Support NeoGAF

Wabba · May 20, 2017

I understand why people are saying that this could just be a DLC. The first Destiny had downloadable content that was better then the day one game. It's difficult to say what Destiny is, in some ways it's a MMO. So they could just keep making content for the original game, but with so much new content it is justifiable to just release a sequel. And it's Activison so of course they are going to make another.

Strange that you compere it to Uncharted 2, because that is maybe the biggest difference from the first to the second game i can think about. It's not at all comparable. Not only did they release one of the best action adventure campaigns, but they also released it with a big multiplayer part and coop that was never in the first game. And with a polish from the first to the second that almost was a generation apart.

But i am sure that Activison has a lot of secrets for Destiny 2 that is not yet reveled. Day one for me regardless.

Horp · May 20, 2017

Xando said:
Well let's compare it to legion(WoWs latest expansion):

New areas
Destiny 4
Legion 5

New dungeons:
Legion 10
Destiny ??

New MP Maps:
Legion 0
Destiny ??

Quest system:
Legion added world quests
Destiny 2 seems to add world quests

Level cap:
Legion increased by 10
Destiny has you start at lvl 1 again

Raids:
Legion 1
Destiny 1

New skills
legion, people got the artifact skill i guess
Destiny three subclasses for each class with new skills

New classes
legion demonhunter
Destiny new subclasses

Doesn't seem like much of a difference tbh

Legion overhauled the combat system.
Legion redid all attack animations.
Legion added tons more landmass than destiny (wow is a much much bigger game in terms on scale).
Legion will add tons more dungeons and raids during its time. Ofc wow has a monthly cost, but it can be paid with ingame currency, while Destinys DLCs are always paid with gold.
By the end of legion I guarantee that there will be many many more raids and even more dungeons, compared to what Destiny 2 will have had.
And most importantly:
Legion is called an expansion pack!! Just like people in here claim Destiny 2 seemingly is. Legion isnt Wow 2, its an expansion.

The defence for Destiny 2 here at gaf has been almost intolerable. I even saw someone claim that the very idea of a new class was "rediculous". It's like, if they straight up said "Destiny 2 is just a character whipe. Replay the game for 60 bucks" some people would STILL cheer. There is just no limit to the amount of defence some people will do to protect their precious game.
I dont get it. I have loved many games over the years, some a bit too much, but I have never blindly defended them like the Destiny fanboys do here. A game I'm a fan of serves up a bad patch or a weak sequel? I'll be first in line to complain.

Xando · May 20, 2017

Bold One said:
How often does WOW release its expansions?

Around every two years

Horp said:
Legion overhauled the combat system - So does Destiny, with new subclasses and changes to the weapons
Legion redid all attack animations. - I'll give you that
Legion added tons more landmass than destiny (wow is a much much bigger game in terms on scale). - Remains to be seen. A lot of legion is just mountains that make the areas feel big.
Legion will add tons more dungeons and raids during its time. Ofc wow has a monthly cost, but it can be paid with ingame currency, while Destinys DLCs are always paid with gold. - so will Destiny and the majority of people don't finance their WoW time via ingame gold
By the end of legion I guarantee that there will be many many more raids and even more dungeons, compared to what Destiny 2 will have had. - what does that have to do with anything i said?
And most importantly:
Legion is called an expansion pack!! Just like people in here claim Destiny 2 seemingly is. Legion isnt Wow 2, its an expansion. - This is exactly what i'm saying. Thanks for reading my post.

See answers in the quotes.

Ivory Samoan · May 20, 2017

lantus said:
Just based off of the gameplay trailer they released it seems exactly like the first game. So much in fact if you put the two together I might not be able to tell the difference. This is what immediately caught my attention when I first saw the gameplay. That's fine I guess, but I expect more from bungie.

If you have played the first game though, I can't see how it's anything alike to the first in terms of cinematic storytelling and such (even TTK's campaign quests were lighter on it than this).

I am curious, for people who have played D1's content (including TTK), are any of you thinking this was exactly the same looking as D1? Or is it mostly people who didn't play the original more-so?

Bold One · May 20, 2017

LongMuckDong said:
If you have played the first game though, I can't see how it's anything alike to the first in terms of cinematic storytelling and such (even TTK's campaign quests were lighter on it than this).

I am curious, for people who have played D1's content (including TTK), are any of you thinking this was exactly the same looking as D1? Or is it mostly people who didn't play the original more-so?

800 hours+ the very notion that it looks the same as D1 is absurd to the point of stroke-inducing. But honestly, par for the course in Destiny thread.

NascentGecko · May 20, 2017

[removed]

GodfatherX · May 20, 2017

Given the extra time/delay, the dropping of old systems, and the reported overhaul of they dev tools aka not taking over 4 hours to open a map to edit it, people were expecting a pretty decent bump up in graphics.

I only saw a few shorter clips, but is the world system still the same? or can I actually play a map freely and then start a strike ect. from within the world, or do i still need to menu out, load, menu into a mission load? Apart from the story, that was always the most disappointing thing to me with Destiny 1

SomTervo · May 20, 2017

Laurel_McFang said:
The reason is we accepted Destiny 1 as a kind of beta test an extended voyage into the possibilities of a massive online shooter. So by the end of it Bungie had a decent game and some solid tech, but the issue is Destiny 2 so far fails to deliver the next-gen ludological solutions to the massive online game enviroment. Strikes are still redudant grind a thons and while yes they do look hectic the one shown failed to take the possibility of co-operative gameplay further. The story mission showed improvements, but still felt like teen fiction compared to the sombering tones of Halo. Basically we thought Destiny 2 would be the time Bungie nails it. The second they realize some fundamental aspect of online play and knock it out of the park instead it looks like an iterative sequel still struggling with the limitations the original could never shurg off. The game just seems tense and I continue to feel that somewhere deep down there Destiny was the result of some key insight we have yet to fully realize, its like a gem waiting to glitter. Bungie should cut down on graphics and double down on innovation. That's nice that Destiny is a cool world, but come on man make a game worth playing for endless hours not an MMO in space. It has failed to solve the problem all MMOs suffer from: why bother with it when offline games and more focused online multiplayer games have better gameplay and are more fun. Its a nice social space, but not much else.

I guess i agree with all this, but i think it all basically boils down to an absence of:
- a compelling world you can actually get lost in
- better/more unique mission design (that's worth playing for its own gameplay rather than to grind for the next one)

I didn't get the impression Destiny 2 is going to address either of those.

Frankly I'd prefer one MASSIVE location that they poured everything into rather than a handful of locations that feel empty and half-assed (like Destiny 1).

The vibe of the missions looks a lot better - let's hope they go hard on that. This COULD be great. I mainly just hope it's not all about the grind, life Destiny 1 was.

CryptiK · May 20, 2017

It most definitely could have been an expansion and had a level cap increase to 40. Hell even a massive patch, so much of it should have been in D1 to begin with and its just basic QOL.

Twilight Gap · May 20, 2017

SomTervo said:
I guess i agree with all this, but i think it all basically boils down to an absence of:
- a compelling world you can actually get lost in
- better/more unique mission design (that's worth playing for its own gameplay rather than to grind for the next one)

I didn't get the impression Destiny 2 is going to address either of those.

Frankly I'd prefer one MASSIVE location that they poured everything into rather than a handful of locations that feel empty and half-assed (like Destiny 1).

Ya I honestly don't care for the planet structure anymore upon seeing that they're still using orbit screensavers. I think they are limited by having more, which sounds weird. But when you look at it in context, you're stuck developing more unique assets and then using lore to limit them to one or two races and art palettes. At least the worlds are more colorful and varied this time around, but visual variety doesn't need to be "star warzed" and designated to an entire planet.

I'm excited to play more Destiny but I don't get the impression that this game is going to be, well, impressive on a fundamental level. Its scope is way too big for its own damn good, and the good ol "less is more" probably could have helped. But maybe they have something up their sleeve - who knows at this point.

Trup1aya · May 20, 2017

It seems like a bunch of QOL enhancements for the most part. Then your standard new areas that typically would be expected with an expansion pack.

The graphical enhancements are minimal, and we are still using p2p. I think technological improvements are generally what people expect out of sequels, and we aren't seeing that here. Just tweaks on gameplay systems- most of which probably could have been done via expansions (Bungie has made similar tweaks to Destiny 1s systems over its lifespan).

icecold1983 · May 20, 2017

because its 2017, over 3 years into the current gen, and this game still looks like cross gen

nOoblet16 · May 20, 2017

Trup1aya said:
It seems like a bunch of QOL enhancements for the most part. Then your standard new areas that typically would be expected with an expansion pack.

The graphical enhancements are minimal, and we are still using p2p. I think technological improvements are generally what people expect out of sequels, and we aren't seeing that here. Just tweaks on gameplay systems- most of which probably could have been done via expansions (Bungie has made similar tweaks to Destiny 1s systems over its lifespan).

Technological advantages and "dropping last gen shackles" does not just mean graphical upgrades. Graphics are only part of the tech. By dropping last gen you are getting larger areas, more enemies, probably a bunch of other things we haven't seen AND there IS an upgrade to the renderer (yes it's there, it's noticeable and the gap is par for the course for a sequel). Some of the upgrades you already started seeing in Destiny 1 (like how ROI and the recent April update increase enemy count by 2-3x and how around TTK we got increase in vault space that PS360 never got). And just because Destiny 1 was cross gen doesn't mean the renderer for Destiny 1 was not pushing the console at all. That's certainly not true otherwise Destiny 1 would have been a 60FPS game.

I'm gonna point out that the beloved Battlefield games that GAF drops so much did not receive that much upgrade to the actual rendering technologies between BF4 and BF1 eventhough BF4 was cross gen. There IS a substantial visual upgrade between the two but it's not so much on the rendering tech as much as it is on using PBR and photogrammetry (neither are actual 'rendering tech' as in they are not the same as lighting, shadowing, particles etc but rather a specific way/philosophy of creating the content and not something that actually needs current gen hardware to achieve, it just so happens that they became prominent right about the time the current gen started).

GodfatherX said:
Given the extra time/delay, the dropping of old systems, and the reported overhaul of they dev tools aka not taking over 4 hours to open a map to edit it, people were expecting a pretty decent bump up in graphics.

I only saw a few shorter clips, but is the world system still the same? or can I actually play a map freely and then start a strike ect. from within the world, or do i still need to menu out, load, menu into a mission load? Apart from the story, that was always the most disappointing thing to me with Destiny 1

Faster content creation would lead to more frequent content updates, so instead of waiting 1 year for 1 new area you might get 2 new areas per year or 1 super larger area per year...depending on what the developer prioritises. Faster content creation has little if anything to do with better graphics if you expect that then you are expecting A from something that affects B.

icecold1983 · May 20, 2017

nOoblet16 said:
Technological advantages and "dropping last gen shackles" does not just mean graphical upgrades. Graphics are only part of the tech. By dropping last gen you are getting larger areas, more enemies, probably a bunch of other things we haven't seen AND there IS an upgrade to the renderer (yes it's there, it's noticeable and the gap is par for the course for a sequel). Some of the upgrades you already started seeing in Destiny 1 (like how ROI and the recent April update increase enemy count by 2-3x and how around TTK we got increase in vault space that PS360 never got). And just because Destiny 1 was cross gen doesn't mean the renderer for Destiny 1 was not pushing the console at all. That's certainly not true otherwise Destiny 1 would have been a 60FPS game.

I'm gonna point out that the beloved Battlefield games that GAF drops so much did not receive that much upgrade to the actual rendering technologies between BF4 and BF1 eventhough BF4 was cross gen. There IS a substantial visual upgrade between the two but it's not so much on the rendering tech as much as it is on using PBR and photogrammetry (neither are actual 'rendering tech' as in they are not the same as lighting, shadowing, particles etc but rather a specific way/philosophy of creating the content and not something that actually needs current gen hardware to achieve, it just so happens that they became prominent right about the time the current gen started).

Faster content creation would lead to more frequent content updates, so instead of waiting 1 year for 1 new area you might get 2 new areas per year or 1 super larger area per year...depending on what the developer prioritises. Faster content creation has little if anything to do with better graphics if you expect that then you are expecting A from something that affects B.

destiny1/2 look a lot like battlefield 4, very cross gen. battlefield one looks a generation better than both. the renderer in fb is much more advanced in battlefront/bf one despite your claims to the contrary. dice has released several presentations going into detail about the various improvements they have made once they were able to drop ps360 support from frostbite

-ImaginaryInsider · May 20, 2017

I can definitely understand folks who played the first game being suspicious and/or still annoyed, but like it or not, Destiny was an effective (and addictive) gameplay formula for a lot of people, even with all the massive warts. Sure, I'd like a Halo + Mass Effect + MMO super-game as well, but what Destiny actually is is pretty worthwhile on its own, especially if they can fix some of the most glaring flaws.

Actually having a story, in-game lore, and a form of matchmaking for Raids is a step in the right direction. Even with the lack of new classes, they could easily add new subclasses that do largely the same thing. I can understand some of the criticism, but I think it's too early to discount some of the positives that have been discussed.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Xando said:
Well let's compare it to legion(WoWs latest expansion):
[comparison]
Doesn't seem like much of a difference tbh

The difference is when WoW release an expansion it's expanding on existing content. To make WoW truly comparable to Destiny all previous expansions would have to be standalone. This is what bums me out about D2 the most. All new activities, events but in areas that are no longer accessible, raids that are no longer accessible, missions quests that are no longer accessible. We are essentially getting a hard reboot of D1 in terms of content with QOL changes.

Neoxon · May 20, 2017

Vital Tundra said:
Ask the goof's that think Splatoon 2 is an "expansion/port" of Splatoon

This, basically

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Horp said:
Destiny 2 does a few new things.
Destiny 2 does much fewer new things than the average sequel to the average big franchise.
The cod games suffer from this a bit too, but they have also recieved shit for it for 10 years.

That wasn't so hard was it?

Terrible analogy.

This is Destiny TWO not Destiny 10 in a long line of samey incremental iterations.

Destiny 1 was a test, it was Bungie's first foray into the MMO style. They made a lot of mistakes, and now they get to effectively reboot the franchise without being hampered by last gen.

There are plenty of great sequels that don't make drastic changes, and Destiny is a perfect example of a game that didn't need to.

People have really weird expectations sometimes.

Trup1aya · May 20, 2017

nOoblet16 said:
Technological advantages and "dropping last gen shackles" does not just mean graphical upgrades. Graphics are only part of the tech. By dropping last gen you are getting larger areas, more enemies, probably a bunch of other things we haven't seen AND there IS an upgrade to the renderer (yes it's there, it's noticeable and the gap is par for the course for a sequel). Some of the upgrades you already started seeing in Destiny 1 (like how ROI and the recent April update increase enemy count by 2-3x and how around TTK we got increase in vault space that PS360 never got). And just because Destiny 1 was cross gen doesn't mean the renderer for Destiny 1 was not pushing the console at all. That's certainly not true otherwise Destiny 1 would have been a 60FPS game.

I'm gonna point out that the beloved Battlefield games that GAF drops so much did not receive that much upgrade to the actual rendering technologies between BF4 and BF1 eventhough BF4 was cross gen. There IS a substantial visual upgrade between the two but it's not so much on the rendering tech as much as it is on using PBR and photogrammetry (neither are actual 'rendering tech' as in they are not the same as lighting, shadowing, particles etc but rather a specific way/philosophy of creating the content and not something that actually needs current gen hardware to achieve, it just so happens that they became prominent right about the time the current gen started).

Faster content creation would lead to more frequent content updates, so instead of waiting 1 year for 1 new area you might get 2 new areas per year or 1 super larger area per year...depending on what the developer prioritises. Faster content creation has little if anything to do with better graphics if you expect that then you are expecting A from something that affects B.

Consumers, frankly, l don't care about imperceivable underlying tech advancements. They want to look at the sequel and SEE improvements. This is why D2's reveal APPEARS to be more of an expansion.

Consumers don't generally CARE if low cost enhancements like PBR and photogrammetry are behind the improved visuals. They just look at BF1 and BF4 and conclude that the more recent game looks much better.

You can't sell, a consumer on the merits of improving the dev pipeline via a reveal trailer. It's not something that is immediately gratifying.

Gamers expected better performance, better visuals, better networking solutions and better gameplay systems. All that other stuff you talked about is great- but it's a tough sell. To answer the OP, this is why so far many see it as an expansion instead of a sequel.

BattleMonkey · May 20, 2017

It looks like DLC cause all they have shown so far is just retread of content we've already seen. Reworking old systems is nothing amazing, it's done in patches and DLC all the time too.

They need to show us new content, stuff that stands out. Not the same characters, locations, and gameplay.

Lockjaw333 · May 20, 2017

Because it looks like destiny 1. That's it and that's all.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Lockjaw333 said:
Because it looks like destiny 1. That's it and that's all.

Of course it looks like D1. It's the sequel.

However, if has quite a long list of additions and improvements that quite clearly separate it from D1.

BattleMonkey said:
It looks like DLC cause all they have shown so far is just retread of content we've already seen. Reworking old systems is nothing amazing, it's done in patches and DLC all the time too.

They need to show us new content, stuff that stands out. Not the same characters, locations, and gameplay.

The gameplay was always going to be pretty much identical. Not sure what you were expecting here.

They showed lots of new locations. Did you see them?

There will be new characters, but of course they're going to lead with the familiar who are inherent to the franchise now.

cartoon_soldier · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
Of course it looks like D1. It's the sequel.

However, if has quite a long list of additions and improvements that quite clearly separate it from D1.

But it looks more like D1 revamped and not a complete sequel to Destiny.

E92 M3 · May 20, 2017

I want Destiny 2 to be more loot, new guns, new areas, and just more Destiny. I love it.

That said, kinda irked that everything is 4v4. Sometimes it's fun to just relax in 6v6. It'll be harder to play with randoms in 4v4.

Mister Wolf · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
Of course it looks like D1. It's the sequel.

However, if has quite a long list of additions and improvements that quite clearly separate it from D1.

People expect visual improvement. Mass Effect 1 to Mass Effect 2. Gears 1 to Gears 2. Both sequels were huge improvements with no change in hardware power.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Mister Wolf said:
People expect visual improvement. Mass Effect 1 to Mass Effect 2. Gears 1 to Gears 2. Both sequels were huge improvements with no change in hardware power.

Sure, but they've upped the /scope/ of the game.

There are more costs to development than just visuals, you know? Until we see the final game and understand where all the dev time/power went, shitting on the visuals is stupidity.

cartoon_soldier said:
But it looks more like D1 revamped and not a complete sequel to Destiny.

A "complete sequel" doesn't have a template. A sequel can be incremental and still be a great game.

Plus we haven't even seen the real scope of this game yet. We cannot make a final call either way until we do.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Mister Wolf said:
People expect visual improvement. Mass Effect 1 to Mass Effect 2. Gears 1 to Gears 2. Both sequels were huge improvements with no change in hardware power.

Considering D1 wasn't much of a looker makes this point even more depressing. Many said that the engine along with working with previous generation held back what they'd be capable of. There are differences but certainly nothing dramatic.

BattleMonkey · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
The gameplay was always going to be pretty much identical. Not sure what you were expecting here.

They showed lots of new locations. Did you see them?

There will be new characters, but of course they're going to lead with the familiar who are inherent to the franchise now.

The gameplay trailer pretty much just played out in a familiar location, with same characters and didn't really show us anything new. They have talked about how the game is gonna be different, but don't show us that. Show us these new big zones you boast about, show us what makes the new enemy different, show us some new game systems, show us new content that makes you know it's a sequel. What was seen just looks like any of the DLC expansion reveals.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Ryuuga said:
Considering D1 wasn't much of a looker makes this point even more depressing. Many said that the engine along with working with previous generation held back what they'd be capable of. There are differences but certainly nothing dramatic.

D1 was cross gen. You know this.

And, again, we don't know the scope of the game. It's not just a matter of "turning up the visuals" in their dev tools, you know?

They have to balance cost of visuals with everything else they're doing.

Until we see the final game, this bitching is utterly useless.

PS - Feel free to discuss things, of course, but all this absolute judgement shit is incredibly dumb.

BattleMonkey said:
The gameplay trailer pretty much just played out in a familiar location, with same characters and didn't really show us anything new. They have talked about how the game is gonna be different, but don't show us that. Show us these new big zones you boast about, show us what makes the new enemy different, show us some new game systems, show us new content that makes you know it's a sequel. What was seen just looks like any of the DLC expansion reveals.

Sure, it would have been cool to be shown instead of told, but that doesn't justify some of the the stupid reactions ITT.

Trickster · May 20, 2017

E92 M3 said:
I want Destiny 2 to be more loot, new guns, new areas, and just more Destiny. I love it.

That said, kinda irked that everything is 4v4. Sometimes it's fun to just relax in 6v6. It'll be harder to play with randoms in 4v4.

I thought the move to 4v4 pvp focus was a good thing initially. But that was on the assumption that there would still be other games modes with more players. But from what they said it really does sound like it will be only 4v4.

To me that is honestly baffling if true. Bungie did such an amazing job with pvp in their Halo games, there was tons of variety. I want 8v8 modes, and modes and maps with vehicles. Like they had 10+ years ago in Halo.

Zakalwe said:
Sure, but they've upped the /scope/ of the game.

There are more costs to development than just visuals, you know? Until we see the final game and understand where all the dev time/power went, shitting on the visuals is stupidity.

The wait and see argument, while probably valid, just isn't one people are gonna listen to after being told that same thing with Destiny 1

Flyinmunky · May 20, 2017

I had a blast playing D1 with friends. I will be there day 1 and will get hundreds of hours of fun out of it....

Saying that my biggest issue from what i have seen is the lack of new enemies.

Going to new planets is going to lose a lot of excitement when you are still shooting the same enemy that you killed in a loot cave years ago.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Trickster said:
The wait and see argument, while probably valid, just isn't one people are gonna listen to after being told that same thing with Destiny 1

Wait and see before making absolute judgements or throwing our toys out the pram is the intelligent thing to do regardless of dev history.

Scepticism is fine, but then if you're being fair you'd have to also include all the obvious things they learnt since D1 launch. TTK proves they understand how to improve they're game drastically, so there's more evidence to suggest D2 will launch in a superior state to D1 than to the contrary.

Darkstorne · May 20, 2017

SomTervo said:
I guess i agree with all this, but i think it all basically boils down to an absence of:
- a compelling world you can actually get lost in
- better/more unique mission design (that's worth playing for its own gameplay rather than to grind for the next one)

I didn't get the impression Destiny 2 is going to address either of those.

Yeah, for a sequel this is exactly what I was hoping for, and there's still a chance that the second point is going to happen. E3 is their opportunity to show that solo mission structure is really varied this time around, and the beta will be the make-or-break moment for many of us hoping for this. It needs to be REALLY damn good though, given the rest of the game is more of the same.

The first point definitely isn't happening (no giant open world), and making the same mistake of only launching with four worlds (some up to double size as before, but double something small and it's still fairly small) is NOT a good way to convince people that their content creation pipeline is speeding up. So if I'm going to buy into this I absolutely need them to promise that every expansion (three per year) will provide at least one new explorable location to the game.

If they can secure those two things, and promise Destiny 2 is here to stay for the rest of this console gen, then I'm definitely on board and will forgive that this is essentially Destiny 1.5 with a hard reset.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
D1 was cross gen. You know this.

And, again, we don't know the scope of the game. It's not just a matter of "turning up the visuals" in their dev tools, you know?

They have to balance cost of visuals with everything else they're doing.

Until we see the final game, this bitching is utterly useless.

PS - Feel free to discuss things, of course, but all this absolute judgement shit is incredibly dumb.

I see the "wait for final" argument all the time. We'll be getting a beta in the next little while, but I wouldn't expect a dramatic change in visuals. The Inverse Spire strike happened show an example of the "scope", but as large as it was it still looked and played out all too familiar fashion.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Ryuuga said:
I see the "wait for final" argument all the time. We'll be getting a beta in the next little while, but I wouldn't expect a dramatic change in visuals. The Inverse Spire strike happened show an example of the "scope", but as large as it was it still looked and played out all to familiar fashion.

You see it all the time because it's smart.

Sure, just forget about all the other stuff they said they included...

Look, I'm all for healthy scepticism, but some of the reactions and comments ITT are just juvenile.

Eccocid · May 20, 2017

it is not really too difficult to understand, even your thread title spoils the answer to your question. Destiny 2 looks like Destiny Dlc. it is that simple, it LOOKS like a dlc. Even tho i spent hours in D1 and only had a chance to join raids like 3 times(not into community, got no friends who play destiny, tho i am fan of gun play) it LOOKS like a dlc. I was expecting bigger, better and more spectacular trailer at least, with not before seen planets etc. btw its all about the looks, not the content. If youbare releasing a game sequel to a multimillion seller with zillions of budget you expect more than new content(which is a must and expected by all i guess, new game new content), you expect bigger things, it is that simple and that trailer failed to show any of that.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
You see it all the time because it's smart.

Sure, just forget about all the other stuff they said they included...

Look, I'm all for healthy scepticism, but some of the reactions and comments ITT are just juvenile.

My point is that time and time again it's been proven false. More often than not when we get a beta (usually months out from release) there isn't a dramatic shift in visuals. There are small tweaks, but the crux of most arguments is that while there are visual improvements there is no stark or immediately contrasting improvement from it's predecessor. To be honest, visuals are the least of my concerns with this game, but I can understand people feeling letdown if they were expecting a bit more oomph in either visual intesity or performance.

ZehDon · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
Of course it looks like D1. It's the sequel...

If your audience can confuse one game for another, that's a very real problem. Deus Ex: Mankind Divided had this issue, and it hurt it quite a bit. Bungie are clearly aware of the potential problem of people thinking their multi-million dollar sequel is an expansion pack. See: the ridiculously over-scaled "2" on everything. They're communicating that this is a separate, standalone product in the bluntest way possible. However, by emphasising the giant "2", they're inadvertently pushing up "better in every way" that people expect when dealing with sequels. Audiences will read it as not just "a" sequel - it's a "BIG SEQUEL". From their perspective, why else would Bungie make the "2" bigger than the name of the game itself? Because it must be better in every way! So, combining the two - a sequel that's basically indistinguishable in every way that matters, and an overemphasis of it being a sequel - and you get this thread. Entirely understandable. Bungie have, once again, deliberately inflated expectations and, once again, set themselves up to fail. Let's hope the game has a lot more content than Destiny. 5 Strikes and one raid won't cut it this time.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

ZehDon said:
If your audience can confuse one game for another, that's a very real problem. Deus Ex: Mankind Divided had this issue, and it hurt it quite a bit. Bungie are clearly aware of the potential problem of people thinking their multi-million dollar sequel is an expansion pack. See: the ridiculously over-scaled "2" on everything. They're communicating that this is a separate, standalone product in the bluntest way possible. However, by emphasising the giant "2", they're inadvertently pushing up "better in every way" that people expect when dealing with sequels. Audiences will read it as not just "a" sequel - it's a "BIG SEQUEL". From their perspective, why else would Bungie make the "2" bigger than the name of the game itself? Because it must be better in every way! So, combining the two - a sequel that's basically indistinguishable in every way that matters, and an overemphasis of it being a sequel - and you get this thread. Entirely understandable. Bungie have, once again, deliberately inflated expectations and, once again, set themselves up to fail. Let's hope the game has a lot more content than Destiny. 5 Strikes and one raid won't cut it this time.

They showed us a snippet of gameplay. They /told/ us of a lot of additional stuff that could very easily justify the visuals to those complaining.

Should they have shown more instead of told? Sure, Bungie have always been pretty bad at this with Destiny. However, we /have/ to heed the advancements they made with TTK that proves they understand how to make their game much, much better.

I think the assumption that this game will launch with enough content and scope to justify the visuals is probably safer than the opposite based on all we know, but Bungie /have/ surprise us before...

Ryuuga said:
My point is that time and time again it's been proven false. More often than not when we get a beta (usually months out from release) there isn't a dramatic shift in visuals. There are small tweaks, but the crux of most arguments is that while there are visual improvements there is no stark or immediately contrasting improvement from it's predecessor. To be honest, visuals are the least of my concerns with this game, but I can understand people feeling letdown if they were expecting a bit more oomph in either visual intesity or performance.

The visuals looks pretty great to be honest, for a game of this scope especially.

Being let down about the visuals before understanding the rest fully is dumb however you spin it, especially when Bungie have proven to understand how to improve their game drastically.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
The visuals looks pretty great to be honest, for a game of this scope especially.

Being let down about the visuals before understanding the rest fully is dumb however you spin it, especially when Bungie have proven to understand how to improve their game drastically.

That's your opinion and I'd ask you respect the opinion of others who don't feel the same. Had Bungie lead strong with what you assume will be available in the final build then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

the_lizard · May 20, 2017

Can't speak for anyone else, but even as someone who generally enjoyed the series' debut entry, it felt like kind of a half measure. Like a game that was pushed out the door before it was feature complete. So my expectation was that Bungie would seize the opportunity presented by the sequel to fill those gaps and release the game that OG Destiny was supposed to be. Instead, it seems like they're doubling down on the original game's limitations.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Ryuuga said:
That's your opinion and I'd ask you respect the opinion of others who don't feel the same. Had Bungie lead strong with what you assume will be available in the final build then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I respect anyone approaching this logically.

Anyone saying "the visuals are shit, this is terrible" without understanding how the cost of development was spent elsewhere (ie: we need more context), I can't respect that stupidity.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
I respect anyone approaching this logically.

Anyone saying "the visuals are shit, this is terrible" without understanding how the cost of development was spent elsewhere (ie: we need more context), I can't respect that stupidity.

No, it feels more like you're proposing that people conform to how you feel about the visuals . Personally, I don't know the first thing about where the resources were spent and neither do you. I do understand how both of us feel about the visuals and I have no qualms with how we approach our opinons on it. If I understood that we're getting larger worlds, more activities, more complex AI etc., I can still turn around and be disappointed in the visuals. Adults can walk and chew gum.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Ryuuga said:
No, it feels more like you're proposing that people conform to how you feel about the visuals . Personally, I don't know the first thing about where the resources were spent and neither do you. I do understand how both of us feel about the visuals and I have no qualms with how we approach our opinons on it.

Yes. If you actually read my posts you'd notice I'm not doing that at all, and as these posts are still there for all to read you trying to spin it another way is especially strange.

I feel ok about the visuals because I'm assuming Bungie have spent the resources elsewhere. I could be proven wrong, but I'm pretty sure the lessons they learnt with TTK won't be forgotten.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
Yes. If you actually read my posts you'd notice I'm not doing that at all, so you trying to spin it that way is especially strange.

You may not be asking people to agree with you, but you've certainly done nothing but denigrate others for feeling differently.

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Ryuuga said:
You may not be asking people to agree with you, but you've certainly done nothing but denigrate others for feeling differently.

Haha, I haven't done that at all. I do like how you move the goalposts slightly though so you can carry on your weird critique.

I've only ever said "anyone making silly illogical statements in an absolute way before knowing the final context is pretty dumb", which you really disagree with?

Anyone approaching this logically I can fully respect.

Trogdor1123 · May 20, 2017

Sorry, I haven't been following destiny 2 too much but there are only 4 new locations? Is that in addition to the previous ones?

Zakalwe · May 20, 2017

Trogdor1123 said:
Sorry, I haven't been following destiny 2 too much but there are only 4 new locations? Is that in addition to the previous ones?

We don't know how dense these locations are.

If there was only 1 location but it had five maps that were all individually bigger than the previous games entire playable space, it wouldn't be problem right? Of course, this is a space adventure so we want planets and I get that, but four is plenty to start with if these four have enough content to justify the number.

Especially we know Destiny will be getting new content in the future.

Ryuuga · May 20, 2017

Zakalwe said:
Haha, I haven't done that at all. I do like how you move the goalposts slightly though so you can carry on your weird critique.

I've only ever said "anyone making silly illogical statements in an absolute way before knowing the final context is pretty dumb", which you really disagree with?

Anyone approaching this logically I can fully respect.

In the context of "I think this looks good, but if you think this looks bad you're dumb". If neither of us have all the information then aren't we just reacting to what we're currently given? If yes, what makes your opinion any less illogical than those who don't find the visuals particularly good. Again, yes even considering the size and scope et.c,

bigJP · May 20, 2017

Updating the UI would have gone a long way

Support NeoGAF

To the "Destiny 2 looks like DLC" crowd. Why?

Member

Member

Member

Gold Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Junior Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Gold Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Gold Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Similar threads