If we could have a nice conversation like adults, that would be nice.

Fox2232:

You do cut cancer off, not dress it nicely and feed. Really, you can check Steam reviews of those games if you want to see how atmosphere changes over time. You can display graph of positive/negative and pick them by month to see what was plaguing given game.

Like I said, I just don't buy it. I've had far bigger issues in other games, many of which I've played far less, and optimizing for AMD hardware does nothing for Nvidia owners (which those previous games were geared towards). I'm not sure how much you've played the games, but they are not those games that I would classify as unplayable. I think it's far more likely that Randy or some other higher-up no longer favors Nvidia and/or wants to court AMD users.

vbetts:

If we could have a nice conversation like adults, that would be nice.

Fair point. As I was typing my previous post, it came off more tongue-in-cheek in my head. Reading back now, I can see how my tone was more aggressive than intended.

Fox2232:

If that's all you got and have to ask, there is really no point in explaining. But imagine I slap you on face in middle of otherwise pleasant conversation. Where does that conversation go from there?

My apologies if I was rude. Let me take another shot at this: Borderlands 2 has had a great reputation on PC for many years. Pre-Sequel wasn't as well received by many, but from a technical perspective it ran just as good. Both games have hundreds of hours of content available, and a review ratio most developers would kill for. There's no shortage of people who've had hundreds of hours of fun with these games. I personally get tired of seeing people pull a bunch of drama from the internet into product discussions - especially when the product being discussed hasn't even released yet. Whatever legal/moral business is going on with Randy Pitchford has nothing to do with the quality of Borderlands 3. He didn't make the game, the team at Gearbox did. Whether it's good or bad is independent of Randy's drama. Same thing with the EGS stuff. Gearbox is probably trying to maximize profits off this game because Battleborn seems to have been a dud, and they need to fund the studio for a few years so they can take a shot at a new IP. They've probably been looking for hand outs from every "partner" they could talk to. From my perspective, this is a good thing because the extra money they get from AMD, Xbox, Epic Games or Mountain Dew is just money to keep the people on that team employed. My point is: It's okay to not like Randy Pitchford based on the information that's been in the news. It's also okay to not like Epic Games. But there's no reason to bash Borderlands 3 because of those two things. It's frustrating when people can't entertain a nuanced opinion.

Borderlands 2 reputation took a dive with the booty DLC, as it destroyed framerates.

Astyanax:

Borderlands 2 reputation took a dive with the booty DLC, as it destroyed framerates.

I've got well over a 1000 hours in the game and there are no problems with that section for me or my buddies i used to play with. Games performance issues is stemmed from being poorly threaded; the draw distance set to very high drops FPS by 50% compared to medium.

Agent-A01:

I've got well over a 1000 hours in the game and there are no problems with that section for me or my buddies i used to play with. Games performance issues is stemmed from being poorly threaded; the draw distance set to very high drops FPS by 50% compared to medium.

Captain scarletts booty introduced the particle physx fps hit to the engine.

D3M1G0D:

Like I said, I just don't buy it. I've had far bigger issues in other games, many of which I've played far less, and optimizing for AMD hardware does nothing for Nvidia owners (which those previous games were geared towards). I'm not sure how much you've played the games, but they are not those games that I would classify as unplayable. I think it's far more likely that Randy or some other higher-up no longer favors Nvidia and/or wants to court AMD users.

AMD's toolkit surely does not make game libraries messy as with integration of nVidia's toolkit. It will look better for both sides and play well too.

rm082e:

My apologies if I was rude. Let me take another shot at this: Borderlands 2 has had a great reputation on PC for many years. Pre-Sequel wasn't as well received by many, but from a technical perspective it ran just as good. Both games have hundreds of hours of content available, and a review ratio most developers would kill for. There's no shortage of people who've had hundreds of hours of fun with these games. I personally get tired of seeing people pull a bunch of drama from the internet into product discussions - especially when the product being discussed hasn't even released yet. Whatever legal/moral business is going on with Randy Pitchford has nothing to do with the quality of Borderlands 3. He didn't make the game, the team at Gearbox did. Whether it's good or bad is independent of Randy's drama. Same thing with the EGS stuff. Gearbox is probably trying to maximize profits off this game because Battleborn seems to have been a dud, and they need to fund the studio for a few years so they can take a shot at a new IP. They've probably been looking for hand outs from every "partner" they could talk to. From my perspective, this is a good thing because the extra money they get from AMD, Xbox, Epic Games or Mountain Dew is just money to keep the people on that team employed. My point is: It's okay to not like Randy Pitchford based on the information that's been in the news. It's also okay to not like Epic Games. But there's no reason to bash Borderlands 3 because of those two things. It's frustrating when people can't entertain a nuanced opinion.

No, you was not rude and did not deliver imaginary slap. It was an hint on how players feel after they get slap from developer. Or two. Or half dozen. That drama is boosted by Randy's behavior and other things in 2019. And maybe bad leadership will not affect quality of BL3, but sales will be affected. I do not really feel like supporting things I do not like. And while I may like product, I may not like producer or those who receive money from my purchase. (Similar to nVidia, they make good GPUs but I really do not like Huang.) Battleborn failed because they failed it with bad monetization and saying that there are not going to be balance changes or new heroes outside of paid DLCs. No class based (asymmetric) competitive multiplayer game can live without balance changes and new characters given over time. Because that what shifts meta, and enables new strategies, and balances unforeseen hero combination "exploits". (And entire community of such games knows that.) When they went partially F2P I hopped in to be disappointed by lack of players and some single-player to multi-player story mode weirdness. Did not feel like something worth paying 30 Euros for. (Which they want even today for likely dead game.) Honestly they should pull all assets to new engine, give free copy (all heroes) to those who paid for Battleborn before. Do some tuning of things people did not like and re-release with more sensible monetization and proper support. But if community feels like producer does not listen... PR is always bad problem. Most of the times it is better to have no PR than such that alienates groups of people while pleasing others.