- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
“It was a clear case of a cult game failing to find a broader audience.”
The non-gamers assumed it was about the game. The gamers knew it wasn’t about the game. It failed to find any audience. And a decade too late.
What a BS excuse. That’s like saying the Dragon Ball movie did bad because it’s a cult show that failed to find a broader audience.
He says, implying all Borderlands fans watched or even wanted this movie in the first place.
I’ll never understand the ego that is required to take a beloved ip and go: never read it never played it, don’t wanna know anything about it, here is what I think it should be. Even if it’s good somehow, it’s not what anyone wanted.
Counterpoint: Castlevania. IIRC Warren Ellis says he deliberately avoided playing the games, and only read the plot in broad strokes. Turns out you can do that and people will still love your show if it’s just plain good. The look is right, the vibe is right, and they picked the perfect writer for complex villains amid freaky demon shit.
Borderlands flopped because it was a shite product. Popularity-based casting, miserable lazy writing, hilariously bad cinematography and editing. A soulless cash grab from beginning to end. It should’ve been a Mad Max knockoff where every new sci-fi gun makes men in the audience do grabbyhands. Instead it’s nonstop schlock for the sake of schlock.
Mr. Krabs leans into the mic, unprompted, “money!”
Exact same problem that the Halo show had - they wrote it for the broad audience and hired a bunch of people who didn’t care at all about the source material, and then they casted it for who they thought would be popular. Which of course alienated the core fans and lost the broad audience.
Instead of catering to the devote fans and who then would encourage the broader audience to go see it with them. Look at Fallout. You can make a good show that the fans will enjoy, who will get others to watch too.
I never gave the Fallout games a fair shake until after watching the series. Played 4 and powered through the slow start that had turned me off of it before and ended up really enjoying the game.
So yeah, I guess you could say I’m something of a statistic myself.
Ohh. You are going to love New Vegas. 4 is only like the fifth-best Fallout game.
A buddy who loves the whole franchise said he thought 3 and New Vegas were the best but the graphics were pretty dated. Now that I’ve actually got enough of a taste of the lore I’ll go back and try those
If you do, I can’t reccomend the Viva New Vegas modpack enough. It’s a wonderful “vanilla-plus” pack that keeps the feeling of the base game while fixing bugs, improving the balance and leveling curve, reintroducing appropriate cut content, and giving it all a consistently good new coat of paint. And it’s not crash prone, which even the base game has trouble with at times.
I can’t help myself from tinkering further, but it’s the best baseline setup I’ve found since the game released over a decade ago.
There are also sister packs done by the same team for 3, and Tale of Two Wastelands (another mod that puts 3 into New Vegas’s slightly improved engine, which a lot of people prefer to playing 3 on it’s own). I haven’t used them myself, but they look to be up to the same gold standard.
Oh, yeah, better graphics absolutely do not make a better game. They’re in the “nice to have” category. Some of the best games I’ve played had the worst graphics.
That said, there must be all kinds of HD texture packs on nexusmods or Steam Workshop or whatever.
By this, they mean “We made a bad movie, and for some strange reason people didn’t want to see it. We’re confused.”
