I don't understand the appeal of Destiny 2

Sassafrass

This is a placeholder
Legacy
Apr 6, 2020
51,250
1
3
Country
United Kingdom
Lufia Erim said:
It's fun.Remember fun? Before the escapist became a hate filled cercle jerk? Not every game is for everyone. Get over it.
No, every game is shit now. It has been set in stone. Your favourite waifu game? Shit. Sorry.

OT: I enjoyed my time with it, although I did drop off when it became a major grindfest and my co-op running buddy decided to drop out as he put around 200 hours into it in a month and a half. Still, if I can get 50/60 hours of playtime out of something, I consider it at least decent.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,487
5,566
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Phoenixmgs said:
CoCage said:
The fact that one of the unholy trinity published the games and go out of the way to screw people over is not helping.
It was actually Bungie themselves responsible for most of the Destiny shit, not Activision.
True, but let's be honest here, if they wouldn't have done it; Activision would have made the same decisions. In other words: same difference,
 

pure.Wasted

New member
Oct 12, 2011
281
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
pure.Wasted said:
Destiny 2 otoh feels like one step up from an indie roguelike that was made on a shoestring budget. "Of course there's only two environments, that's because it was made for $50!" The fuck is Destiny's excuse? Nathan Fillion and Lance Reddick asked for too much money?
Watch the video just above this to see why Destiny 2 has minimal content. Not only was Destiny 2 actually rebooted mid-development, Bungie's tech is also garbage taking literally 8 hours to simply load a map to edit it.
Good video, thanks for linking.

I just checked Metacritic. ME:A, another game that had a lot of behind-the-scenes complications and didn't succeed at everything it tried to do, has a score of 71 for PS4. OK, sure, let's say that's fair. So Destiny's gotta be like a 40 right? 85, ************. 85. What in the shit. I mean I know gaming journalism isn't worth the paper it's not printed on, but fuck me, in what universe is that remotely reflective of what these games actually attempt and/or accomplish? And before anyone says "but Destiny 2 has really good shooting," the gameplay of ME:A was actually UNIVERSALLY PRAISED. It was like the one part of the game that EVERYONE thought was a huge improvement for the franchise. I'm gonna stop thinking about this because it's destroying my brain.
 

Mcgeezaks

The biggest boss
May 25, 2020
864
0
0
Sweden
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
pure.Wasted said:
Phoenixmgs said:
pure.Wasted said:
Destiny 2 otoh feels like one step up from an indie roguelike that was made on a shoestring budget. "Of course there's only two environments, that's because it was made for $50!" The fuck is Destiny's excuse? Nathan Fillion and Lance Reddick asked for too much money?
Watch the video just above this to see why Destiny 2 has minimal content. Not only was Destiny 2 actually rebooted mid-development, Bungie's tech is also garbage taking literally 8 hours to simply load a map to edit it.
Good video, thanks for linking.

I just checked Metacritic. ME:A, another game that had a lot of behind-the-scenes complications and didn't succeed at everything it tried to do, has a score of 71 for PS4. OK, sure, let's say that's fair. So Destiny's gotta be like a 40 right? 85, ************. 85. What in the shit. I mean I know gaming journalism isn't worth the paper it's not printed on, but fuck me, in what universe is that remotely reflective of what these games actually attempt and/or accomplish? And before anyone says "but Destiny 2 has really good shooting," the gameplay of ME:A was actually UNIVERSALLY PRAISED. It was like the one part of the game that EVERYONE thought was a huge improvement for the franchise. I'm gonna stop thinking about this because it's destroying my brain.
MEA had lots of bugs, really poor animations (Especially facial animations), laughable face models etc and that's just the technical mess side of the game.

I have 67 hours in Andromeda but I'm having trouble coming up with anything it did better than Destiny 2.
 

pure.Wasted

New member
Oct 12, 2011
281
0
0
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
Phoenixmgs said:
So you need to buy DLC to actually make the game good?

The reason Bungie didn't learn anything from Destiny 1 is because their tech is literally garbage and they can't make content in a timely matter at all so they have to put bullshit microtransactions into the game while cutting content from the main game to make it DLC to actually meet their contractual obligations. Bungie were the ones that went to Activision to add microtransactions, not the other way around.
Not at all, the game was still good when it came out, nothing spectacular or anything but the shooting, the looting, and the raiding was/is still a lot of fun. But it did also leave more to be desired, what I was saying is that Forsaken fixed a lot of the problems that the game had when it launched which is both really great and really annoying at the same time because they did the exact same thing with Destiny 1, so it shouldn't even have happened in the first place.

hanselthecaretaker said:
What?s odd is I personally think the same for Halo. I?ve played 1 and 2?s campaign, 3 online, and parts of Reach. I haven?t played any Destiny but would hope it?d be more interesting. It should have had a chance to be that way due to its setting, mechanics and loot system but I?m not a big fan of online shooters or online games in general.

I often think the only reason Halo was so popular in the first place was because it was the only decent Xbox launch title and Microsoft hyped the shit out of it. Then console shooters kinda took off from there, even though still to this day I?d rather play Goldeneye and Turok 2 with the funky N64 controllers. I guess I?m a bit weird.
Halo was a gaming phenomenon, it was a lot more than just a ''decent xbox launch title'' that was hyped, no company can create that amount of hype for just a decent game. I was hoping for Destiny to be like a new Halo with MMO elements, which is probably why I was so incredibly disappointed with it in the end.
I just have a tough time believing it was because it was that good of a game vs simply having the right ingredients to be mega popular; kinda like how CoD has been since taking the console shooter crown. Neither of these IPs ever did anything exceptionally well technically or artistically when it comes to visuals or gameplay. There were brighter than average spots like enemy AI in Halo or a high image quality:performance ratio in CoD, but in general the main constant for either was simply having ?fun? multiplayer modes and a compelling progression system.
 

Mcgeezaks

The biggest boss
May 25, 2020
864
0
0
Sweden
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
hanselthecaretaker said:
I just have a tough time believing it was because it was that good of a game vs simply having the right ingredients to be mega popular; kinda like how CoD has been since taking the console shooter crown. Neither of these IPs ever did anything exceptionally well technically or artistically when it comes to visuals or gameplay. There were brighter than average spots like enemy AI in Halo or a high image quality:performance ratio in CoD, but in general the main constant for either was simply having ?fun? multiplayer modes and a compelling progression system.
The right ingredients were (For Bungies Halo games) a compelling story and good storytelling, great graphics for the time, great gameplay, amazing OST, iconic characters, great multiplayer etc

A game series simply can't get that huge just because it has fun multiplayer modes and a progression system, what are the ''right ingredients'' that made the series huge in your opinion?
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
CoCage said:
Phoenixmgs said:
CoCage said:
The fact that one of the unholy trinity published the games and go out of the way to screw people over is not helping.
It was actually Bungie themselves responsible for most of the Destiny shit, not Activision.
True, but let's be honest here, if they wouldn't have done it; Activision would have made the same decisions. In other words: same difference,
Regardless if Activision had demanded microtransactions and cutting content for revenue reasons instead of Bungie, it is still Bungie's technical incompetence that caused it all.

pure.Wasted said:
Good video, thanks for linking.

I just checked Metacritic. ME:A, another game that had a lot of behind-the-scenes complications and didn't succeed at everything it tried to do, has a score of 71 for PS4. OK, sure, let's say that's fair. So Destiny's gotta be like a 40 right? 85, ************. 85. What in the shit. I mean I know gaming journalism isn't worth the paper it's not printed on, but fuck me, in what universe is that remotely reflective of what these games actually attempt and/or accomplish? And before anyone says "but Destiny 2 has really good shooting," the gameplay of ME:A was actually UNIVERSALLY PRAISED. It was like the one part of the game that EVERYONE thought was a huge improvement for the franchise. I'm gonna stop thinking about this because it's destroying my brain.
You don't have to tell me about game reviews, they are just advertisements. The chances of anything in any medium being being rated so consistently high across ~100 different people to reach an 80 average score is pretty rare. The fact that most games are rated 80+ is a joke. With regards to Destiny 2's higher score over the 1st game is probably the story/campaign was probably better and that's really all they play. For how bad reviewers are already, they are at least 10 times worse with regards to multiplayer/service type games. Whether it's Destiny 2 or Overwatch or Battlefield 5, they are not going to play the game for the length it takes to actually understand stuff like balance issues or the drop rates of loot. If it was good for 10 hours or so, then 8/10 even when the game is specifically designed for long-term play and not just a weekend.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
I have 67 hours in Andromeda but I'm having trouble coming up with anything it did better than Destiny 2.
I haven't played Andromeda but if it plays like past ME games like I'm pretty sure it does, then it definitely does powers in a better way than Destiny; more of them and you can use them far more often. Destiny is far too much of a straight shooter than it should be.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,487
5,566
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Phoenixmgs said:
CoCage said:
Phoenixmgs said:
CoCage said:
The fact that one of the unholy trinity published the games and go out of the way to screw people over is not helping.
It was actually Bungie themselves responsible for most of the Destiny shit, not Activision.
True, but let's be honest here, if they wouldn't have done it; Activision would have made the same decisions. In other words: same difference,
Regardless if Activision had demanded microtransactions and cutting content for revenue reasons instead of Bungie, it is still Bungie's technical incompetence that caused it all.

Activision did nothing to stop it, so they're just as responsible.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
I think a lot of people here are comparing Destiny 2 to the wrong games. For all intents and purposes it is a first person action RPG that's always online. Its closest analogies are not WoW or single player shooters, but Borderlands and hack'n'slash RPGs like Diablo.

What Destiny 2 does it does really well. Whether it does enough to keep a player hooked for the long game is another matter.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
8,411
16
23
Gethsemani said:
I think a lot of people here are comparing Destiny 2 to the wrong games. For all intents and purposes it is a first person action RPG that's always online. Its closest analogies are not WoW or single player shooters, but Borderlands and hack'n'slash RPGs like Diablo.

What Destiny 2 does it does really well. Whether it does enough to keep a player hooked for the long game is another matter.
Actually the problem is Destiny doesn't know what the fuck it is, it doesn't know if it wants to be Borderlands or WoW and fails at both, with some Halo, Call of Duty and Mass Effect sprinkled in...poorly.


Plus Destiny's reliance on things that equate to MMO raids also keeps it squarely in the ring against them, again poorly.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
Saelune said:
Gethsemani said:
I think a lot of people here are comparing Destiny 2 to the wrong games. For all intents and purposes it is a first person action RPG that's always online. Its closest analogies are not WoW or single player shooters, but Borderlands and hack'n'slash RPGs like Diablo.

What Destiny 2 does it does really well. Whether it does enough to keep a player hooked for the long game is another matter.
Actually the problem is Destiny doesn't know what the fuck it is, it doesn't know if it wants to be Borderlands or WoW and fails at both, with some Halo, Call of Duty and Mass Effect sprinkled in...poorly.

Plus Destiny's reliance on things that equate to MMO raids also keeps it squarely in the ring against them, again poorly.
Yeah, pretty much. I remember playing the alpha of Destiny 1 and pretty much seeing the game was designed as a standard multiplayer shooter as classes themselves weren't very different and powers basically functioned as killstreaks. Even the skills in the tree were very basic to not upset PvP balance. Then, they just added the looter-shooter and MMO elements (loot system & raids) onto that base to make it a "10-year game". It didn't strive to do much outside of Bungie's comfort zone at all. Stuff like Borderlands, Overwatch, Battleborn, Warframe do way more in giving different playstyles and character build options than Destiny.
 

Elijin

Elite Member
Legacy
May 10, 2020
1,741
540
118
I find it interesting it's always the outsiders or 'played it for an hour or two' that discredit the raids as a negative.

The raids are for the most part, pretty amazing. Certainly havent run into anything similar in the shooter genre. They're obviously endgame, which keeps the 'tried it and it was boring' internet critics from experiencing them, but they were pretty excellent end game.
 
Sep 9, 2007
631
0
0
Elijin said:
I find it interesting it's always the outsiders or 'played it for an hour or two' that discredit the raids as a negative.

The raids are for the most part, pretty amazing. Certainly havent run into anything similar in the shooter genre. They're obviously endgame, which keeps the 'tried it and it was boring' internet critics from experiencing them, but they were pretty excellent end game.
I wouldn't quite go as calling them amazing, but the raids are a good way to spend an afternoon yelling at my clanmates :p. I find it interesting from my clan's perspective at least that we've kinda forgotten about the Eater of Worlds lair. We're currently gearing up for the Forsaken raid, when that drops, but if we're gathering up for a raid, we're either looking to run Leviathan prestige, or guiding people through the Spire of Stars lair. I guess that kinda lines up with Curse of Osiris being kinda meh overall.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,747
227
68
The Eupho Guy said:
Elijin said:
I find it interesting it's always the outsiders or 'played it for an hour or two' that discredit the raids as a negative.

The raids are for the most part, pretty amazing. Certainly havent run into anything similar in the shooter genre. They're obviously endgame, which keeps the 'tried it and it was boring' internet critics from experiencing them, but they were pretty excellent end game.
I wouldn't quite go as calling them amazing, but the raids are a good way to spend an afternoon yelling at my clanmates :p. I find it interesting from my clan's perspective at least that we've kinda forgotten about the Eater of Worlds lair. We're currently gearing up for the Forsaken raid, when that drops, but if we're gathering up for a raid, we're either looking to run Leviathan prestige, or guiding people through the Spire of Stars lair. I guess that kinda lines up with Curse of Osiris being kinda meh overall.
The Raids have had kind of a lot of running issues, and there's some historical context behind the negative perceptions of Leviathan.

Vault of Glass had severe reward inconsistencies (Forever 28/29 syndrome), although the entire raid was generally concerned a fairly fun well done experience (even the forced stealth and platforming segment). Then it got left behind by expansions.

Crota was fun, but kind of short. And so so many people were cheesing the bugs in it constantly that it became tough to find a group to play legitimately with which diluted the experience. Then it got left behind by expansions (running theme here).

Skolas got a lot of flak for not having a traditional raid, and also seeming to be balanced behind having ludicrously optimal gear (Gjallahorn). How much of that latter was down to an increasingly toxic LFG community is up for grabs (I did it with my clan with no Gjallahorns and not even a damn bubble Titan, so lol). And again left behind by expansions.

Taken King saw the return of WTF rewards dropping at completely random power levels even more then original Vault of Glass. Also a lot of platforming, and Destiny is definitely not a good platforming game, jumps are floaty as hell and traction is an alien concept to it, even if you did use a sword to get into third person. Also every boss encounter boiled down to standing in a tight circle firing snipers at the enemy, which was dull as dishwater. No sword bearer, no portal teams, just everyone doing the same identical thing for a DPS check. And left behind by expansions (which would be fine, except Destiny needs all the endgame content it can get, so ditching some of the best stuff is a problem)

Wrath of the Machine was probably the best of them. There was distinct stuff and multi-positioning all over the place. The spectacle of the Zamboni (War Machine, lol). Lots of interaction and requirement for a team that couldn't just be done in principle by multiplying your damage by 6.


Leviathan comparatively, was a big step down. The rewards got even more screwy then ever before (half the time you got tokens that only were redeemable if you finished the whole thing). The whole bit with the dogs is just awkward as hell, and even poorer stealth implementation then Bungie has done previously in the franchise. Its not as obnoxious as Taken King's, but the running segment was again highlighting Bungie's not terribly precise platforming mechanics, and didn't really engage the core gameplay. They brought back the circle of DPS check mechanics again, and Calus' shadow realm thing was kind of a horrible mess of visual noise.


And yeah, no one ever does Curse of Osiris stuff. And I never got high enough light level for the Warmind one because they made the idiotic idea of locking light level upgrades only to the milestones, and RNG never decided to give me the right item slots to progress.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,740
0
0
Gethsemani said:
Its closest analogies are not WoW or single player shooters, but Borderlands and hack'n'slash RPGs like Diablo.
That was the impression I got. A bunch of my friends picked up the game and said it was great, but looking at it I said "It looks like Borderlands, but less fun and with a more boring art style, not interested"

A few months later, none of my friends were playing it anymore and my choice to pass on it was vindicated.

If I want a grindy shoot and loot, I'll play warframe.
 

pure.Wasted

New member
Oct 12, 2011
281
0
0
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
hanselthecaretaker said:
I just have a tough time believing it was because it was that good of a game vs simply having the right ingredients to be mega popular; kinda like how CoD has been since taking the console shooter crown. Neither of these IPs ever did anything exceptionally well technically or artistically when it comes to visuals or gameplay. There were brighter than average spots like enemy AI in Halo or a high image quality:performance ratio in CoD, but in general the main constant for either was simply having ?fun? multiplayer modes and a compelling progression system.
The right ingredients were (For Bungies Halo games) a compelling story and good storytelling, great graphics for the time, great gameplay, amazing OST, iconic characters, great multiplayer etc

A game series simply can't get that huge just because it has fun multiplayer modes and a progression system, what are the ''right ingredients'' that made the series huge in your opinion?
I really don?t know, but it?s highly subjective. Halo CE-3 are at best 7/10 games for me personally. Shooting is decent but plagued with aim assist (actually I remember seeing a Microsoft patent for it that suggested the game pioneered its implementation), AI can be exceptional, but inconsistent, the level design is uninspiring and repetitive especially in CE, and the soundtrack is highly overrated. The main theme reminds me of something that could?ve been from an older high school science class edutainment video.

More than all of that though, I just don?t care for its style. It often felt like it was trying to be too cute and silly, but then throws in serious themes about race and war. Like being stuck between a Nintendo game and an actual mature game but can?t make up its mind what it wants to be. It actually reminds me a lot of Star Wars which I never really cared for either.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,747
227
68
aegix drakan said:
If I want a grindy shoot and loot, I'll play warframe.
Its funny, I enjoy Warframe, but I've never understood the labelling of it as shoot'n'loot.

Like there's basically no loot. You don't pull a weapon out of treasure chest or a boss fight and start blowing shit up with it. You buy a blueprint off the market console and run around a dozen missions or whatever kind of passively picking up mundane resources to build it in a foundry.

Like that whole idea of finding the uber-cool thing is kind of muted because outside of a few rare mods (that drop off seemingly picked at random mundane enemies), you probably were specifically going for that thing all along. Its a detached scientific process rather then an exciting discovery.

Even the void relics that probably come the closest to the idea are still kind of lacking. About the best shot of that loot rush you get is when you see the rando you matchmade with on the fissure mission had some relic you've never seen and you get something that was vaulted or whatever.
 

Gergar12_v1legacy

New member
Aug 17, 2012
314
0
0
MMO-lite games require friends, some more than others. For Destiny the reason I play it is because I want to collect all the weapons, but I quickly too got bored of it. Warframe is like that as well. The Division and Monster Hunter World are exceptions, you could matchmake, and there are no raids to speak of that can't be done with randoms.

IDK about Diablo 3.

Right now I am currently awaiting the release of Ace Combat 7, and since it's a Japanese Game, It caters more to the solo player as my friends all play siege, and I don't.

That, and I loved playing Ace of Combat Infinity. If the devs let us play multiplayer every day without tokens, then I will play Ace of Combat 7's multiplayer which you should get along with Monster Hunter World if you want to have a solo MMO-lite experience.

If you have friends, then wait for The Division 2 and Anthem. Those have raids.

Edit: Forsaken ruins two of the best characters: Cayde 6 by killing him, and Uldren Sov who was a decent mysterious anti-hero by again killing him.

Now, who will fill the void, Zavala???
 

Mcgeezaks

The biggest boss
May 25, 2020
864
0
0
Sweden
Country
Sweden
Gender
Male
Phoenixmgs said:
I haven't played Andromeda but if it plays like past ME games like I'm pretty sure it does, then it definitely does powers in a better way than Destiny; more of them and you can use them far more often. Destiny is far too much of a straight shooter than it should be.
Mass Effect is pretty much just your run of the mill third person cover shooter, the combat is easily the weakest link in the original trilogy, that people think the gameplay (even if it's improved) in Andromeda is the best thing about it should tell you something about the quality of that game.

hanselthecaretaker said:
BabyfartsMcgeezaks said:
hanselthecaretaker said:
I just have a tough time believing it was because it was that good of a game vs simply having the right ingredients to be mega popular; kinda like how CoD has been since taking the console shooter crown. Neither of these IPs ever did anything exceptionally well technically or artistically when it comes to visuals or gameplay. There were brighter than average spots like enemy AI in Halo or a high image quality:performance ratio in CoD, but in general the main constant for either was simply having ?fun? multiplayer modes and a compelling progression system.
The right ingredients were (For Bungies Halo games) a compelling story and good storytelling, great graphics for the time, great gameplay, amazing OST, iconic characters, great multiplayer etc

A game series simply can't get that huge just because it has fun multiplayer modes and a progression system, what are the ''right ingredients'' that made the series huge in your opinion?
I really don?t know, but it?s highly subjective. Halo CE-3 are at best 7/10 games for me personally. Shooting is decent but plagued with aim assist (actually I remember seeing a Microsoft patent for it that suggested the game pioneered its implementation), AI can be exceptional, but inconsistent, the level design is uninspiring and repetitive especially in CE, and the soundtrack is highly overrated. The main theme reminds me of something that could?ve been from an older high school science class edutainment video.

More than all of that though, I just don?t care for its style. It often felt like it was trying to be too cute and silly, but then throws in serious themes about race and war. Like being stuck between a Nintendo game and an actual mature game but can?t make up its mind what it wants to be. It actually reminds me a lot of Star Wars which I never really cared for either.
To be honest that's quite a bunch of unpopular opinions, everything you said you don't like about the series is something it's very often praised for by critics and players.

I can agree about one thing though, HaloCE did have quite a few repetitive levels.
 
Feb 7, 2016
728
0
0
Gergar12 said:
Edit: Forsaken ruins two of the best characters: Cayde 6 by killing him, and Uldren Sov who was a decent mysterious anti-hero by again killing him.

Now, who will fill the void, Zavala???
That's quite a bit of Spoiler territory :I

Edit: I'm a poophead apparently.