Support NeoGAF

[kraspkibble]

Moderately. I watch some of the PvP streamers and that aspect looks pretty fun.

I expect I'll get my monies worth one way or the other...I think. Not sure. I look forward to asking D2GAF's opinion in a few weeks. That'll be a pretty good indicator of what the general mood is like a month+ in. If people aren't feeling it anymore or are down, I'll get a refund. Too many games to play to play something drab.

so you are gonna get a refund based on what other people think of the game? to be honest with Destiny you're always gonna get people shitting on it. I don't know...i just play games and if i enjoy them then i play them. Don't need other people telling me what to think or do.

 

[Renekton]

I'm gonna be honest, the Angry Joe review turned me off of it

Same boat 😗

 

[Matrix XII]

Not excited anymore. Probably not buying.

I’ll eventually get a Destiny 2 Collection in a couple years.

 

[AcridMeat]

I was really excited to finally play it as I didn't have a console for the first one. I played the open beta though and found it way more dull than expecting. I actually quit out of the strike in the beta because it was taking forever with nothing about it grabbing me.

Sucks because Bungie/Halo used to be my number one dev/franchise.

I already play PUBG and other online games with folks I don't need to buy something as another social playground.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

And you fail to realize why I'm so adamant on Destiny 2 being barred from Battle.Net in the first place. I don't want Battle.Net to become the next Steam or Origin. It has existed as a Blizzard community first, a digital sales platform second.

Why are you the gatekeeper that gets to decide what's acceptable for the Blizzard community to play?

 

[kraspkibble]

I was really excited to finally play it as I didn't have a console for the first one. I played the open beta though and found it way more dull than expecting. I actually quit out of the strike in the beta because it was taking forever with nothing about it grabbing me.

Sucks because Bungie/Halo used to be my number one dev/franchise.

I already play PUBG and other online games with folks I don't need to buy something as another social playground.

to be fair the beta is a very small part of the game. you only have the first story mission (out of 16), pvp, and a strike (there are 6 in the game).

the story isn't anything mind blowing but compared to the first game it's a huge step forward. pvp is actually enjoyable now imo. strikes aren't as good as they used to be. what used to be "patrol" in D1 is now a much larger map with patrols, missions, adventures, lost sectors, public events. way more to do. then of course there are other things like nightfalls, trials, raid.

i'm not trying to convince you because it sounds like you've made your mind up but the beta probably done the game more harm than good. i feel it was aimed more at people who played D1 and not new players.

 

[AnathemicOne]

Why are you the gatekeeper that gets to decide what's acceptable for the Blizzard community to play?

I'm not, I speak for myself and my comfortable enjoyment of a community I've come to know and grow with for the majority of my life. Others in that very same community may disagree and I'd respect that. However I still fear that extreme of Battle.Net changing for the worse and can only hope I'm proven wrong.

 

[kraspkibble]

I'm not, I speak for myself and my comfortable enjoyment of a community I've come to know and grow with for the majority of my life. Others in that very same community may disagree and I'd respect that. However I still fear that extreme of Battle.Net changing for the worse and can only hope I'm proven wrong.

this is the first non blizzard game in over 2 decades. i think they will likely add more games but i hardly see it turning into the next Steam/Origin/uPlay.

 

[Strakt]

Well Call of Duty WWII or w/e its called is coming to steam (theres a page up for it already) so its not like Blizzard is putting every activision game on there. They probably like the idea of Destiny 2 and how it can attract players from their games since they share similar elements.

 

[Tahnit]

I was gonna double dip..and still might. But man ive gotten attatched to my character on psn. I got great loot and shaders/ships ect.

It would be a hard thing to start all over again, also i joined a clan on PSN and having a great time.

So im undecided.

 

[BizzyBum]

Not when Mario Odyssey comes out 3 days later.

 

[-hadouken]

Enjoyed the PC beta a good deal more than the console version - 60fps made a significant difference to the overall experience. Still, not enough content I'm interested in to pay sticker price.

 

[jizzlobber]

Its funny, I was really keen but I'm really not fussed now... I think releasing later on PC was a strategic move but it has had the opposite effect on me.

 

[M.W.]

Not when Mario Odyssey comes out 3 days later.

And ACO and Wolfenstein.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

I'm not, I speak for myself and my comfortable enjoyment of a community I've come to know and grow with for the majority of my life. Others in that very same community may disagree and I'd respect that. However I still fear that extreme of Battle.Net changing for the worse and can only hope I'm proven wrong.

Strange position to hold when you realise you're speaking for yourself but wish an action into effect that would affect many others. Perhaps accept your dislike of the game doesn't warrant barring it from the rest of the Blizzard community.

 

[AnathemicOne]

Strange position to hold when you realise you're speaking for yourself but wish an action into effect that would affect many others. Perhaps accept your dislike of the game doesn't warrant barring it from the rest of the Blizzard community.

My opinion is hardly the outlier. On the same token Destiny 2 being out in the BNET client is an action being forced upon contemporary BNET players. This is how these things work. You argue in terms of community-affecting decisions, not just for the self. Boot up WoW, SC2, Overwatch, etc. and as the question or take a stroll through Blizzard community forums, or hell, even on GAF. My opinion is shared just like the opinion of accepting Destiny 2 is shared.

 

[Nokterian]

And ACO and Wolfenstein.

Wolfenstein gets my money, fun times for nazi's.

 

[Abilidebob]

The delay was way too big.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

My opinion is hardly the outlier. On the same token Destiny 2 being out in the BNET client is an action being forced upon contemporary BNET players. This is how these things work. You argue in terms of community-affecting decisions, not just for the self. Boot up WoW, SC2, Overwatch, etc. and as the question or take a stroll through Blizzard community forums, or hell, even on GAF. My opinion is shared just like the opinion of accepting Destiny 2 is shared.

Except your position is you want to deny access to a game because of your personal dislike of it, whereas the other side isn't forcing you to play it because they like it. These are not equal.

 

[AnathemicOne]

Except your position is you want to deny access to a game because of your personal dislike of it, whereas the other side isn't forcing you to play it because they like it. These are not equal.

I wish it barred from Battle.Net that's hardly the equivalent of preventing people from playing it. Many other digital platforms exist, some of which Activision already participates in. Battle.Net need not be included.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

I wish it barred from Battle.Net that's hardly the equivalent of preventing people from playing it. Many other digital platforms exist, some of which Activision already participates in. Battle.Net need not be included.

I said you're denying them access, which is what it would be. You're denying them the ability to access the game through, what will be for some, their preferred launcher. This is for a game that AB are directly involved in, so the comparisons to Steam really don't make sense.

 

[Aztechnology]

Wolfenstein gets my money, fun times for nazi's.

Never played New Order or old blood, picked it up during the sale for a few bucks each. Man is it good. Can't wait for the new one.

 

[Van Bur3n]

I know people with anime avatars have shit taste.

My man.

 

[AnathemicOne]

I said you're denying them access, which is what it would be. You're denying them the ability to access the game through, what will be for some, their preferred launcher. This is for a game that AB are directly involved in, so the comparisons to Steam really don't make sense.

The comparisons to Steam do make sense. Do you believe Activision won't use the precedent of managing Destiny 2 into BNet (whether or not Blizzard is agreeing to this or not) won't be used to shove more titles in of varying polish and/or quality? Destiny 2 being polished widley-acclaimed game would be continuing the pattern of Battle.Net dedicated for Blizzard - quality games as defined by the word would be fine and this isuee of mine (again, shared by others) need not exist. Destiny 2, however, in its current state is not something I can say lived up to that standard thus I protest it.

As for access on their preferred launcher, yeah I don't see anything wrong with that. That's my opinion, just like BioWare/EA barred access from ME3 and DA:I from Steam due to the launch of Origin. Yet players still get to play them.

People aren't up in arms for WoW not being on Steam nor are they up in arms for FFXIV for nor being on Battle.Net.

 

[Aztechnology]

Give me a freaking break. Destiny 2 is anything but mediocre. It's one of the best games of the year

There's too many great titles that came out this year, and recently, for me to say Destiny comes even close to the top of the list this year. I guess if we compare it to the other co-op focused shooters like Ghost Recon Wildlands then sure, it's one of the best of the year.

Not excited anymore. Probably not buying.

I'll eventually get a Destiny 2 Collection in a couple years.

The problem there is the raid and high end experiences are significantly lessened for it, unless you have a full group of friends just getting the game too. Otherwise groups just get kind of toxic later and fatigue has started to set in. I think it's better to pick it up now. Play through it while the Iron is hot and sell it. Then decide later if you want to re-pick it up again when the first expansion is out for pennies.

 

[XAL]

I really wish they'd stop fucking up the Hunter class.

After hearing about how the nighstalker is worse at CC'ing than arc strider I think I'm just going to play Titan and Warlock first.

 

[Sygma]

Key difference is Destiny has some of the best gunplay in existence.

Certainly not on pc man, wake up. Its call of duty levels of bland. No recoil and low skill cap, its almost as arcadey as Unreal Tournament except that the later actually ask for players to be good while playing it

Don't get me wrong I really like Destiny but the gunplay is overhyped / over appreciated. On console it's already too easy to do good with every single gun in the game of any category, on pc they just got rid off recoil for the most part. So in order to compensate for that on PC, they introduced some hardcore suppression in the crucible, just like in BF 3. Its all about who shoot first but its not exactly deep / skillful

 

[Aztechnology]

I really wish they'd stop fucking up the Hunter class.

After hearing about how the nighstalker is worse at CC'ing than arc strider I think I'm just going to play Titan and Warlock first.

I wouldn't say it's bad or anything, it has a kit that allows for a lot of survivability and utility. Spawns tons of orbs etc. Arc Strider is just amazing in PVE for clearing mobs because of the Raiden Flux. Without it the Night Stalker is probably as good. That's one of the big dissapointments for me too, as I said before. They have made exotics just extremely boring. They really do not change the way the classes play, and we've had our options for skill trees severely cut down. So before you could specialize and tweak at least somewhat to make your character work for you (Which I even thought was a little underwhelming in the first game, now it's just embarassing). Then Exotics helped to amplify the set you were already using. Now it's just generic energy gain across all but a few items basically. PVP balancing really did a number on PVE.

 

[Veldin]

I was, but given the impressions I've seen from PS4 players and the fact that I realized Warframe is really good, I can't say I'm interested in buying it anymore.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

Do you believe Activision won't use the precedent of managing Destiny 2 into BNet (whether or not Blizzard is agreeing to this or not) won't be used to shove more titles in of varying polish and/or quality?

Yes. Destiny is a AB franchise they're proud of. Why would you not expect it to go into the Battle.net launcher? Why does that predicate a sudden deluge of shit games that aren't owned by them appearing?

Destiny 2 being polished widley-acclaimed game would be continuing the pattern of Battle.Net dedicated for Blizzard - quality games as defined by the word would be fine and this isuee of mine (again, shared by others) need not exist. Destiny 2, however, in its current state is not something I can say lived up to that standard thus I protest it.

Not sure how Heroes of the Storm fits in here. It's a fun game but not in the tier of reverence or impact you seem to require for a game to be 'worthy' of its place on Battle.net.

 

[dengatron]

Destiny 2, however, in its current state is not something I can say lived up to that standard thus I protest it.

Thanks for your opinion. My opinion is I'm glad destiny 2 is coming to battle.net because now I get to play a game I was already going to buy, but instead I get it for wow gold and pay nothing.

Heroes of the storm before the 2.0 patch isn't something I'd agree lived up to blizzard's quality standards so it shouldn't have been on the battle.net launcher. No, I don't think activision is going to try to shoe-horn more games on to bnet, or they'd have done with with codww2. It's coming to b.net. Get over it.

 

[Aztechnology]

I was, but given the impressions I've seen from PS4 players and the fact that I realized Warframe is really good, I can't say I'm interested in buying it anymore.

Warframe as a loot based title, is a better game. I will conceded that. On top of that, it's F2P. It's somewhere between Destiny and Path Of Exile.

Oh I also haven't played like the last two expansions, so even then it was better. I'd be interested to see where it is now. But I'm waiting for the next big release.

 

[UrbanRats]

I'm gonna be honest, the Angry Joe review turned me off of it, at least at the full $60 price tag.

Same.
I'll wait for the inevitable "Taken-King-like" comprehensive expansion+base game combo.

 

[Won]

Impressions make it sound as if its really is as dull as the PC beta showcased.

And the business model makes it so that I probably won't even pick it up out of curiosity.

 

[AnathemicOne]

Yes. Destiny is a AB franchise they're proud of. Why would you not expect it to go into the Battle.net launcher? Why does that predicate a sudden deluge of shit games that aren't owned by them appearing?



Not sure how Heroes of the Storm fits in here. It's a fun game but not in the tier of reverence or impact you seem to require for a game to be 'worthy' of its place on Battle.net.

Because Activision hasn't shoved titles into BNet for a good 9 years? With that length of time is it hard to assume that the status quo would continue? A comfortable status quo I might add that BNet players had no issue with.

Regarding HotS, I still view it better that Destiny 2 alongside D3 for that matter, Blizzard's weaker fanchises, just due to the merit of attempt of Blizzard attempting to improve what was already done before, like they've always had. I can't say Destiny 2 has done anything similar to this judging from the amount that had changed from its predecessor.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

Because Activision hasn't shoved titles into BNet for a good 9 years? With that length of time is it hard to assume that the status quo would continue? A comfortable status quo I might add that BNet players had no issue with.

They have a new IP they're proud of. How would you not expect them to feature it on Battle.net? Your response doesn't seem to combat that itself. There's nothing "shoved" about it. It's a popular franchise they own, on their launcher.

I can't say Destiny 2 has done anything similar to this judging from the amount that had changed from its predecessor.

The most prevalent point from critics for D2 is how far it's come from its predecessor. It's literally the reason it's been scoring well.

 

[Alpha Phoenix]

Not excited anymore. Probably not buying.

I’ll eventually get a Destiny 2 Collection in a couple years.

While this is a valid choice for most games, I think with the type of game Destiny is, the earlier you start, the better. I regret my decision of starting D1 late. These games are built to be played from the get-go, and waiting two years will put you at a massive disadvantage compared to other players.

But it's your call, of course.

 

[AnathemicOne]

They have a new IP they're proud of. How would you not expect them to feature it on Battle.net? Your response doesn't seem to combat that itself. There's nothing "shoved" about it. It's a popular franchise they own, on their launcher.


The most prevalent point from critics for D2 is how far it's come from its predecessor. It's literally the reason it's been scoring well.

Because there was no precedent for it. Again ever since the Activision merger in 2008 Activision hasn't put a franchise of theirs on Battle.Net until now in 2017. Many prided franchises of Activision have been created in that time frame most notable Call of Duty with advent of Modern Warfare series.

Just because Bungie was acquired it was assumed their title would be on BNet? How so, hell the original Destiny wasn't even on BNet. Blizzard has had clout over their own games and platform ever since the merger, yeah I most likely assume Blizzard agreed, no I don't think it's a good idea.

And between critical acclaim and my own beta experiences, again, I see no iterative and/or innovative merit compared to what Blizzard does with their own franchises. "Fixing" a game is something to be done within the game's lifespan, not dedicated to a sequel.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

And between critical acclaim and my own beta experiences, again, I see no iterative and/or innovative merit compared to what Blizzard does with their own franchises. "Fixing" a game is something to be done within the game's lifespan, not dedicated to a sequel.

Yeh, because the only improvements to Destiny were reserved for the sequel. /s

You're having your cake and eating it. First complaining that there isn't enough difference between the first and the second, now saying there's too much.

 

[MechDX]

EDIT: wrong thread

 

[Strakt]

Because there was no precedent for it. Again ever since the Activision merger in 2008 Activision hasn't put a franchise of theirs on Battle.Net until now in 2017. Many prided franchises of Activision have been created in that time frame most notable Call of Duty with advent of Modern Warfare series.

Just because Bungie was acquired it was assumed their title would be on BNet? How so, hell the original Destiny wasn't even on BNet. Blizzard has had clout over their own games and platform ever since the merger, yeah I most likely assume Blizzard agreed, no I don't think it's a good idea.

And between critical acclaim and my own beta experiences, again, I see no iterative and/or innovative merit compared to what Blizzard does with their own franchises. "Fixing" a game is something to be done within the game's lifespan, not dedicated to a sequel.

Thats funny cause most critical acclaim says the game not only improves the flaws of the first, but adds more. Guess you just point your eyes to the few negative aspects.


Its gonna be on battle.net, move on with your life.

 

[NeOak]

wtf is with the "I don't like <non-blizzard> game is coming to Battle.net".

Man, that is some salt.

 

[AnathemicOne]

Yeh, because the only improvements to Destiny were reserved for the sequel. /s

You're having your cake and eating it. First complaining that there isn't enough difference between the first and the second, now saying there's too much.

What? I never argued the latter. I view Destiny 2 as a failure not living up to the potential advertised doubly so when compared to Blizzard titles. Where have I argued the differences between it and it's predecessor were too much? I want the game to be better before being on BNet, if not, then it need not be on it.

 

[LostDonkey]

Bought it on PS4...Originally I was going to wait for the PC version.

Probably won't be getting it on PC now.

 

[The ๖ۜBronx]

What? I never argued the latter. I view Destiny 2 as a failure not living up to the potential advertised doubly so when compared to Blizzard titles. Where have I argued the differences between it and it's predecessor were too much?

When you suggest that it has changed enough from the first that said changes should have been in the first game, and not dedicated to the sequel like you stated they were.

 

[KonradLaw]

Yeah. I don't have time for PvP games, but campaign and co-op seems cool from the open beta, so I will get it. Pretty much the only multiplayer games I play are co-op and this looks like the best pick for fall season this year.

 

[AnathemicOne]

When you suggest that it has changed enough from the first that said changes should have been in the first game, and not dedicated to the sequel like you suggested they were.

Yeah, improvements to the game should be done in the original game's lifespan, not the sequel. Let's take the core 3 franchises of Blizzard for comparison, because, yknow, Battle.Net.

SC:BW into SC2 was a complete overhaul in how the games play for better or worse. Personally enjoy the quality of life improvements such as mass unit selection and whatnot.

WC3:TFT into WoW was pretty much genre switching/evolution.

Each xpac of WoW overhauled the games mechanics, systems, etc. This shouldn't be explained due to virtue of the MMO genre.

Diablo 2 into D3 was a modernazation attempt from the early 2000 hit title, many things were changed for better or worse. RoS fixed many things but also brought new content worthy of a sequel such as Greater Rifts, new campaign, and continously free content patches. Do note that Loot 2.0 came out months prior to RoS release.

Has Destiny into Destiny 2 equate to any of the above in what it offers?

 

[jett]

My interest has come and gone.

 

[KonradLaw]

Has Destiny into Destiny 2 equate to any of the above in what it offers?

This would make sense if Destiny1 was on PC. As it's not there's really no point in discussing how much it improved or not from original from Battlenet user's perspective.

 

[AnathemicOne]

This would make sense if Destiny1 was on PC. As it's not there's really no point in discussing how much it improved or not from original from Battlenet user's perspective.

There is a point when Destiny 2 is being hosted on Battle.net, I expect Blizzard quality in terms of production, maintenance, and passion everytime I boot up that launcher as do many others. The predecessor doesn't exist in a vacuum thus comparisons are inevitable. Also note both D3 and D3:RoS were present in the console space.