Support NeoGAF

[BreezyLimbo]

I think people are forgetting that Vanilla destiny launched in a very basic, incomplete form.

So yeah when you compare D2 to D1s base, it looks like a sequel. But if anything, its just a full sized expansion.

 

[SeanR1221]

I'll get it and play it a ton but it definitely looks like a large expansion.

I legit rolled my eyes when the new hunter class looked like blade dancer, but now with a staff!

 

[Horp]

0_0 This argument is so flawed I'm actually stunned.

You know when someone says something "is fine" or "is good" it's implied that is an opinion, right?

Unless you think people can only say something is good or fine if it's empirically true. Which is impossible.

This is English 101 stuff.

Ok you clearly don't understand what I'm saying. If someone gives an -argument- regarding a matter, and you reply with "no it's fine", what you are saying is that their argument isn't valid, things are fine. Not: I'm personally ok with it though.
That fact that you can't grasp this simple concept baffles me. This is how argumentation works. Imagine a debate where a candidate replies to an argument regarding a specific problem with the economy by saying "no it's fine"; and then when pressured he says "no actually I don't disagree, I was just giving my opinion that I'm personally ok with this problem in the economy. Geez man, why am I explaning this...

 

[Twilight Gap]

Fuck 4v4 TBH. Hate it in Halo, and it wasn't particularly interesting in Destiny outside of the occasional Clash game

But I guarantee they shrunk the size for 3 reasons:

1. Universal playercount to design maps for, instead of falling into the typical Bungie pitfall of designing maps that are supposed to play everything

2. Less chaos to manage because it looks like every super is a roaming super now

3. Slower pace of play means maps can be larger and not feel empty

Hope it's as fun as D1 was on launch, and better than it was afterwards. Those regen fields and barriers have me concerned though.

Speaking of maps, for all the cute visuals on Midtown, it's a damn shame it's such a generic 3 lane map.

 

[Brohan]

I really don't understand the 4vs4 for pvp either. If they thought supers and grenades and such would become too chaotic or unbalanced with higher player counts then why not simply turn off the supers for the bigger pvp modes? Or have the supers become available via a pick-up (grenades aswell) like overshield or cloak in Halo.

The fixes seem so easy.

 

[jdstorm]

Your comment is super frustrating because youre angry people aren't angry about the state of Destiny 2... without offering what it should have been instead.

Like what did you expect from a sequel to Destiny that they havent addressed yet?

Complaints about Vanilla Destiny:
- lack of any interesting campaign (they addressed it)
- lack of characters or a story (they addressed it)
- lack of anything meaningful to do in the environments (they addressed it)
- lack of any diversity in encounters (they addressed it)
- lack of matchmaking for end game activities (they addressed it)
- lack of social features (they addressed it)
- loot and "the grind" are unforgiving (they fixed this a long time ago, and its only gotten better)

Praise for Vanilla Destiny:
- movement and gunplay are awesome (they kept it)
- enemies and art direction are awesome (they kept them)
- raids are really cool (they kept them)
- music is really good (they fired Marty, lol)

I try really hard not to tip over into Bungie apologist mode, but a ton of people have this sense of what Destiny *should* be and how they know better than Bungie does. Meanwhile Bungie is playing the game they made alongside the people who do like it, and addressing a lot of the totally valid criticism they got.

What are they delivering at the expense of? What are they doing wrong?

Failing to capture the imagination of players who dont like Destiny.

Destiny 1 felt fresh and new, it was promised as an epic scifi adventure that combined what players loved about Halo, Mass Effect, and Borderlands into an epic MMO Lite game (Destiny likes really need their own genre. As not a full MMO's it should be a ?MO RPG)

For everything Bungie has improved upon, their current trajectory doesnt capture that sense of wonder that most felt with Destiny 1. Now if that is deserved or not is realistically too early to tell. The new Strike looked really cool, and it could just be mainstream marketing (something that typically doesnt go over too well on GAF) that is keeping some pesemistic.

How does Destiny get that back? No idea. Until we as players have seen Destiny 2 we cant really comment on what changes we would like to see*, and even then there probably wont be a consensus.**

Rightly or wrongly Destiny is a game that is graded not against other games, but against its players/and Non players idea of its own potential. Which is somewhat ludicrous.

*

Spoiler

Except the obligatory Switch port begging that will never happen on its current hardware due to Destiny being CPU limited and the Switch having a CPU thats inferior to the PS4/XB1

** Except Space Battles. That will probably never die down.

 

[yanipheonu]

Ok you clearly don't understand what I'm saying. If someone gives an -argument- regarding a matter, and you reply with "no it's fine", what you are saying is that their argument isn't valid, things are fine. Not: I'm personally ok with it though.
That fact that you can't grasp this simple concept baffles me. This is how argumentation works. Imagine a debate where a candidate replies to an argument regarding a specific problem with the economy by saying "no it's fine"; and then when pressured he says "no actually I don't disagree, I was just giving my opinion that I'm personally ok with this problem in the economy. Geez man, why am I explaning this...

You're poorly arguing about arguments to an English Major. This is genuinely foolish.

Is it even possible I don't understand what you're saying because it's written poorly? Even what I'm quoting doesn't make any real sense. I genuinely don't know what you're trying to argue.

Maybe calm down and read more books.

 

[border]

Are there really going to be ONLY 4v4 modes? That doesn't seem very interesting for modes like Control, Zone Control, Rift, or Mayhem.

 

[Brohan]

Are there really going to be ONLY 4v4 modes? That doesn't seem very interesting for modes like Control, Zone Control, Rift, or Mayhem.

Yeah those game types seem alot more fun to play with bigger teams.

Another problem i can think of with 4vs4 is that having a bad player(s) in your team will make alot bigger impact than if there is one in a game with bigger teams and as such i can only imagine how toxic players are gonna go apeshit on bad/casual players.

 

[ZeoVGM]

Are there really going to be ONLY 4v4 modes? That doesn't seem very interesting for modes like Control, Zone Control, Rift, or Mayhem.

Yeah, i'm a bit worried how it will work with Control but we'll see.

 

[Atilac]

Anyone else point out that the bosses are still bullet sponges?

 

[HiredN00bs]

Are there really going to be ONLY 4v4 modes? That doesn't seem very interesting for modes like Control, Zone Control, Rift, or Mayhem.

I don't think they're necessarily going to bring over every mode. Modes and maps will be tailored to the 4v4 format. Gonna miss Rumble, but I like the idea of having fewer playlists for a better matchmaking pool. It should improve match quality substantially.

 

[Vanadium]

People have been unrealistic about Destiny since before the Alpha. I wasn't really moved by anything I saw, but that is more down to me. According to Wasted on Destiny, I put nearly 1,927 hours in over both PS4 and XBO. That's not a trivial amount for any game. A similar thing happened after COD: MW2. After putting in ridiculous multiplayer hours over MW and MW2, I never went back to COD for more than a few hours. I'm just sort of done, but I do hope it succeeds. In Destiny, I solo'd Crota as a 32. Went to the lighthouse a few times, beat everything on HM and completed every challenge. Even maxed rank IB in the first two grind tests back in year one. Destiny 2 looks good, and I'll go back eventually, but I can't muster the effort and I can't spare the time these days.

 

[Dynasty8]

I see much hatred for this game it just makes me roll my eyes. Criticize the game, but please be realistic about it.

All sequels are the same shit nowadays whether you want to believe it or not. People are defending Gears of War and Uncharted as being "true sequels" is seriously hysterical.


Gears 1 and Gears 2...loved them both, but the game remained very similar to the first (as it should).
Uncharted series as well, loved them all...but Uncharted 3 felt just like a nicer looking version of Uncharted 2 with a new story. Nothing wrong with that either.

People want sequels in order to relive that experience that made the original so fun...to explore new worlds, see returning characters, with that new story attached. New things DO get added for each of these games, but under it all, those games I just mentioned could have also been just "expansions" as you guys are making it out to be.

It's a $60 game that comes with optional DLC just like almost every other triple A game today...only difference for me is that it provides much better gameplay than 90% of other games out there and MUCH more longevity.

 

[veloxStrix]

Unsustainable reinventing the wheel....Like where in this thread did anyone call for reinventing the wheel, please show me. Asking for innovation is not asking for reinventing the wheel and calling that a model that is not sustainable is laughable. Again, point me to where all these posts are asking for destiny to become a totally different game. Because Most people haven't done that, theyve asked for more innovation.

Strawman, the fact you pulled the definition and failed to understand how its applied to a game no one is talking about is beyond me. No one was saying every sequel to every game innovates or reinvents the wheel, which is where the strawman came from. Hes asserting that because some sequels don't also do much to add innovation, that its ok for destiny, but no one was saying that was the case or making that argument to begin with. Hes knocking down an argument no one was having.

What is this thread about?

 

[Sullichin]

I don't think they're necessarily going to bring over every mode. Modes and maps will be tailored to the 4v4 format. Gonna miss Rumble, but I like the idea of having fewer playlists for a better matchmaking pool. It should improve match quality substantially.

Did they confirm there won't be a rumble mode? What a strange thing to leave out

 

[Robdraggoo]

Same as The Taken King dlc features list.

This is absurd and borderline insulting.

 

[yanipheonu]

What is this thread about?

I think it's devolved into a naked revelation of some gaffers' poor comprehension of the English language. It's actually kinda fascinating.

If it gets any worse though, it might be time to move on...

 

[Zakalwe]

This is absurd and borderline insulting.

There's quite a bit more to it than TTK provided.

Here.

 

[Robdraggoo]

There's quite a bit more to it than TTK provided.

Here.

Why you telling me. I know lol

 

[Zakalwe]

Why you telling me. I know lol

Quoted the wrong person. I think I should have stopped a while ago...

 

[border]

Uncharted series as well, loved them all...but Uncharted 3 felt just like a nicer looking version of Uncharted 2 with a new story. Nothing wrong with that either.

But each new Uncharted has like, more spectacle or something!

 

[Spirit of Jazz]

Really wish we got 3 new classes and 3 new enemy races as opposed to none. Dedicated servers would have done a lot to sell me on it too.

 

[Robdraggoo]

Really wish we got 3 new classes and 3 new enemy races as opposed to none. Dedicated servers would have done a lot to sell me on it too.

We don't know we didn't get new enemies races. They only showed vex and cabal. We didn't see a lot of things.
And they also showed several new class of cabal. The double blade ones, the dogs and others.
3 new subclasses is nice.

 

[geordiemp]

All sequels are the same shit nowadays whether you want to believe it or not. People are defending Gears of War and Uncharted as being "true sequels" is seriously hysterical.
.

Indeed, any post that says its just an expansion but then praises gears 10, Uncharted 5 or mart kart 11 is beyond hypocritical.

Yeah I made fun of the numbers, it makes a point.

Everybody does iterative sequels so why point at bungie ?

However, I cant forgive P2P for multiplayer, had so many laggers, red bar warriors, lag switchers, gave up on the multiplayer that favours shit connections a long time ago, Bungie should be ashamed.

 

[TalentBurke]

Big Destiny fan here but yeah this shit does look like it could have been DLC. Preordered though...

 

[jviggy43]

What is this thread about?

Its entirely possible, that people want Destiny to evolve and innovate, because it would be good for the game in and of itself distinct from what other games and sequels are doing. To the post I quoted, he took "innovation", turned into "reinventing the wheel", and then used an example of pokemon to knock down the idea that destiny should innovate because pokemon doesn't really innovate. Strawman, through and through.

I think it's devolved into a naked revelation of some gaffers' poor comprehension of the English language. It's actually kinda fascinating.

If it gets any worse though, it might be time to move on...

I'm sorry, says the poster that took "innovation" to mean "reinventing the wheel".......

 

[Future]

It looks dlc ish cuz nothing is changing the game so dramatically that if:

- you weren't into the first, you'll be into the second
- if you pumped 1000 hours into the first and got kinda burned out, this will bring ya back

Ill pick it up for sure but I am in the second crowd. After the third dlc I kinda fizzled out of destiny before. And right now gaining XP to slowly be able to throw a knife again in an XP tree is not so exciting I'll admit.

 

[Ivory Samoan]

Failing to capture the imagination of players who dont like Destiny.

See, this is where I think this sequel is being viewed wrong: this isn't an apology for those that didn't like vanilla D1 and never played TTK et al, this seems to be a love letter to those that are current players (of which there are many) and semi-recent players (of which there are masses).

I see a lot of people stating how it should be completely different to D1 in every way, but a whole lot of Destiny players didn't want revolution like that, just evolution...which is what D2 seems to be in a great way.

 

[whalleywhat]

See, this is where I think this sequel is being viewed wrong: this isn't an apology for those that didn't like vanilla D1 and never played TTK et al, this seems to be a love letter to those that are current players (of which there are many) and semi-recent players (of which there are masses).

I see a lot of people stating how it should be completely different to D1 in every way, but a whole lot of Destiny players didn't want revolution like that, just evolution...which is what D2 seems to be in a great way.

Seeing as their entire rationale for starting over with a new game when that wasn't their original plan at all was that major changes were needed which wouldn't be possible within the framework of Destiny 1, this isn't enough. People who were happy with Destiny 1 would've continued to buy the expansions.

 

[Ivory Samoan]

Seeing as their entire rationale for starting over with a new game when that wasn't their original plan at all was that major changes were needed which wouldn't be possible within the framework of Destiny 1, this isn't enough. People who were happy with Destiny 1 would've continued to buy the expansions.

Nah, as long time player (since Alpha) I was down for a revamp/slate wipe: no more expansions thanks.

The game looks to introduce so many new features and cool things to do....I just don't see how it's not $60 worthy if nothing else than a monetary value for money thing.

 

[veloxStrix]

Its entirely possible, that people want Destiny to evolve and innovate, because it would be good for the game in and of itself distinct from what other games and sequels are doing. To the post I quoted, he took "innovation", turned into "reinventing the wheel", and then used an example of pokemon to knock down the idea that destiny should innovate because pokemon doesn't really innovate. Strawman, through and through.

I think that's actually called "supporting evidence" and it is impossible to build an argument without it.

He says

I love Pokemon, but I won't pretend that isn't the same game every time. Sometimes it's okay if things don't vastly change.

You don't have to refute anything. You don't have to beat the strawman to try and argue his point. A strawman would be:

Destiny's lack of innovation is the same as the Pokemon series. Are you claiming the Pokemon series is all DLC?

It becomes a strawman when he misconstrues the initial argument. But he isn't. He's using Pokemon as an example of a game that doesn't innovate traditionally. As evidence.

Anime avatars man

Girls wearing bandana scarf avatars, man. Wants to talk shit but can't think past his arse to actually say something. lol.

 

[RefigeKru]

Anime avatars man

Not you brohan, that's manga

 

[RefigeKru]

I think that's actually called "supporting evidence" and it is impossible to build an argument without it.

He says


You don't have to refute anything. You don't have to beat the strawman to try and argue his point. A strawman would be:



It becomes a strawman when he misconstrues the initial argument. But he isn't. He's using Pokemon as an example of a game that doesn't innovate traditionally. As evidence.



Girls wearing bandana scarf avatars, man. Wants to talk shit but can't think past his arse to actually say something. lol.

Okay.

Reading the last page, I somehow managed to understand where both yanipheonu and jviggy43 were coming from, I even somehow managed to understand the intent of post 879, magically, if you're nice I'll explain it to you. I was just trying to point out that both posters with Anime avatars are a tad off topic here and also acting a bit rude but thanks but making that clear for everyone to see.

It's the condescension I can't stand.

 

[veloxStrix]

Okay.

I was just trying to point out that both posters with Anime avatars are a tad off topic here

Anime avatars man

and also acting a bit rude but thanks but making that clear for everyone to see.

Anime avatars man

It's the condescension I can't stand.

I even somehow managed to understand the intent of post 879, magically, if you're nice I'll explain it to you.

You really chose the right rebuttal, huh. No one was really off-topic since the topic of the thread is "To the Destiny 2 looks like DLC crowd. Why?" Which implies there will be both people talking about why they think the game looks like DLC and also discussion over those opinions. That "discussion" part is the what was going on, until someone arbitrarily decides to throw out a casual insult into the mix with no real argument or point whatsover. Like, if you have a point, make it. The whole "anime avatars man" line would be like going "Oh, well your shirts green" in the middle of a political debate. What the hell does it mean?

 

[RefigeKru]

You really chose the right rebuttal, huh.

I watch Anime just so you know, yet there has been a recurring theme of awful posters here donning anime avatars and I finally understood, so I thought it a light enough jibe. Honestly there's been a lot of shit Destiny 2 conversation already, I just found yours to be unnecessarily caustic.

Agreed?

Anime avatar was a joke to break the ice...... Going great.

 

[KiraXD]

As long as they arent cuting out half the game to sell to us later as DLC again im fine.

But honestly how can people justify going over to Destiny 2 Vanilla, if it has less content than Destiny 1 complete?

The only way i would consider Destiny 2 launch day is if it had more content than the entire Destiny 1 + DLC

 

[border]

But honestly how can people justify going over to Destiny 2 Vanilla, if it has less content than Destiny 1 complete?

Presumably because most of the player base will shift over to Destiny 2, leaning Destiny 1 players without many people to group with.

I mean, if you haven't played Destiny 1 at all, maybe there's a case to be made that there is more content there. But if you're stuck playing by yourself, you'll burn through all the single-player content pretty quickly. Getting into Strikes and Raids will probably be a hassle.

If you played Destiny 1 beyond the Vanilla content though, I'm not sure why you would want to stay engaged with the last-generation version of the game.

 

[jdstorm]

See, this is where I think this sequel is being viewed wrong: this isn't an apology for those that didn't like vanilla D1 and never played TTK et al, this seems to be a love letter to those that are current players (of which there are many) and semi-recent players (of which there are masses).

I see a lot of people stating how it should be completely different to D1 in every way, but a whole lot of Destiny players didn't want revolution like that, just evolution...which is what D2 seems to be in a great way.

I tend to agree with that. That has certainly reflected all through D2's marketing. As far as the actual game goes, we still have very little idea about what has or hasnt changed. At the presentation Bungie mentioned Dungeons, Bosses and NPC quests as footnotes. Then quickly got back to the message of talking about new Strikes, Loot, Cutscenes, Guided Games and other endgame content that Hardcore Destiny players really care about.

At some point we will see more of the changes that feel new (Probably E3) but for now i'm not worried.

 

[MassiveNights]

Ultimately the perception problem boils down to calling it Destiny 2. I think people were expecting a new structure, expanded scope, enemies, game modes - across single player, co-op and multi, classes and such.

That's what I would traditionally expect from a sequel.

Sure there are sequels that are basically the first game but tweaked slightly, but this is Bungie and a top-tier franchise and it would have been nice to have seen more ambition after the decidedly underwhelming package that was Destiny 1.

Perhaps these things will come to fruition, but right now the first impressions are very much unimpressive for me personally.

 

[jviggy43]

I think that's actually called "supporting evidence" and it is impossible to build an argument without it.

He says


You don't have to refute anything. You don't have to beat the strawman to try and argue his point. A strawman would be:



It becomes a strawman when he misconstrues the initial argument. But he isn't. He's using Pokemon as an example of a game that doesn't innovate traditionally. As evidence.



Girls wearing bandana scarf avatars, man. Wants to talk shit but can't think past his arse to actually say something. lol.

At no point in the post that he originally quoted, did anyone say that destiny had to do anything with the sequel due to the criteria of any other series. It was a self contained, why would desinty not innovate for the good of destiny in and of itself? Not "why doesn't destiny innovate like other sequels?".

You say evidence, I say, he used an example he could beat down in order to argue that not every sequel needs to innovate when the post he responded to never ever said anything about innovation based upon a set of sequel criteria related to anything other than destiny itself. His "evidence" had nothing to do with that posters argument, a very specific and tailored example that fit his strawman which 1. neglected the original post in question and 2. neglected and ignored all the sequels that do innovate- of which again, was really besides the point here.

Now had that poster said "Well Mass Effect 2 innovated so all sequels should innovate", then he could respond with "Pokemon doesn't innovate and people don't complain" and that would be a case of using this example as evidence. As it stands, the original post never made mention of Destiny having to innovate because of other games.

 

[Horp]

You're poorly arguing about arguments to an English Major. This is genuinely foolish.

Is it even possible I don't understand what you're saying because it's written poorly? Even what I'm quoting doesn't make any real sense. I genuinely don't know what you're trying to argue.

Maybe calm down and read more books.

Hehe, nice here come the old "I dont get it / I have no more arguments so I'll just throw some unverifiable education at you". I know, though, I'm often tempted to do the same. I mean why else did I spend all those years at uni?
But seriously, this isn't english, this is debate.

 

[Pepboy]

Your comment is super frustrating because youre angry people aren't angry about the state of Destiny 2... without offering what it should have been instead.

Like what did you expect from a sequel to Destiny that they havent addressed yet?

Easy to answer. For a $60 game, I expect a game that I can play through once and enjoy, and feel like I got $60 of value or enjoyment out of it.

Destiny 2 seems very similar to Destiny 1, or maybe an extension of TTK (which also had 3 new subclasses and other tweaks). Thankfully I only paid $15 for D1, because I'm not sure it's worth even that.

The question is whether there is enough content for someone to enjoy it. A lot of people don't like replaying missions. A lot of people don't get excited by loot grinds or shiny drops. You might say "Well those people were never supposed to enjoy Destiny" -- and you're right. They bought Destiny because Bungie was pretty unclear about what Destiny was (not surprising, they were still figuring it out themselves up to release date).

But I thought Destiny 2 might be able to satisfy both "one-time players" and "grinders". Maybe they got the content issues squared by using a new engine. Turns out it looks far more likely to only satisfy those who enjoy grinding. If you only play each mission once and a few strikes, MAYBE a raid one time, Destiny 2 seems likely to end up in the same zone as Destiny 1 -- 5 to 15 hours, depending on how much loading and running from point A to point B there is (within missions or within hub world).

So I would have liked to see something more like 25-35 hours of single-playthrough content, with relatively little fluff. And of that single-pass content, maybe not have you repeat the same maps from different spawn points 70% of the time. That would be the bare minimum for me to ever consider spending $60 on Destiny 2. The market has also changed a lot from 2014, so I'm curious how it will all shake out.

 

[border]

If you only play each mission once and a few strikes, MAYBE a raid one time, Destiny 2 seems likely to end up in the same zone as Destiny 1 -- 5 to 15 hours, depending on how much loading and running from point A to point B there is (within missions or within hub world).

I'm a little confused as to how people can estimate the amount of playtime Destiny 2 offers, based on the scant and vague offerings of a single press conference. You really think that the campaign + strikes + raid is only going to be 5 hours in total?

 

[Pepboy]

I'm a little confused as to how people can estimate the amount of playtime Destiny 2 offers, based on the scant and vague offerings of a single press conference. You really think that the campaign + strikes + raid is only going to be 5 hours in total?

If I exclude loading times, time spent running around to find the next quest giver, and being forced to replay missions to get to the next story quest, I think 5 hours is fair but on the low end for Destiny 1. 20 min per mission, 15 or so missions.

I put about 10-12 hours in and was about 2/3rds through, but a big chunk of that was wasted on the stuff above.

But perhaps I should have been more clear and said 8 hours instead of 5. Maybe 8-12 is a better estimate.

 

[jviggy43]

Ehhh if you go into a raid blind (which I reccomend) it can take a few hours alone. If in destiny 2 you can run past the majority of encounters in regular missions and strikes you could cut down on the time but really, even a cycnical destiny fan, 5-8 hours is stretching it.

 

[Donthizz#]

no new classes in destiny 2 bums me out.

 

[Aztechnology]

no new classes in destiny 2 bums me out.

Yea... And alot of the classes have near identical subclasses. At least add another subclass or maybe a few if not an entirely new class. Just... We need some more things to differentiate it from D1. I see there might be a weapon mod slot which is cool. There's gear that from feedback seem to be more or less what we got before with minor ability changing effects. But we need more variation across the board.

 

[Hoo-doo]

A lot of the things that are 'new' in Destiny 2 were delivered via DLC packs in the original game. You'd expect more from a full-blown sequel.

For one, the level cap staying at 20 and no new classes is just a big bummer. This game has a lot more potential.

 

[Liliana Eileen]

This game could easily be DLC. It's so sad to see Bungie and Activision seeing giant dollar signs and people lapping it up. Bungie really sold themselves out; only company that could be worse than Activision is maybe EA.