|
On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning.
that's really the only thing. I have played it on xbox and the ui is quite good there (feels like a normal ui for console). Regarding aiming, I don't find it hard on console, but I would aim a lot better with a mouse
|
On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning.
Ok well I guess it might be a difficult one to explain if you haven't played fps for a long time as there hasn't really been many fps games designed for the PC in a long time..
For me its a combination of the following:
large 'iron sights'
larger cross section on bullets
greater and more sporadic recoil
'weightier' guns
there are other things which are less about the guns and things I associate with console fps:
sprinting mechanics (where you cant fire, your go into a sort of weird run mode)
larger character models
slower movement speed
The best example is if you go and play a game of CS:GO right now you'll find the guns to feel light and responsive, you click at a location and bullets go there, there is recoil but its controllable and its designed to stop spray and pray.
'Console' fps for me would not work this way with a mouse and keyboard, I don't feel that same responsiveness. As I've played these types of games on consoles more than I have PC to me I associate that 'feel' to a console controller.
I guess that's what it boils down to, association, I associate the characteristics I listed with a controller, and so if I experience them with a mouse and keyboard it feels wrong to me, it doesn't feel responsive and accurate because its not designed to be pinpoint accurate as this is something not achievable on a controller.
Again I'll reiterate I don't mean this as a criticism. Far from it, console fps is essentially a different genre now when compared to more traditional pc only fps.
I guess the reason I mentioned it is because this is the first console fps I've played on PC, normally I have the two separated but my xbox has been in a box for months now since I moved house and I probably wont use a console till the next gen.
|
Thats because in CS there is no physics, its an old and outdated gametype. I know CS GO just released but its based on a very old shooter style. Crosshairs are big cause thats the art direction and spread because guns like these usually have recoil ^^ Have nothing to do with consoles at all. This is a way better shooter than CS:GO.
|
Borderlands' hit detection is forgiving enough that the increased accuracy gained with a keyboard/mouse over the controller is rendered moot. Doesn't matter if your aim is a bit off, you're still gonna crit. Big bullets or large crit hitbox idk, feels like a lot of shots I make in this game would've been considered misses in other fps's. Having enemies charge towards you in a straight line make things easier.
|
On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning.
The game, like the first, was designed for consoles. The difference is that this one has zillions of optimization and under the hood utility that makes it seem a lot more like a PC game. They did an excellent job on the port.
|
On September 22 2012 08:49 Avean wrote:
Thats because in CS there is no physics, its an old and outdated gametype. I know CS GO just released but its based on a very old shooter style. Crosshairs are big cause thats the art direction and spread because guns like these usually have recoil ^^ Have nothing to do with consoles at all. This is a way better shooter than CS:GO.
You were doing well until the last line =/
I understand all the console "association" going on but I'd never give up my mouse ^^
|
On September 22 2012 08:38 adwodon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning. Ok well I guess it might be a difficult one to explain if you haven't played fps for a long time as there hasn't really been many fps games designed for the PC in a long time.. For me its a combination of the following: large 'iron sights' larger cross section on bullets greater and more sporadic recoil 'weightier' guns there are other things which are less about the guns and things I associate with console fps: sprinting mechanics (where you cant fire, your go into a sort of weird run mode) larger character models slower movement speed The best example is if you go and play a game of CS:GO right now you'll find the guns to feel light and responsive, you click at a location and bullets go there, there is recoil but its controllable and its designed to stop spray and pray. 'Console' fps for me would not work this way with a mouse and keyboard, I don't feel that same responsiveness. As I've played these types of games on consoles more than I have PC to me I associate that 'feel' to a console controller. I guess that's what it boils down to, association, I associate the characteristics I listed with a controller, and so if I experience them with a mouse and keyboard it feels wrong to me, it doesn't feel responsive and accurate because its not designed to be pinpoint accurate as this is something not achievable on a controller. Again I'll reiterate I don't mean this as a criticism. Far from it, console fps is essentially a different genre now when compared to more traditional pc only fps. I guess the reason I mentioned it is because this is the first console fps I've played on PC, normally I have the two separated but my xbox has been in a box for months now since I moved house and I probably wont use a console till the next gen.
well ok, be you seem to be associating anything other than counter strike and quake, and basically every new FPS aspect introduced since 1999 then as consoley, which seems like a pretty narrowminded definition.
large 'iron sights'
larger cross section on bullets
greater and more sporadic recoil
'weightier' guns
Iron sights are obviously a more recent FPS feature, but it has nothing inherently to do with consoles, its just a game design choice to either emphasize realism, or add depth to the gameplay by giving players a choice between mobility and accuracy while discouraging run and gun gameplay. In fact, for all intents and purposes CS basically does have ironsights, with the movement based accuracy penalties. The fact that you dont see your gun come up into the frame when you pause to let off a burst doesn't change the fact that you are performing the exact same from a gameplay perspective. Iron sights were introduced on PC games anyway and didn't become standard on consoles for quite a while (Halo says hello).
Larger hitboxes are definitely used a lot on consoles (although aim assist is used more now), but to call it a console feature is still ridiculous, its simply a game decision to speed up aiming and gameplay. The idol of PC shooter skill supremacy, Quake, uses giant fat cylinders as its hitboxes, far far far more generous than this game (try and shoot between someones legs in quake vs BL2), but you certainly wouldn't call it a console game.
Im not even sure why you would characterize large recoil as a console feature, as consoles typically severely tone it down due to the fact that you cannot control recoil with a controller like you can with a mouse. The poster children of recoil are PC games like DOD, which would never work on a controller as you would spend most of the game looking at the sky. Big name console games like COD have significantly less recoil and more accurate rifles than CS, despite the similar damage systems, because its hard enough to aim already. Large recoil is also completely necessary on some guns in BL2 to serve as an important stat that differentiates the random loot you find, if all guns were nice and accurate it would remove a whole aspect of the game and choice by the player to value that stat, as well as valuing skills that improve accuracy.
I'd say that the majority of guns even in BL2 are more accurate than you think compared to CS guns just because of the design decision to jerk your actual crosshairs more around during recoil, as opposed to letting them stay still and just jerking the bullet trajectories. The latter obviously makes the weapon feel much lighter and more accurate despite that fact that your bullets may be decorating a 90 degree arc randomly.
|
On September 22 2012 08:38 adwodon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning. Ok well I guess it might be a difficult one to explain if you haven't played fps for a long time as there hasn't really been many fps games designed for the PC in a long time.. For me its a combination of the following: large 'iron sights' larger cross section on bullets greater and more sporadic recoil 'weightier' guns there are other things which are less about the guns and things I associate with console fps: sprinting mechanics (where you cant fire, your go into a sort of weird run mode) larger character models slower movement speed The best example is if you go and play a game of CS:GO right now you'll find the guns to feel light and responsive, you click at a location and bullets go there, there is recoil but its controllable and its designed to stop spray and pray. 'Console' fps for me would not work this way with a mouse and keyboard, I don't feel that same responsiveness. As I've played these types of games on consoles more than I have PC to me I associate that 'feel' to a console controller. I guess that's what it boils down to, association, I associate the characteristics I listed with a controller, and so if I experience them with a mouse and keyboard it feels wrong to me, it doesn't feel responsive and accurate because its not designed to be pinpoint accurate as this is something not achievable on a controller. Again I'll reiterate I don't mean this as a criticism. Far from it, console fps is essentially a different genre now when compared to more traditional pc only fps. I guess the reason I mentioned it is because this is the first console fps I've played on PC, normally I have the two separated but my xbox has been in a box for months now since I moved house and I probably wont use a console till the next gen.
The only two of those that actually feel like console features to me are the iron sights(personally don't like them, prefer having crosshairs, even if it's like fear 1 where you have aiming raised gun mode but crosshairs stay) and the sprinting mechanics(though technically even half-life had sprinting). The crosshairs and recoil spreads are a product of there being an accuracy stat(similar to first deus ex having variable spreading crosshairs and accuracy) and the weightyness of the guns is just a design choice that varies from game to game regardless of platform. The regular movement speed is at least on the faster end of a lot of other console shooters(cod just feels so sluggish to me) though not as fast as many really old-school pc fps games(such as ut or quake), but not many games have gone that fast in the past decade. Not entirely sure what you mean by larger character models though(large guns maybe?), but at least there is a scalable hud. They really did a much better job of having pc optimizing options than the first one did.
|
I've always felt Borderlands was for the PC. Kinda weird reading that its primarily a console game.
|
You can usually tell what platform a game was designed for by how well it responds to the Mouse. Mouse controls give you instantaneous aiming and extremely fast view movement, so if it feels like motion doesn't match the Mouse, or if game mechanics are not designed around extremely fast and precise control, then it's basically a console game.
|
On September 22 2012 13:24 WolfintheSheep wrote:
You can usually tell what platform a game was designed for by how well it responds to the Mouse. Mouse controls give you instantaneous aiming and extremely fast view movement, so if it feels like motion doesn't match the Mouse, or if game mechanics are not designed around extremely fast and precise control, then it's basically a console game.
That's only happens with extremely poor ports though. Borderlands 1 responded perfectly fine to a mouse, but it had no real options for pc users and used gamespy for matchmaking, Gearbox even had to make that "claptrap's love letter to pc gamers" thing apologizing for the lack of attention they gave to the pc, but mouse control was never an issue. Mechanics not designed around fast and precise aim control also doesn't necessarily mean it's a console game either(though if they are based on precise controls, than it usually is a pc game, it just doesn't go both ways). Having an accuracy stat interferes a bit with fast and precise control, but deus ex 1 did that fine and that was most certainly designed as a pc shooter.
|
Borderlands' gunplay is fine. If you're going to define every shooter since CS as a dumb console-port, then sure, it's a dumb console-port... but that's not the standard definition.
By most people's metrics, it plays very smoothly and responsively. It has mechanics which make it easier, like large bullet cross sections and optional auto-aim (which defaults to off), but those things are just as easily chalked up to its status as an accessible casual co-op game rather than a competitive shooter. They don't count against it at all in the space it's trying to occupy.
The only thing that feels clunky and ported in borderlands is the menu system, which really is pretty poor for m+kb. In particular, the fact that you can't even abandon the mouse and navigate using wasd is doubly frustrating. Arrows+enter are much too far away and make either option a chore.
|
Just popping by to say I love this game, so much shit makes me very very happy in it, endless amazing quotes from the likes of Marcus and other random people you meet along the way.
I think tiny tina is my favourite video game character in a long time
|
On September 22 2012 12:31 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 08:38 adwodon wrote:On September 22 2012 07:56 sob3k wrote:
For people who are saying the game was clearly designed for consoles...can you give some examples?
Obviously the menu UI is totally console and is quite clunky on PC, but the actual gameplay feels absolutely fine.
Game is really fantastic IMO, having a lot of fun, the world is really stunning. Ok well I guess it might be a difficult one to explain if you haven't played fps for a long time as there hasn't really been many fps games designed for the PC in a long time.. For me its a combination of the following: large 'iron sights' larger cross section on bullets greater and more sporadic recoil 'weightier' guns there are other things which are less about the guns and things I associate with console fps: sprinting mechanics (where you cant fire, your go into a sort of weird run mode) larger character models slower movement speed The best example is if you go and play a game of CS:GO right now you'll find the guns to feel light and responsive, you click at a location and bullets go there, there is recoil but its controllable and its designed to stop spray and pray. 'Console' fps for me would not work this way with a mouse and keyboard, I don't feel that same responsiveness. As I've played these types of games on consoles more than I have PC to me I associate that 'feel' to a console controller. I guess that's what it boils down to, association, I associate the characteristics I listed with a controller, and so if I experience them with a mouse and keyboard it feels wrong to me, it doesn't feel responsive and accurate because its not designed to be pinpoint accurate as this is something not achievable on a controller. Again I'll reiterate I don't mean this as a criticism. Far from it, console fps is essentially a different genre now when compared to more traditional pc only fps. I guess the reason I mentioned it is because this is the first console fps I've played on PC, normally I have the two separated but my xbox has been in a box for months now since I moved house and I probably wont use a console till the next gen. The only two of those that actually feel like console features to me are the iron sights(personally don't like them, prefer having crosshairs, even if it's like fear 1 where you have aiming raised gun mode but crosshairs stay) and the sprinting mechanics(though technically even half-life had sprinting). The crosshairs and recoil spreads are a product of there being an accuracy stat(similar to first deus ex having variable spreading crosshairs and accuracy) and the weightyness of the guns is just a design choice that varies from game to game regardless of platform. The regular movement speed is at least on the faster end of a lot of other console shooters(cod just feels so sluggish to me) though not as fast as many really old-school pc fps games(such as ut or quake), but not many games have gone that fast in the past decade. Not entirely sure what you mean by larger character models though(large guns maybe?), but at least there is a scalable hud. They really did a much better job of having pc optimizing options than the first one did.
Day of Defeat had both sprinting and iron sights. And this is back in 2000 (may have been other games before that that had them too, that is just the first that pops into my mind).
Anyway, first playthrough done. Really enjoyed it. Great voice acting, great gameplay, really fun. The final boss was absurdly difficult for me (I died a LOT), though I may not have had adequate gear/level.
Spoilering video of me doing it. There were a number of times where I died in 1 hit.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Anyone else get massive, and i mean down to like 5 fucking frames when you shoot the head off of a goliath and all the blood comes out? I pull 60+fps constantly until this happens. And it happens every single time. I5 oc'd to 4.4 and dual 6850's in CF. I just don't understand why the blood would lag the my computer so horribly.
|
Does anyone here know how explosive damage is factored into weapon damage? Like this shotgun with explosive damage:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KNZvR.png)
is it doing 48x16 regular damage and then a hidden amount of bonus explosive damage added onto that? Or is the explosive already factored into the 48x16?
|
I dont think its in the 48x16, cause explosice dmg does deal different amount of dmg to different enemies I think it is added on later BUT I have no evidence to support my theory, jsut felt like it when i had a similar shotgun. Thats a sick gun for lvl9 btw 
|
No, unless they changed it from BL and, contrary to their philosophy of making gun stats clearer, made elemental mods interact 'weirdly' with the base damage of a gun the 48x16 is just the spread of that shotgun regardless of the presence of an elemental effect. I've not seen anything to indicate what the elemental damage types do yet in specific numbers. From eyeballing it I'd say lightning seems around the same as BL (was 1.5) but corrosion and fire have both been made even more potent against their intended target type (were 1.2 and 1.3 iirc)...whatever that might bode for changes to explosive.
The short direct answer is yes, there is a hidden bonus, numbers have simply not been deduced/mined yet. Coincidentally I have a pair of shotguns I was comparing earlier and the one with 69?x11 with explosive was hitting harder than a 72?x13 at short range with all pellets connecting.
I hate that they tried to make the stats clearer yet left things like that unexplained. Not as bad as the lack of scope quality or any indication of a weapon's stability other than to say if it has certain part mods that modify it though.
Infernal-dream, are you running physix? BL2, physix and AMD cards do not get along at all right now and it makes for stutters during numerous animations/combat explosive event type things, it needs to be disabled (set to 0 in the ini, the in game options menu's "high" and "low" represent 2 and 1 respectively).
|
I found a sweet jacobs sniper I've been using all yesterday, found at lvl 9 (I think).
Can we all stop arguing over console ports and whether PC is the master race and just enjoy the game? Its great on both!
How about this:
Post a screenshot of your best gun?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qFtFl.png)
Edit: Not burst fire either like some of the high fire rate snipers :D
|
@TSBspartacus, there's a nifty inspect option when checking your gun. Looks a bit more flattering that an in-action screenshot, I think. :D
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XX4j8.jpg)
Guess this is my best gun so far (level 14 Siren with the WItch class mod, so corrosive hits even harder :D)
Loving the game so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
