I forgot that they were making this. I just checked the trailer, and it surprisingly doesn't look terrible. As far as video game adaptations go these days, this actually seems pretty true to the source material.
I imagine it'll be one of those movies that's terrible for general audiences, but will probably be well-received among its niche. As a huge fan of the first two Borderlands games, it looks solid and I actually want to watch this.
As far as video game adaptations go these days, this actually seems pretty true to the source material.
Uh… What? Look at the casting- Roland should be a straight-man (in comedy terms) but they’ve cast Kevin Hart to tell his typically unfunny cracks. And while I love Kate Blanchett she is not a good fit to play Lilith
Yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about some of the casting as I'm kinda tired of seeing Kevin Hart and Jack Black in everything lately (I'm surprised I didn't see The Rock in the trailer somewhere, to be honest), but the overall feel of the trailer seems to match the energy that the games had. I'm not saying it's 1:1 accurate by any means, but the trailer definitely manages to feel like Borderlands. I imagine the writers for the movie didn't want anybody from the main group to feel like a "downer" character, so Roland's probably being reworked a bit.
I'm okay with it so far, at least. It's generally pretty hard to make the "strong, quiet type" very interesting, especially for a movie format where you have limited screen time that has to be shared among a lot of characters. You can make that sort of character interesting, like in No Country For Old Men, but you have to dedicate a lot of time to it, and that's not easily done with a story that has so many characters with their own stories to tell.
I dunno, I'm just remaining optimistic. I want to like this movie.
It’s the classic thing that happens to all these movies and TV shows that are written by people who purposely avoid the source material and brag about “we didn’t play the game or read the books” like that somehow is going to make the content better?
Offhand I can only think of one movie (and sequels) where “didn’t read the book” made the movie significantly better: The Bourne Identity. Those books really were awful!
Not only that, they probably would have been better off not using the original 4 playable characters since every game comes with a new set. Just make sure the side characters are done well and you keep the same feel as the games and it should have been an easy win
I resolved to stop paying full price for anything Pitchford and his touch based on a number of factors. I did buy the latest BL game when it was on a big sale and thoroughly hated the main story and various plotholes (seemingly from cuts made by the company/directors rather than the writers). I bought Tiny Tina (again, on sale for over half off) and it was a game with all kinds of bugs that just never got fixed -- it's the first game I didn't immediately roll a new character to replay after beating it. At this point, I'm not sure I would buy anything else they put out.
I really wanted to like Wonderlands, but the intended demographic is apparently younger than me. The drop from M to T seems to have cut the writing down to kindergarten level.
Presequel is great, wonderlands is not. Tiny Tina’s dlc in 2 was absolutely perfect and MAYBE should’ve gotten a sequel dlc in 3, but there was never enough content for a stand alone title. Certainly not at a full game price point. I always look back to farcry 3 for the proper way to handle a stand alone dlc installment. Blood dragon was always a smaller spinoff and it worked well in that regards.
I don’t think Wonderlands had much replay value. Plus the DLCs were garbage, speed run dungeons and new items in the loot pool, no new story. I lost faith in gearbox after that.
I highly, highly recommend playing BL1 and BL2. They're fantastic games, and wonderfully written. Not all of the humor has aged really well (nothing offensive, just mostly very 2010's-specific humor), but the gameplay still holds up today, IMO. The DLCs for BL2 are particularly good, and among some of the best DLCs I've seen for any game.
Agreed! The quality and quantity of the content in that DLC are enough to qualify for a standalone game. Not to mention all the wild new mechanics that the DLC introduces, and work seamlessly with the rest of the game. TTAODK was probably the best piece of content Gearbox will ever produce.
Big random factor in the loot so you can go long stretches without any interesting upgrades if you’re unlucky.
There’s a lot of time wasting - go here, now go back there, now go to this place
Leveling is weird and is a big factor in damage. If you’re too low level you can’t do anything except die. If you’re too high level you can’t lose. Sometimes you do too many side quests or not enough
The games typically start slow. You go a long while before you unlock your cool powers, or even the ability to equip four guns.
The writing is meh except for Handsome Jack. He’s a great villain.
There was a mega bundle of all the games before 3 for like $5. Look for that kind of sale.
Play BL2. I didn’t really bother with 1. BL2 is such a great game, probably sunk more hours into it over the years than any other. Lots of replayability with different characters, TVHM and UVHM, DLCs etc.
Has there been any word on a Linux port? Since it's in Love2D I saw people were able to unofficially inject it into the native runtime, so it would be great to have that made official.
it turns out the PS VR2’s Sense Controllers are very flakey when it comes to Bluetooth connectivity. Even though I have the required Bluetooth adapter built into my PC, constant connection losses meant that I couldn’t even make it past the headset’s initial setup process on PC.
Bluetooth has always been a bad experience for me. The connection will always randomly drop. Sometimes I’ll hold the two connected devices right next to each other or lay one on top of the other and the connection will still drop.
Any device that requires bluetooth is an immediate nope for me and life has been easier since.
Why don’t we have anything better? I’d even accept WiFi (802.11) connections over bluetooth. Sure, they aren’t as energy efficient (right?), but at least they are stable.
TLDR; the reviewer is upset because the PSVR2-PC adapter doesn’t come with a Display Port cable, and his Bluetooth adapter is not compatible. So he can’t review the unit on time until he receive both items. 🤷
And that’s perfectly valid…if Sony is selling something to make their device work on pc, include the things to make it work or don’t claim it’ll make it work without needing a bunch of other crap.
The average person won’t do prior digging to find out how the company is lying to them, they just trust…sadly.
At the same time, unfortunately it is pretty standard among electronics in general. Photography, synthesizers, music equipment in general, PC parts… When you buy a pc case, you expect the bare minimum to include screws, but they don’t always include things like SATA cables.
However for VR, a simple adapter should definitely be included. I just can see why it wasn’t given the history of electronics.
It’s been known since before launch that it wouldn’t come with a display port cable. Not sure about the Bluetooth thing. I couldn’t say for sure, but I Imagine it probably says something in the item description and on the box itself.
I had to drop everything and move halfway across the country on somewhat short notice (long story) and could only take what fit in my car. One of those things was my random cables/adapters box and it came in handy almost immediately. No one will ever convince me to throw that shit away.
I’m a Mac guy so I’m a bit out of touch with the state of PCs. I know PCs usually are a few years behind technology wise, but I’m kind of surprised they still don’t have bluetooth as standard. The technology is decades old.
That usually depends on if the PC has an inbuilt Wi-Fi chip. The Bluetooth controller is usually coupled in the same chip. So PCs that lack Wi-Fi usually doesn’t have Bluetooth.
I know PCs usually are a few years behind technology wise.
I am an IT technician, and it takes a lot of confidence and ignorance to be this wrong.
I’m kind of surprised they still don’t have bluetooth as standard.
This explains so much about your earlier statement, you seem to think that there is a a standard PC, there isn’t.
There are hundreds of manufacturers making PCs and PC parts.
I have never seen a laptop in decades that lack Bluetooth, however there are still desktop motherboards you can buy without wifi or bluetooth, but this is not my reason for making this post…
I am pissed because I don’t get why you wouldn’t just put the required Bluetooth into the PSVR2 PC adapter unit.
I would argue that buying a $10-20 usb Bluetooth adapter is much preferred to giving my info and data and privacy away to Meta. Not to mention the other things you can use it for.
Personally I’m really glad Sony went with Bluetooth over some sort of proprietary tech.
eurogamer.net
Najnowsze