Borderlands 3 *Developer trailer*

[Valyrious]

Looks like Gearbox hid a possible release date for BL3 in the trailer. People are speculating it may release in October.

[BlackTorito]

2 hours ago, Viper said:

See...comments like this and Polygon, just prove you didn't actually watch the trailer. Or you're not a big enough fan to know what you were watching. 

 

The amount of information they threw at us in such a short time frame of a video was insane. And considering they showed off several different WORLDS (a word that also shows up more than once in the trailer) shows there's no possible way this could just be some DLC. 

 

The only criticism I probably agree with are the graphics. There's a clear lighting and texture upgrade...but the game doesn't look that different aesthetically from BL2 or TPS in the Handsome Collection...but I think that has something to do with the type of Cel-Shading they use. This could be on the PS7 right now and it would probably still look similar. Luckily graphics aren't important to me, so that won't hinder my enjoyment. 

I think you don’t get the idea, it doesnt matter how many worlds, how many billions weapons or characters it throws, its not innovating (or thats what it shows), so yes, its just a big expansion of what already is, thats the idea.

 

I have played every single Borderlands by the way, and I liked them. The fact that you are a fan it just implies your opinion is more biased. Its okay if you want more content, its a good game nonetheless, but its still dissapointing they ain’t doing anything new.

[Crispy_Oglop]

1 hour ago, BlackTorito said:

I think you don’t get the idea, it doesnt matter how many worlds, how many billions weapons or characters it throws, its not innovating (or thats what it shows), so yes, its just a big expansion of what already is, thats the idea.

 

I have played every single Borderlands by the way, and I liked them. The fact that you are a fan it just implies your opinion is more biased. Its okay if you want more content, its a good game nonetheless, but its still dissapointing they ain’t doing anything new.

 

I'd recommend avoiding Polygon, it's empty agenda fuelled journalism at its worst. The fact that someone over at Polygon spent salaried time to write an opinion piece based on a single trailer and general speculation pretty much sums them up.

 

Even if Borderlands 3 isn't doing anything new which we don't know either way yet, there is literally nothing wrong with that if the formula they are reproducing is fun.

 

Enjoyment is not dependent on Innovation whatsoever. It's pretty ridiculous as to how many people create that dependency through critique.

 

If you apply that rationale to pretty much the majority of games that have been released in the last 10 years (at least) then it rings true. So it's pointless to criticise any game for 'not doing anything new' when half the shit we play and enjoy is 'not doing anything new' either. It's futile and just writing for the sake of writing.

 

If you want to critique anything, do it about the substantial elements of the game once we know more about them.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Crispy_Oglop

[BlackTorito]

18 hours ago, Crispy_Oglop said:

 

I'd recommend avoiding Polygon, it's empty agenda fuelled journalism at its worst. The fact that someone over at Polygon spent salaried time to write an opinion piece based on a single trailer and general speculation pretty much sums them up.

 

Even if Borderlands 3 isn't doing anything new which we don't know either way yet, there is literally nothing wrong with that if the formula they are reproducing is fun.

 

Enjoyment is not dependent on Innovation whatsoever. It's pretty ridiculous as to how many people create that dependency through critique.

 

If you apply that rationale to pretty much the majority of games that have been released in the last 10 years (at least) then it rings true. So it's pointless to criticise any game for 'not doing anything new' when half the shit we play and enjoy is 'not doing anything new' either. It's futile and just writing for the sake of writing.

 

If you want to critique anything, do it about the substantial elements of the game once we know more about them.

First off, I don’t read polygon and my opinion got out of my mind the first time I saw the trailer.

 

Second, I have already stated that there is nothing “wrong” in more content if its fun, demand elasticity works in many ways. But saying criticing abscence of innovation is futule is ridiculous, and besides everyone is entintled to their own opinion, and to me, after various games and years without changing the formula, the fact that the trailer doesnt show anything that makes us think thats going to change is actually dissapointing, and its a fair opinion.

[Crispy_Oglop]

43 minutes ago, BlackTorito said:

First off, I don’t read polygon and my opinion got out of my mind the first time I saw the trailer.

 

Second, I have already stated that there is nothing “wrong” in more content if its fun, demand elasticity works in many ways. But saying criticing abscence of innovation is futule is ridiculous, and besides everyone is entintled to their own opinion, and to me, after various games and years without changing the formula, the fact that the trailer doesnt show anything that makes us think thats going to change is actually dissapointing, and its a fair opinion.

 

I didn't say that it's futile to criticize absence of innovation at all. I'm saying that it's futile to define whether something is fun solely by how innovative it is, which is where you are coming from in how you wrote your posts.

 

The opinion part is specific to whether you personally think Borderlands 3 will grow the franchise enough for you to enjoy it. Which is totally fine if you feel that way. I do think that you are basing your opinion off a fluffed-up opinion piece from Polygon and minimal information though. Might be worth waiting till we know more before you make your mind up

 

 

[Valyrious]

9.13.19 release date confirmed. Also... Epic Game Store gets 6 months timed exclusivity on PC.
 

 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Valyrious

[starcrunch061]

A wee bit of stinky fanboyism in this thread, but nothing can overcome the reek from the Polygon article cited.

 

I get so tired of critical "reviews" that say nothing more than, "This game should add something to the genre." Really? I'll agree that the best sequels do something new, but the best need not be the enemy of the good. The fact that Borderlands has found a winning formula shouldn't be discarded because some wannabe journalist wants to sound smart. If a game is good, give me more of it, please. Borderlands 3 looks like it adds a bit to the mix, without changing what made the series worth playing in the first place. Why the name of God would I want the graphics to be changed? That's one of the main draws of the game!!!  The fact is, companies that stray too far from winning formulas get burned in the end. Don't even get me started on Dynasty Warriors 9.

 

But anyway, I'll definitely play this in time. I never bothered with the pre-sequel, because that game seemed more interested in parodying itself than anything. Hopefully, they get back to the basics on this one.

[Lonemankane]

1 hour ago, starcrunch061 said:

A wee bit of stinky fanboyism in this thread, but nothing can overcome the reek from the Polygon article cited.

 

I get so tired of critical "reviews" that say nothing more than, "This game should add something to the genre." Really? I'll agree that the best sequels do something new, but the best need not be the enemy of the good. The fact that Borderlands has found a winning formula shouldn't be discarded because some wannabe journalist wants to sound smart. If a game is good, give me more of it, please. Borderlands 3 looks like it adds a bit to the mix, without changing what made the series worth playing in the first place. Why the name of God would I want the graphics to be changed? That's one of the main draws of the game!!!  The fact is, companies that stray too far from winning formulas get burned in the end. Don't even get me started on Dynasty Warriors 9.

 

But anyway, I'll definitely play this in time. I never bothered with the pre-sequel, because that game seemed more interested in parodying itself than anything. Hopefully, they get back to the basics on this one.

I think the idea of change can work in some things but things like this is best to not change too much. As in, look to Doom 1 and 2. look and play the same just added more enemies and a new gun and that is it. and it is still played far more then 1. Look to doom 3, it changed alot but it kept true the roots but it didn't have too much to do with the old way of combat and so on. This is an example done right in changing. Look to return to castle wolfenstein then to 2009. both play in the same vain while adding and removing bits and parts of the past one.

 

Look to wolfenstein new order and old blood. both done the same as castle wolfenstein and 2009. however the better of the two was old blood. due to the plot never stopping the gameplay for more then 5mins. then look to 2 it completely kept the style of new order and gameplay of old blood but put more plot in and added bs that shouldn't be in a game to start with and it does not go at all with it. You get where am going with it but yeah.

 

Change can be good or bad but. here not too much change is good. As long as the classes don't feel like each other and none of them are weak it is fine. and as a side note I hope they add in the grinder from pre-sequel as it had the power to make a lot of cool gun combos as that to me was the only thing that game done really well along with tech guns and moving about on the moon and so on.

[Viper]

2 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

 

But anyway, I'll definitely play this in time. I never bothered with the pre-sequel, because that game seemed more interested in parodying itself than anything. Hopefully, they get back to the basics on this one.

Why does TPS have such horrible stigma attached to it? The game was fantastic and it has a bad wrap for absolutely no reason. I get that back in 2014 people were kind of pissed that we got TPS instead of BL3...but once you play it all of that doubt should have went away. In fact, some of the gameplay elements they added in TPS, NEED to be in BL3, Butt Slams, Cryo and Laser Weapons? They were critical changes that will be weird to live without now. 

TPS was very much a serious entry to the franchise. It was meant to expand on the backstory of Handsome Jack...to give us insight into how he rose to power and why he is the way he is, and the game did a brilliant job with that in it's story.

 

You definitely need to give TPS a go. It's Borderlands 2 with new gameplay elements, a different environment and a compelling story about Jack. 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Viper

[starcrunch061]

31 minutes ago, Viper said:

Why does TPS have such horrible stigma attached to it? The game was fantastic and it has a bad wrap for absolutely no reason. I get that back in 2014 people were kind of pissed that we got TPS instead of BL3...but once you play it all of that doubt should have went away. In fact, some of the gameplay elements they added in TPS, NEED to be in BL3, Butt Slams, Cryo and Laser Weapons? They were critical changes that will be weird to live without now. 

TPS was very much a serious entry to the franchise. It was meant to expand on the backstory of Handsome Jack...to give us insight into how he rose to power and why he is the way he is, and the game did a brilliant job with that in it's story.

 

You definitely need to give TPS a go. It's Borderlands 2 with new gameplay elements, a different environment and a compelling story about Jack. 

 

I don't know, to be honest, because I haven't played it. But a lot of people didn't care for it (including trustworthy friends who told me that the game wasn't worth my time), so I didn't play it, either. Maybe I missed out there?

 

It's on sale a lot, though, so I might pick it up sometime on your recommendation.

[Valyrious]

Borderlands Handsome Jack Collection 4K texture pack is... pretty large.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Valyrious

[Viper]

14 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

I don't know, to be honest, because I haven't played it. But a lot of people didn't care for it (including trustworthy friends who told me that the game wasn't worth my time), so I didn't play it, either. Maybe I missed out there?

 

It's on sale a lot, though, so I might pick it up sometime on your recommendation.

The game is literally Borderlands 2 with a new coat of paint and a few additions to the gameplay mechanics. People saying it's not worth your time makes no sense to me. If you liked BL2, then TPS is a shoe in, even more so if you're a fan of Handsome Jack since it's his story. I almost feel like, by the time TPS came out, people were burned out on BL2 or something, so they gave TPS this bad wrap of not being worth playing, couple that with it not being the game people wanted at the time it just created this bad idea about it. I don't know...I don't get it. I love TPS...so I recommend it for everyone.

 

The Handsome Collection is on sale in the PS Store right now for $15. I'd definitely pick it up. 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Viper