- cross-posted to:
- gaming@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- gaming@beehaw.org
You must log in or # to comment.
I love Borderlands, but I really wish Randy would just shut the fuck up.
I think he thinks he’s Jack in The Pre-Sequel, but really he’s Jack in Borderlands 2.
Jack in BL2 was funny and entertaining tho.
Probably not if you lived on Pandora.
I hate borderlands, and I also wish Randy would shut the fuck up!
I have a simple rule - Not touching anything that has grease marks on it.
B1 is a bit slow, but quite fun, B2 is brilliant, BTPS is similar to B2, but the crafting stuff is annoying, B3 was too chaotic with a too cluttred UI and a damn annoying story, B4, I have no idea
Have you tried Wonderlands? I really liked it, and would love a sequel/more of that one.
I liked that one but weirdly there’s no NG+ and the DLC kind of sucked. I finished it with a friend and we were like, “that’s it?”. It’s not very long, and it ends shortly after your end of skill tree powers become available.
The TIny Tina game?
I tried it, didn’t like it and uninstalled it.
I am not saying it is a bad game, just that at the time it wasn’t game I liked.
Favorite in the series. But I’m just getting started with BL4 so my opinion may change.
Allegedly B4 is much better than 3, aside from the abysmal performance. I can wait until they fix it and get it for $15 on sale.
I’ve been playing B4 for a few hours now and it’s been pretty good. Definitely getting more B2 vibes than B3.
Good assessment. I agree completely!
I’m not very far in, but so far I’m enjoying B4 more than TPS, and MUCH more than 3.
What crafting?
I think it was a really good game originally. The writing has gotten really fucking bad though, and the gameplay hasn’t really evolved with the times. (I can’t speak on the new game.)
The new one feels like progress so far. I’m not very deep in, but the story and dialogue are not nearly as annoying as 3 was. The biggest difference has to be the movement. In previous games it often felt like you were trudging forward until you found an enemy and then running backwards so they didn’t catch you before they die. Grappling hooks, double jumps, and gliding add a TON of movement and gives you those John Wick moments where you’re bouncing around the area and blasting people from every direction.
I really don’t understand the open world though. I don’t think that’s the direction they needed to go. I think the best looter-shooter I’ve played recently is Roboquest. It has all the movement you said (and more), but it’s in tight rooms, so the devs have more control of the design. Open worlds means the devs have essentially zero control of encounters and it becomes too easy. The only thing they can do is crank up health of enemies so they don’t die as quickly.
I understand your worries. I was was also concerned about the openworld first, but so far they have nailed the open world part pretty well. Travelling has been fun. There has been always fast travel near when i have wanted to use it. There is enough hidden jokes and easter eggs that i feel rewarded to look around.
I dont really understand your point. Devs still curate where you meet the enemies. Its not like its procedurally generated map where everything is random.
I cant remember single time in my 20 hours of gameplay where i have tought that i hate fighting here, or that these enemies dont fit here.
I dont really understand your point. Devs still curate where you meet the enemies. Its not like its procedurally generated map where everything is random.
I haven’t played it, so maybe they’ve done something to control it. I doubt it though. If you can come from any direction, that makes encounters much harder to design. Think about older Borderlands games when entering a compound. You’d come through one main gate and enemies would be set up with cover and you’d have to fight your way through. With open world you could do something like fly into the middle of the compound, and that’s has to be accounted for.
Check out Roboquest, for example. It has some really impressive movement options, but it’s choice of rooms let’s them restrict how much you can abuse them. You’ll always be fighting through the enemies from an expected direction.
I cant remember single time in my 20 hours of gameplay where i have tought that i hate fighting here, or that these enemies dont fit here.
This isn’t what I meant. There’s nuance between liking something and it being the best possible thing. It can be good and still be possible to be better. My biggest issue with open worlds is, like you mentioned at the beginning, fast travel. It takes so much time and resources to make an open world, just for players to fast travel past most of it. Is it really worth the that? Did it add that much to the experience? We could have more cheaper games with tighter designed experiences instead of games that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. (BL3 cost $140m, and for cost “more than twice” that, so minimum $280m.)
I don’t think people understand that everything is an opportunity cost. If you make an open world game, that’s at the expensive of so much more. At minimum, it’s going to be less game to play (or longer between games and more expensive). Is getting a lot of space that you hardly interact with worth it?
The thing about open world is, you can make those smaller contained spaces you keep mentioning with Roboquest inside of some structure with a single entrance and boom, we have your preferred formula.
Sure. You can make those, but you have to spend a lot of money and time making the open world just to make places for the rooms to live. Is that worth it? Everything is opportunity cost. Did doubling the cost improve the game that much?
I can see that.
I’m not far enough to have settled on an opinion on the open world yet. I did find it tedious in other BL games that I had to walk through the same areas in the same order over and over again to access the end game or start a new character.
That being said, I often don’t know where to go or what to do in BL4. Thank Torgue they added the Echo objective finder, that’s pretty much the only way I’ve been able to stay on track at all.
How does someone with such a shitty personality and dress sense get so smug?
If I looked and acted like him I would want to punch myself in the face
How does someone with such a shitty personality and dress sense get so smug?
Lots and lots of money.
If I looked and acted like him I would want to punch myself in the face
He has top of the line security details to do that for him.
And they keep failing up. Your job qualification is what you have done, not how well they were doing.
So a 4070 is a leaf blower to this asshole.
Well I’ll gladly not buy this game then.
The game runs fine on my 4070 Super ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
At what resolution, frame rate, and settings? Trying to get a good grasp of the performance if I ever buy it.
5120x1440p
60-80fpsI followed this guide from gearbox for the settings, except I turned off volumetric cloud shadows and turned up DLSS to Quality
Nice. Thanks for the info. I’ll probably grab it in 3 years lol
Lol hell yeah
Considering Randy REALLY wants you to pay $130 USD for this game, I’m not shocked his performance advice was “be less poor”
Hot take, Borderlands was never really a good franchise. Yeah I played through the second game, but i did so once, and never wanted to return to it afterwards.
there was something special about playing through 1 for the first time knowing nothing what to expect. Then when 2 came out I liked it alright but already felt like it was a big tonal departure. funny to see the discussion shift over time to 2 being the benchmark and 3(+) going too far.
Well to me, borderlands 2 was the most fun I’ve had with a shooter since half-life 2 or CoD4. It’s one of the funniest games I’ve ever played as well. I think the writing in general is really top notch (props to Anthony Birch), the characters are memorable, the weapons and abilities are fun. All and all, BL2 really hit the mark in a lot of ways for me.
Borderlands 3 on the other hand, just wasn’t as good. It had a ton of great quality of life improvements, so that was nice. The player abilities were also largely really good, I liked most of the classes. But it had a ton of weaknesses… The level design was pretty awful, the much bigger maps really spread out the action absolutely killed the pacing. The story was pretty dumb, and while the villains were detestable, it was only in the way that all obnoxious teenagers are detestable. And the greatest sin, the loot was a mess. They actually threw way too many guns at you, so many that you never really get a chance to enjoy any of them. And way too many of them were uniques (with mysterious effects they never bother to explain).
deleted by creator
Agree
The best game in the franchise is the Telltale game
That one is a gem, Gearbox can’t compete with this. B2’s only biggest asset is the voice actor, the animation when two character interact is worst than Oblivion.
Maybe try optimizing your game before releasing it?
Please try optimizing your pc before purchasing BL4. \s
That’s probably the best how copilot could optimize it.
So… I shouldn’t plan on playing this on a Steamdeck when it gets down to $19.99?
Not the current one, no. The Steam Deck is closer to a PS4 spec, and even if there weren’t optimization problems, this is built to a PS5 spec.
Someone smarter than Randy will figure out tweaks and optimisations to allow it eventually.
For better or worse it’s unreal engine 5 (AKA volumetrics: the engine), so it’s got some easy performance gains here and there with engine.ini tweaks and maybe some mods to remove stuff if denuvo isn’t too bad about it.
I’d watch reviews first.
Borderlands 3 works excellent on the deck though.
That’s nice, he is kind enough to tell us that we should not buy his game if we do not have a monster gpu. He is only excluding a very small portion of gamers after all !
Let’s look at the Valve’s hardware survey.
Wait…
Most popular system RAM is 16GB, and VRAM is 8GB.
Wow! Powerful specs!
It’s sad that a lot of devs just make their game and then slap frame-gen on it and then release it. Like who cares about optimization. Not that I blame them, people still buy those games full-priced, so…
Who even has time to play full price games? I have enough unplayed games piled up in my steam/epic/gog libraries to keep me busy for decades.
Well a surprisingly lot of people. Just a guess but maybe this is the main or only hobby for a significant amount of buyers?
Even so, the steam hardware survey seems to indicate that the vast majority of users wouldn’t reach specs to enable developer-approved framegen anyway. (Unless you count Lossless Scaling).
We’re kind of going full circle back to the paradigm of “You are judged on your entry level as much (or more) than your high end [gameplay performance]”.
In other words:
“We don’t want to put resources towards optimising our product. We don’t care if the methods we built our product with make it more difficult to use, while regressing in several key visual aspects. The burdon of our shortcomings will be placed on the end user, who will have to spend their resources to out-power them.”
A game that looks like BL4 shouldn’t run like Cyberpunk 2077 with ray tracing turned on.
I guess I’m not premium enough to give you my money, Randy.
I’ll play something cheaper then
It’s poorly optimized UE5 slop. Looks like shit, plays like shit.
Hard pass.
Stop using slop for non-ai things.
It’s still slop, just not ai slop.
Slop is a real word not made exclusively for ai
Guess my hogs will be going hungry.
You’re not my real mom.
no. slop be sloppin whether it’s AI or not.
Slop has existed as a word far longer than AI has. Uses for the word slop include:
-
Unappetizing watery food or soup.
-
Spilled or splashed liquid.
-
Waste food fed to farm animals such as pigs.
-
Soft mud or slosh.
-
Is Borderlands really all that popular still? Like I remember seeing the first few games everywhere, and people talking about them, but that was years ago. I realize I’m biased but I would expect to hear something about them…
1 was fresh and new
2 was fantastic
prequel was OK
3 tried too hard and was generally average to poor
Maybe he could try to make another TV series.
Does 1 get better? I have 1 and 2 from a bundle years ago and started the first game. It’s sooo boring, like all the bad stuff from an mmo but single player. I don’t want to walk from a Hub to place A multiple times and just the spawning mobs change based on the quest.
Or if 1 doesn’t get better, can I play 2 without losing to much?
yeah it’s a little bare bones, it’s not worth more than a single playthrough really. Because the events of 1 are expanded on in 2 and some of the story beats land a little better if you knew the characters from 1 it’s worth playing once for novelty - but it being a 16 year old game it shows its age.
After what they did to my boy claptrap they can eat it. It’s obvious that the voice acting department is going to go out of the way to deservedly sabotage this series until it finally gives up.
2 was where the series really peaked. The first did some new things, and brought some fresh life into the shooter genre.
2 expanded upon it, and had a much better story. It was also in the heyday of matchmaking game lobbies, so it was easy to boot up the match finder and jump into a game with someone. Probably half of my Steam friends list came from playing this game and just vibing with people on voice chat while we ran through the side quests.
The prequel was… Alright? I’d put it about on par with the first game. It didn’t bring anything new or exciting to the table, but it was good at what it did.
Then 3 was just bad. It felt really cringey, in a “how do you do, fellow kids” kind of way. Like it was trying too hard.
And now 4 sounds like more of 3. The game sounds rushed, and the CEO’s attempting to cover for that rush makes him sound woefully out of touch. There’s no good reason that cel-shaded graphics should require a 5090 to run smoothly.
