All in all, this game really isn't worth it. If you're a massive Borderlands fan, you might get something out of it, or you might not. It's quite neutral, really, but neutral in a negative way. There's very little redeeming this game. I expect it will still be better than Borderlands 4 is going to be.
C Tier game.