Anyone else hyped for Borderlands 3 [Release date 9/13/2019]

[Man_Over_Game]

So with the likely Borderlands 3 reveal happening on the 28th, is anyone else really excited for it?

Any expectations as to what it's going to be like, or who'd be in it?

I'd like to see something involving that pet skag you had in the second one, maybe some kind of Beastmaster Class.

Also, I'm pretty sure Lilith is going to go darkside, based on her actions in the Pre-Sequel and how she was totally up for torturing Athena.

My biggest concern is the storyboarding and the map design. They're using a different guy this time around, and the Pre-Sequel had some amazing combat mechanics (Shorter ability cooldowns, faster combat, mobility was a big thing), but the entire game was terrible to travel through and it just lacked any kind of likable story. They nailed combat and messed up on everything else.

I dunno, we'll see.

[Edit]

CONFIRMED

Release date on September 13, 2019!

[The Glyphstone]

Borderlands 3 is like Half-Life 3. I'll believe it exists when I see it, and not a moment before then.

[Man_Over_Game]

Borderlands 3 is like Half-Life 3. I'll believe it exists when I see it, and not a moment before then.

There was a very..."On the Nose" clue released a few days ago.

Had the date for PAX East on a billboard, using the Borderlands graphics style, with Exit 3 partially cropped out.

Gearbox has also responded a bit more than they normally would for any minor teaser.

So while I feel your pain, I'm feeling pretty good about this.

[Resileaf]

I can already see the disapointment when the words "Epic Games Store Exclusive" appear.

[Psyren]

I'm down but I'm also curious how the more recent crop of live service looter-shooters affect this one. Certainly I don't expect that they're going to be good with it being offline and thus cheatable like the others have been.

Having played the likes of Destiny and Anthem I'm not sure if I can really go back to cel shading. But if it has local co-op again I'll definitely be doing that.

[factotum]

No. I learned my lesson to not be hyped about this sort of thing when Borderlands 2 came out and turned out to be effectively a super-large DLC for the original game, only with even more bullet spongy enemies.

[Rodin]

No. I learned my lesson to not be hyped about this sort of thing when Borderlands 2 came out and turned out to be effectively a super-large DLC for the original game, only with even more bullet spongy enemies.

Pretty much this. If they actually innovate a bit and introduce some more interesting mechanics, I'm down. But between the two previous games I burnt myself out on the "FPS Diablo" idea, so they have to do something exciting to draw me in.

[Erloas]

No. I learned my lesson to not be hyped about this sort of thing when Borderlands 2 came out and turned out to be effectively a super-large DLC for the original game, only with even more bullet spongy enemies.

Obviously not everyone sees it the same way, more Borderlands was exactly what I wanted, and exactly what we got, with Borderlands 2. The last thing I want is for the next game to *not* be like the previous games.

Although I never did get into the Pre-Sequel, not for any good reason, mostly just because I no longer had anyone to play with and the games are so much better with other people.

[Anteros]

I can already see the disapointment when the words "Epic Games Store Exclusive" appear.

Who cares? I don't get why everyone is so obsessed with giving their money to Steam over some other company that does the exact same thing. It's not like a console where you have to go shell out an extra 400 for the system. Just download the free launcher and play.


For Borderlands 3, I'll admit that I'm excited. I've already told my old friends that I played the earlier games with to clear space in their schedules to play it. It's hard to even get excited for games these days after so many overhyped games have flopped, but I'm hopeful for this.

Not hopeful enough to pre-order or pay for early access though.

Obviously not everyone sees it the same way, more Borderlands was exactly what I wanted, and exactly what we got, with Borderlands 2. The last thing I want is for the next game to *not* be like the previous games.

Although I never did get into the Pre-Sequel, not for any good reason, mostly just because I no longer had anyone to play with and the games are so much better with other people.

Right? Borderlands 2 was exactly what I wanted it to be. Honestly, it's not even all that similar to the first game. They improved on a lot. I'll never understand why someone would buy a game that's part of a franchise, and then complain that it's like the other games in the franchise. It's nonsensical.

[Resileaf]

Who cares? I don't get why everyone is so obsessed with giving their money to Steam over some other company that does the exact same thing. It's not like a console where you have to go shell out an extra 400 for the system. Just download the free launcher and play.

Epic Games is problematic because their launcher is spyware. It looks over your activity, particularly what you do in Steam.

[GloatingSwine]

Epic Games is problematic because their launcher is spyware. It looks over your activity, particularly what you do in Steam.

You know Steam reports all your installed programs back as well, right? It's actually really common information gathering, especially for anti-cheat systems.

The squealing hyperbole around the epic store from people who are so weird about videogames they've got an emotional attachment to a specific shop is really bizarre.

Valve are not your friend. They are out to get money from you and nothing else. Preferably for as little input on their part as possible. Even better if it's for a product they know you don't actually want and probably won't even download. (Deep discount flash sales trigger FOMO and prompt people to buy things they would never have bought if the sale wasn't such a limited time offer, even for the same price).


On topic. I was remarkably cool on Blands 2 after spending roughly infinity time in the first one. I didn't think it was as funny, I especially didn't think it was as funny as it thought it was. The limitations on the player imposed by the plot and the lack of decent sidequests didn't make for a good campaign, the game feel wasn't great and the loot was uninspired, especially with how rare purple/oranges were.

So Blands 3 is maybe not as thrilling to me. If I want a new looter-shooter I'll buy Division 2. (And lament that it'll never have as comprehensive or compelling an endgame as Path of Exile).

[NeoVid]

I'm looking forward to it, even though I don't expect them to be able to recapture the magic of BL2. But who knows, I might be wrong, and BL3 could be as big an upgrade as 2 was from 1.

[The Glyphstone]

I actually started with BL2, and when I tried BL1 I found it relatively unpolished and less impressive. Pre-Sequel had some fun elements, but was a step back in other ways, so I hope they've learned their lessons there.

[Keltest]

You know Steam reports all your installed programs back as well, right? It's actually really common information gathering, especially for anti-cheat systems.

The squealing hyperbole around the epic store from people who are so weird about videogames they've got an emotional attachment to a specific shop is really bizarre.

Valve are not your friend. They are out to get money from you and nothing else. Preferably for as little input on their part as possible. Even better if it's for a product they know you don't actually want and probably won't even download. (Deep discount flash sales trigger FOMO and prompt people to buy things they would never have bought if the sale wasn't such a limited time offer, even for the same price).

Personally, im pretty bothered by the business tactic of trying to force me to use a product or service im not interested in in order to access one that I am. I have steam and origin already, I neither need nor want a half dozen competing distributors offering 95% of the same content just to play the half dozen games that are exclusive to each platform. Especially since each platform also takes up space on my hard drive.

[BeerMug Paladin]

I'm not sure how anyone could think Borderlands 2 wasn't a richly improved version of Borderlands. It was the same game in the way that maybe Diablo and Diablo 2 were the same game. It was a definitive improvement in pretty much every aspect. But at its core, you're still just clicking on monsters.

Of course, all you're really doing when you play a game is clicking around and/or mashing buttons and wiggling sticks a bit. Just ask anyone who doesn't play games and they'll confirm it's the same regardless of genre. Personal experience aside, it's all equally pointless.

As for hype and all that, I don't really play a lot of different games, but the few I do play I can do so fairly endlessly. Extreme grind endlessly endgame mechanics can hold my attention for a long time, but I've never played an online-"service" type of game and I don't intend to begin any. If B3 ends up being one of those, I'll pass.

That said, if it's not one of those I think I'll hold off on buying it for myself until they eventually get around to selling a definitive version with all the inevitable DLC they'll add on after launch. Otherwise, people in my life know my general preferences in gaming so I might get it before then as a gift at some point.

Not necessarily because I'll expect the game to be a rip-off otherwise, I'm just happy with the games I've got and I can wait until the ultimate cost/benefit version inevitably comes out in several years.

[Anteros]

Personally, im pretty bothered by the business tactic of trying to force me to use a product or service im not interested in in order to access one that I am. I have steam and origin already, I neither need nor want a half dozen competing distributors offering 95% of the same content just to play the half dozen games that are exclusive to each platform. Especially since each platform also takes up space on my hard drive.

The amount of space they take up is negligible for any system actually capable of running the games they sell. I agree that I don't like mandatory DRM services, but that applies to Steam just as much as it does to Epic, or Blizzard, or Origin or anyone else. I wish the practice would go away entirely, but I've accepted that it won't. I don't see any reason to single Epic out for doing the same thing as every other major publisher.

[Rynjin]

You know Steam reports all your installed programs back as well, right? It's actually really common information gathering, especially for anti-cheat systems.

The squealing hyperbole around the epic store from people who are so weird about videogames they've got an emotional attachment to a specific shop is really bizarre.

It's not just the "ambiguously spyware" thing, it's the fact that encouraging this "Platform exclusivity" thing is a horrendous ****ing idea. If you give a company an inch, they'll take the whole world. It's just a hop and a skip from "Epic Games Exclusive" to "Not only is it exclusive, you have to pay a subscription fee to use this service" and you end up with the same cluster**** as the anime industry where you need 4 different subscriptions to watch a collection of specific shows exclusive to amazon/Netflix/Hulu/VRV/Whatever come sout next year to compete with them, leading to a steep rise in justifiable piracy.

And even beside all that, the service itself is a steaming pile of ****. It's unoptimized, featureless, hard to navigate, and just plain a poor service, which is why they need to throw money at developers to entice people to download it.

I'm not sure how anyone could think Borderlands 2 wasn't a richly improved version of Borderlands.

All of the characters (sans Krieg and Gage, who weren't available on launch) were boring to play, for one. I couldn't stand Maya's playstyle, thought whatsisface the Mexican dwarf guy was super boring from concept on down (Oh boy, dual wielding. How fun, original, and game changing), Axton was just Roland+, and Zero's ability and talents were likewise boring in practice.

All four also suffered from "One True Build" syndrome on top of that, where half to three quarters of their talents were worthless, like Zero's melee tree which couldn't ever HOPE to keep up with ever-inflating enemy HP and armor pools, that self-same problem ALSO trimming down weapon variety on a person by person basis since EVERYONE needed a Slag weapon to do more than tickle people.

Cap that off with a severe dilution in personality between the manufacturers (the most egregious being Jakobs, which instead of manufacturing Hand Cannons moved to manufacturing semi-auto peashooters that weren't worth a damn in any kind of fight) and most manufacturers' weapons quirks being either annoying (the Torgue rockets thing), worthless (the Hyperion "anti-recoil" functionality), or so boring you may as well not have bothered (replacing S&S, the "high capacity, good accuracy, often elemental" manfacturer with bandit's "big mag, dumb weapon names" schtick was a mistake) and I'm hard pressed to think of anything BL2 DID improve on besides graphics.

Oh, and the icing on the cake is the absolutely frustrating drop rate for any of the actually worthwhile or interesting legendary items ensuring across several playthroughs of NG with different characters I found a whopping total of 1-2 of the non-guaranteed drops.

All of these problems save the drop rate are exacerbated on NG+ and NG+2 to the point the game is basically unplayable without a very specific meta set up.

I had a niggling feeling that BL2 wasn't as good as the first when I played it, but it took me quite a few years to put into words all the annoyances it stacked up.

[Anteros]

It's not just the "ambiguously spyware" thing, it's the fact that encouraging this "Platform exclusivity" thing is a horrendous ****ing idea. If you give a company an inch, they'll take the whole world. It's just a hop and a skip from "Epic Games Exclusive" to "Not only is it exclusive, you have to pay a subscription fee to use this service" and you end up with the same cluster**** as the anime industry where you need 4 different subscriptions to watch a collection of specific shows exclusive to amazon/Netflix/Hulu/VRV/Whatever come sout next year to compete with them, leading to a steep rise in justifiable piracy.

I could buy this argument if there weren't already hundreds if not thousands of exclusive games on different launchers. You wanna play Overwatch or WoW? You have to use Blizzard. You wanna play Dota or like 5,000 other games? Good luck launching them without steam. No one raised a fuss about this at all until Epic launched and Steam's PR team went into full damage control mode to stir up the internet because they're terrified of losing their monopoly. Now maybe Epic will be garbage and die out, but competition in the market can only be good for us as consumers.

[Rynjin]

I could buy this argument if there weren't already hundreds if not thousands of exclusive games on different launchers. You wanna play Overwatch or WoW? You have to use Blizzard. You wanna play Dota or like 5,000 other games? Good luck launching them without steam. No one raised a fuss about this at all until Epic launched and Steam's PR team went into full damage control mode to stir up the internet because they're terrified of losing their monopoly. Now maybe Epic will be garbage and die out, but competition in the market can only be good for us as consumers.

The difference and fine line there is that the exclusives in those case are games that are made in house and/or distributed by those publishers.

Epic is creating a bad precedent by paying developers huge money to lock otherwise unaffiliated games to their services.

Mind, I don't really like Origin or the Blizzard launcher either, not least because both are also unoptimized messes, and Origin is little better than the Epic Games launcher in terms of **** UI design, but at least they aren't going out of their way to buy random 3rd party titles people are hyped for to shill their subpar services.

The argument could then be made "But Epic is just trying to set themselves up as a legitimate AAA publisher like those guys (Activision and EA)"...to which I'd respond "We don't need any more of those, and could in fact could use a lot less".

[factotum]

I could buy this argument if there weren't already hundreds if not thousands of exclusive games on different launchers. You wanna play Overwatch or WoW? You have to use Blizzard. You wanna play Dota or like 5,000 other games? Good luck launching them without steam. No one raised a fuss about this at all until Epic launched and Steam's PR team went into full damage control mode to stir up the internet because they're terrified of losing their monopoly.

Um, you just contradicted yourself? If there are other game launchers out there already, which there are, then Steam is not a monopoly. And I would have no problem with the Epic launcher at all if they'd actually put some effort into matching Steam for feature set, but they haven't--they'd rather throw money at publishers to get exclusives than spend any money improving their platform, by the looks. Yes, I know they haven't been developing as long as Steam, but they have a template for what to do that Steam did not while it was being developed.

[Anteros]

The difference and fine line there is that the exclusives in those case are games that are made in house and/or distributed by those publishers.

Epic is creating a bad precedent by paying developers huge money to lock otherwise unaffiliated games to their services.

Mind, I don't really like Origin or the Blizzard launcher either, not least because both are also unoptimized messes, and Origin is little better than the Epic Games launcher in terms of **** UI design, but at least they aren't going out of their way to buy random 3rd party titles people are hyped for to shill their subpar services.

The argument could then be made "But Epic is just trying to set themselves up as a legitimate AAA publisher like those guys (Activision and EA)"...to which I'd respond "We don't need any more of those, and could in fact could use a lot less".

Do you actually not realize that there are literally hundreds of games on Steam that are exclusive to their platform but not developed by them? It's been that way for over a decade. You can literally buy physical copies of games in a store and not be able to play them if you don't have access to Steam.

Um, you just contradicted yourself? If there are other game launchers out there already, which there are, then Steam is not a monopoly. And I would have no problem with the Epic launcher at all if they'd actually put some effort into matching Steam for feature set, but they haven't--they'd rather throw money at publishers to get exclusives than spend any money improving their platform, by the looks. Yes, I know they haven't been developing as long as Steam, but they have a template for what to do that Steam did not while it was being developed.

The other launchers like Blizzards or Ubisoft tend to stick to their own content. They aren't in direct competition with Steam for a developer's business like Epic is.

[Rodin]

I'm not sure how anyone could think Borderlands 2 wasn't a richly improved version of Borderlands. It was the same game in the way that maybe Diablo and Diablo 2 were the same game. It was a definitive improvement in pretty much every aspect. But at its core, you're still just clicking on monsters.

Of course, all you're really doing when you play a game is clicking around and/or mashing buttons and wiggling sticks a bit. Just ask anyone who doesn't play games and they'll confirm it's the same regardless of genre. Personal experience aside, it's all equally pointless.

As for hype and all that, I don't really play a lot of different games, but the few I do play I can do so fairly endlessly. Extreme grind endlessly endgame mechanics can hold my attention for a long time, but I've never played an online-"service" type of game and I don't intend to begin any. If B3 ends up being one of those, I'll pass.

That said, if it's not one of those I think I'll hold off on buying it for myself until they eventually get around to selling a definitive version with all the inevitable DLC they'll add on after launch. Otherwise, people in my life know my general preferences in gaming so I might get it before then as a gift at some point.

Not necessarily because I'll expect the game to be a rip-off otherwise, I'm just happy with the games I've got and I can wait until the ultimate cost/benefit version inevitably comes out in several years.

I would definitely dispute the bolded, having just gone back and played the original Diablo. I would argue that Blizzard created a new genre when they made Diablo, and then created another new genre with Diablo II. The games are that different in tone and playstyle, with the only similarities being "isometric real-time" and "random loot and maps". That's not knocking Diablo II, by the way - it was a fabulous game in its own right.

Borderlands 2 was very much the "same again, but with spinning rims" version of Borderlands. It improved in a number of ways, but those ways were purely iterative.

Hmmm...I'm looking for a good comparison. I think the best is the Assassin's Creed series. The first game is another case where it's so different from its successors that it kind of stands alone. Assassin's Creed II was the first of the games to find the incredibly successful formula, and Brotherhood is the game that refined it.

That's where Borderlands 2 sits for me, and that's why I can't quite get hyped about Borderlands 3. Because there's a decent chance it will be an Assassin's Creed Revelations - more of the same when I'm already tired of the original formula. If instead they go in a new direction (like Origins/Odyssey), then they could easily draw me back in.

I enjoyed Borderlands 2 a lot, but the damning indictment is that I never finished it. I got bored of it around about the time you hit Jack's city and just never returned.

[random11]

I enjoyed Borderlands 1, thought 2 was a major improvement, and the pre-sequel was a bit of a step back to me.

The first was just fun shooty game.

The second added better story and villain, kept the fun, and added more weapons.
Also, since classes were less connected to weapon types, it allowed me to play all the characters with less restrictions (still, I liked some more or less than the others.

The pre-sequel didn't change the formula by much, and felt for me like the same game.

Am I hyped about the third? Not sure.
In addition to question what they added and what they removed in game mechanic, and if they have a good story, now I also worry about industry habits (like loot boxes and similar BS)
So I guess I'll just have to wait and see.

[boj0]

Beyond hyped, I absolutely love the series (and my wife does too, so that helps) and if they announce a true sequel at PAX, it will be the first game in years that I preorder a super-deluxe-hyper-badass-etc. edition of a video game.

[Psyren]

The difference and fine line there is that the exclusives in those case are games that are made in house and/or distributed by those publishers.

Epic is creating a bad precedent by paying developers huge money to lock otherwise unaffiliated games to their services.

Mind, I don't really like Origin or the Blizzard launcher either, not least because both are also unoptimized messes, and Origin is little better than the Epic Games launcher in terms of **** UI design, but at least they aren't going out of their way to buy random 3rd party titles people are hyped for to shill their subpar services.

The argument could then be made "But Epic is just trying to set themselves up as a legitimate AAA publisher like those guys (Activision and EA)"...to which I'd respond "We don't need any more of those, and could in fact could use a lot less".

I hate exclusivity too, but you can't deny it's effective. And hey, at least I don't need a whole new $400+ plastic brick and more space under my TV to deal with this kind of exclusivity, it's just a download and making an account.

And besides - Valve could sorely use some competition in the PC space. Let's face it, Steam is a complete cesspit. If you already know what you want when you go there it's great, but browsing or trying to find new niche products you might enjoy is a total cluster(bomb). It's a morass of asset-flips and shoddy products (with the occasional spicy bit of truly deplorable content like School Shooter) because Valve has nothing resembling quality control save at least preventing actual malware from being on the store front. If it takes a competing storefront like Epic or Origin to make them sit up and stop pretending algorithms can curate everything created by humans, then I'm all for it.

[Man_Over_Game]

Borderlands 3 is like Half-Life 3. I'll believe it exists when I see it, and not a moment before then.

Gearbox has told people to make sure to record PAX with #Borderlands.

Just sayin'. It's happening.

[GloatingSwine]

Gearbox has told people to make sure to record PAX with #Borderlands.

Just sayin'. It's happening.

Yeah, but they also put up teasers with Bulletstorm Guy and Duke Nukem.

So it could well be a card battle MOBA with all their IPs.

[BeerMug Paladin]

Yeah, but they also put up teasers with Bulletstorm Guy and Duke Nukem.

So it could well be a card battle MOBA with all their IPs.

Super Shoot Brothers!

[Anteros]

Gearbox has told people to make sure to record PAX with #Borderlands.

Just sayin'. It's happening.

Either that, or they're announcing a mobile phone game.

[The Glyphstone]

Borderlands Online, a FTP MMO with microtransactions and loot boxes.