Support NeoGAF

[SEGAvangelist]

Oh, you mean that I can buy stuff from Xür with them?

Yup. Exotic engrams this last weekend I believe.

 

[crazygambit]

My first post here...so here we go.

I really hate it when people talk about Titanfall and Destiny in the same sentence.

Everyone says the game is bad because it doesn’t have "enough content" yet those same people complain about "Bloat" in games and say that they have too many weapons that are the same, to many gimmicks, etc. Titanfall is all about the gameplay just like the Halo, Quake, Doom, Tribes, CS, etc. You don't see people lamenting that CS only has a few weapons now do you? That's because the gameplay is fucking good.


Respawn made the game with 64 employee’s (standard dev team has 200+ people), under constant stress from the Activision lawsuit, and literally ran out out money halfway through development, and still ended up creating a game that sold millions. They had to scrap a lot of things to even get the game shipped. If they'd had more money and less pressure from activision they'd have had a lot more modes and even a single player but they had to scrap it. http://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/17/behind-the-scenes-final-hours-of-titanfall-app-now-available/


Bungie never had any issue with money, at all. They have over 500 employee’s, they didn't have to deal with a lawsuit, they didn't have to convince people that their company could make good games, they didn't have any issue that the Respawn guys had. What’s their excuse for not having custom games and everything else? What' their excuse for empty worlds? Piss poor social features?

And you know what else? There’s not a single thing Respawn ever said that misrepresented their game. They never mislead people about what was in it or what the game was about at any point. It was always a multiplayer game with some game mode that had people talking. They never said their story would be compared to star wars.

So when Titanfall got amazing scores, it got them because it did everything it set out to do. Destiny got average scores because it didn't.

Not my problem. I couldn't care less about how much it cost or what difficulties they had during development. Completely irrelevant. What's relevant is the amount of content I'm getting for my money. They are both $60, so they're perfectly comparable. If you charge $10 or $20 you get some slack, but if you decide to under-staff your studio, don't come crying back to me later.

Preach. The comparisons to other games are so asinine. As if Candy Crush should somehow be penalized for having less "ambition" than Destiny. Well, helllllllo, they're two entirely different games with different objectives. This is about execution. Maybe people keep using Titanfall because it's a shooter? Idk. Oh, and welcome.

Well, one of them is free.

 

[Etnos]

My first post here...so here we go.

I really hate it when people talk about Titanfall and Destiny in the same sentence.

Everyone says the game is bad because it doesn’t have "enough content" yet those same people complain about "Bloat" in games and say that they have too many weapons that are the same, to many gimmicks, etc. Titanfall is all about the gameplay just like the Halo, Quake, Doom, Tribes, CS, etc. You don't see people lamenting that CS only has a few weapons now do you? That's because the gameplay is fucking good.


Respawn made the game with 64 employee’s (standard dev team has 200+ people), under constant stress from the Activision lawsuit, and literally ran out out money halfway through development, and still ended up creating a game that sold millions. They had to scrap a lot of things to even get the game shipped. If they'd had more money and less pressure from activision they'd have had a lot more modes and even a single player but they had to scrap it. http://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/17/behind-the-scenes-final-hours-of-titanfall-app-now-available/


Bungie never had any issue with money, at all. They have over 500 employee’s, they didn't have to deal with a lawsuit, they didn't have to convince people that their company could make good games, they didn't have any issue that the Respawn guys had. What’s their excuse for not having custom games and everything else? What' their excuse for empty worlds? Piss poor social features?

And you know what else? There’s not a single thing Respawn ever said that misrepresented their game. They never mislead people about what was in it or what the game was about at any point. It was always a multiplayer game with some game mode that had people talking. They never said their story would be compared to star wars.

So when Titanfall got amazing scores, it got them because it did everything it set out to do. Destiny got average scores because it didn't.

This is much truth, Respawn did a lot with less while Bungie well.. Bungie did Destiny. However, not sure if any of this matters in the consumer side, speaking for myself I put arround 250 hours in Titanfall, so I guess I got my 60 well worth.

 

[Tegernako]

This is much truth, Respawn did a lot with less while Bungie well.. Bungie did Destiny. However, not sure if any of this matters in the consumer side, speaking for myself I put around 250 hours in Titanfall, so I guess I got my 60 well worth.

I just think it's worth noticing the difference in support the two games got yet the main complaint for both is a lack of content, only difference being Bungie had every opportunity to make that issue a non issue and Respawn didn't really have that chance.

As a consumer? Not at all.

The price is exactly what sets them up for direct comparisons. If buyers are expected to lower their expectations the price should reflect that.

Huh, didn't think about it that way.

Not my problem. I couldn't care less about how much it cost or what difficulties they had during development. Completely irrelevant. What's relevant is the amount of content I'm getting for my money. They are both $60, so they're perfectly comparable. If you charge $10 or $20 you get some slack, but if you decide to under-staff your studio, don't come crying back to me later.

Understaffed? What part of not a lot of funding was not included in my post? You can't hire lots of people without funding or money. And that wasn't even the main point of my post, the main point was that Bungie made a game that had a TON of money to tossed at, without years long lawsuit threatening them, and still came up with a game people are calling empty and repetitive.

I was thinking more you base a game on its own merits, not because they share the same price you know?

 

[NullPointer]

And no, they aren't perfectly comparable. You base a game on its own merits, not because they share the same price.

As a consumer? Not at all.

The price is exactly what sets them up for direct comparisons. If buyers are expected to lower their expectations the price should reflect that.

 

[Patroclos]

He's basically GAF incarnate, imo

I find that opinion very insulting. I didn't care much for his schtick before but the abused spouse joke was tasteless and disgusting at the best of times and even more so with the recent focus on domestic abuse in the US.

 

[gatti-man]

That Kotaku review reads more like a loot cave addict's confession.

And yeah, I guess that's an appropriate frame.

You'll never see me farming - if a game reaches the point where I feel compelled to do something like that then the game has entirely worn out its welcome. At that point the end-game really does mean where the game ends.

Totally agree. I dont feel worn out of destiny and i dont even see the need to grind like that since the only real competitive thing (the iron banner) isnt even open yet.

 

[Etnos]

I just think it's worth noticing the difference in support the two games got yet the main complaint for both is a lack of content, only difference being Bungie had every opportunity to make that issue a non issue and Respawn didn't really have that chance.

And you know, I still think Destiny is a good game. A very flawed one but a good game in the end. I just don't think you can compare them on that level, in other area's like PvP and balance, sure but not when talking about content as they are different species really.

Yeah I agree that comparing them on $ price tag basis is pointless. I do think it is an interesting comparision from a design stand point, Titanfall set to do few things really well and exploited that as much as they could, While Destiny seems like a bloated mess of contradictory ideas stiched together, I'm not the first one saying this: feels like Bungie didn't know what game they wanted to make, which is exactly the oposite felling I get from the ultra focus Titanfall.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

You know you fucked up when people would rather shoot at enemies coming out of a hole in a wall than do the specially-designed missions to get loot.

I love that Kotaku aticle - really does sum up what the game does so gloriously well but also what it messes up. Still having a good time, though, despite the faults.

 

[TemplaerDude]

Not my problem. I couldn't care less about how much it cost or what difficulties they had during development. Completely irrelevant. What's relevant is the amount of content I'm getting for my money. They are both $60, so they're perfectly comparable. If you charge $10 or $20 you get some slack, but if you decide to under-staff your studio, don't come crying back to me later.



Well, one of them is free.

Ignorant tripe. How posts like this get made on this forum of all forums blows my mind.

 

[aravuus]

I find that opinion very insulting. I didn't care much for his schtick before but the abused spouse joke was tasteless and disgusting at the best of times and even more so with the recent focus on domestic abuse in the US.

Umm

e: oh nevermind

 

[Patroclos]

And comparatively, Respawned promised much less compared to Bungie and Destiny

Respawn promised to forever change the face of shooters. Have you seen Titanfall? The only thing Titanfall changed about the course of FPS was to get call of dooty to copy them before the game was even proven to be successful. Now we have another mech suit shooter coming when it sort of seems like nobody was really all that stoked for long about the first one.

Main point; I think hype/excitement/promise levels were super high for both games. Respawn may have promised slightly less but Bungie delivered WAY more of a complete game than Titanfall.

 

[Anton Sugar]

What's relevant is the amount of content I'm getting for my money. They are both $60, so they're perfectly comparable. If you charge $10 or $20 you get some slack, but if you decide to under-staff your studio, don't come crying back to me later.

So we're judging games based solely on the amount of content in proportion to the amount of money spent?

That's a very flawed formula for assessing value. How does Destiny compare to Skyrim, The Witcher 2, or even Borderlands 2?

 

[Etnos]

Respawn promised to forever change the face of shooters.

No they didn't get your fact straigh or link to the evidence.

 

[TheOddOne]

Respawn promised to forever change the face of shooters. Have you seen Titanfall? The only thing Titanfall changed about the course of FPS was to get call of dooty to copy them before the game was even proven to be successful. Now we have another mech suit shooter coming when it sort of seems like nobody was really all that stoked for long about the first one.

Main point; I think hype/excitement/promise levels were super high for both games. Respawn may have promised slightly less but Bungie delivered WAY more of a complete game than Titanfall.

They did? When?

 

[breakfuss]

I would have put a "Maybe" or "Wait" on their one-word review thing, considering the amount of negatives they cited and that their review is likely for more skeptical people who waited for the impressions anyway.

Oh, heh, I wasn't aware they had another option. Sucks an otherwise terrific review won't become part of the aggregate. Their reasoning is noble but just as equally insulting. I'd like to think people are sophisticated enough not to simply glance at a score and write a game off. But metacritic, rottentomatoes etc are great resources IMO. Hell, I've discovered things there, Ghost Trick being the most recent.

Well, one of them is free.

How is that relevant? My point is that one achieved what it set out to do, the other did not.

 

[Nicko]

Kotaku posted a new review

http://kotaku.com/destiny-the-kotaku-review-1637735501

This is the best review I have read as well. Accurately describes the same feelings of pull and push that I have experienced. Such an amazing framework, yet so many glaring holes that pull you away from the experience. This is seriously the first game I have both thoroughly enjoyed and frustratingly opposed at the same time. Destiny truly is an experience of it's own. I think it's fun in it's own right to just be a part of the conversation, and experience the game myself. Glaring omissions/design decisions aside, the experience as a whole has been an adventure, and i'm excited to see where it takes me next.

Bring on the patches Bungie! I can't wait

 

[Synth]

Respawn promised to forever change the face of shooters. Have you seen Titanfall? The only thing Titanfall changed about the course of FPS was to get call of dooty to copy them before the game was even proven to be successful. Now we have another mech suit shooter coming when it sort of seems like nobody was really all that stoked for long about the first one.

Main point; I think hype/excitement/promise levels were super high for both games. Respawn may have promised slightly less but Bungie delivered WAY more of a complete game than Titanfall.

Gonna disagree on the whole "delivered a more complete game" stuff. A complete game isn't something that's simply larger. A complete game is a game where it doesn't feel like tons a shit has been cut the fuck out. Titanfall feels like a small complete arena shooter. Destiny feels like "it's a shame some of the reviews came even when we're just getting started!!!".

Also, getting Call of fucking Duty to copy you means you probably have somewhat changed the face of shooters.

 

[rac]

.
Everyone says the game is bad because it doesn’t have "enough content" yet those same people complain about "Bloat" in games and say that they have too many weapons that are the same, to many gimmicks, etc. Titanfall is all about the gameplay just like the Halo, Quake, Doom, Tribes, CS, etc. You don't see people lamenting that CS only has a few weapons now do you? That's because the gameplay is fucking good.

CS is also only $15.

 

[aravuus]

Respawn may have promised slightly less but Bungie delivered WAY more of a complete game than Titanfall.

Nope and nope

Bungie promised far more than Respawn ever did. And TF is one of the most complete multiplayer experiences I've had in a while because it was so well done. More content doesn't mean it's more of a complete game.

 

[Synth]

CS is also only $15.

And Warframe is F2P. What's your point?

 

[Brashnir]

That Kotaku review reads like the diary of a gambling addict.

 

[NullPointer]

And Warframe is F2P. What's your point?

Price matters when setting expectations. Its not the only factor, but I'd think it's probably the largest one for most.

 

[Patroclos]

And you know what else? There’s not a single thing Respawn ever said that misrepresented their game. They never mislead people about what was in it or what the game was about at any point.

You made me feel really sorry for that poor, beset from all sides, little, plucky team at Respawn for a few minutes. Then I remembered their bullshit while trying to get ANY answers out of them leading up to release. They were waffling on how many maps, resolution, player count and everything else under the sun basically right up until launch. Mean 'ol Activision probably just wouldn't let them answer questions. By the way, did they ever follow through with upping the resolution like they implied they might? I haven't touched it in months but I heard they have a mode with no Mechs so at least they probably fixed that nasty screen tearing in one game mode now.

All developer's hype and shill their games to be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Respawn is just as guilty.

 

[rac]

And Warframe is F2P. What's your point?

If CSGO was priced at $60 it would be dead right now.

 

[barit]

Respawn promised to forever change the face of shooters. Have you seen Titanfall? The only thing Titanfall changed about the course of FPS was to get call of dooty to copy them before the game was even proven to be successful. Now we have another mech suit shooter coming when it sort of seems like nobody was really all that stoked for long about the first one.

Main point; I think hype/excitement/promise levels were super high for both games. Respawn may have promised slightly less but Bungie delivered WAY more of a complete game than Titanfall.

To be fair Respawn never said such nonsense. This was probably from a Game Journo who wanted to generate clicks. And the next sentence is a Microsoft meme not Respawn's.

 

[Synth]

Price matters when setting expectations. Its not the only factor, but I'd think it's probably the largest one for most.

Yea, that was what I assumed he was going for, which is why I used Warframe as an example. If you're going to compare Titanfall to CS:GO, you may as well compare Destiny to Warframe (or many other F2P games). Should the next fighter from Capcom have to price itself against Skullgirls? Or is it purely based on the amount of content, so Tekken and Virtua Fighter should never be able to retail for similar prices?

If CSGO was priced at $60 it would be dead right now.

If it was still a new version a 15 year old game, that began as a freely downloadable mod for another game... probably. If it was the initial release of it... then maybe not.

 

[TemplaerDude]

That Kotaku review reads like the diary of a gambling addict.

I don't see a problem with it, I thought it was a really good read. We shouldn't be bad mouthing someone trying to break from the "and the graphics and the sound and the story" mold that every reviewer has been using since the beginning of time.

 

[Papercuts]

My favorite part of Angry Joe's review are all the cuts to actual videos featuring Bungie employees talking about things that in no way are true about the released Destiny product.

You made me feel really sorry for that poor, beset from all sides, little, plucky team at Respawn for a few minutes. Then I remembered their bullshit while trying to get ANY answers out of them leading up to release. They were waffling on how many maps, resolution, player count and everything else under the sun basically right up until launch. Mean 'ol Activision probably just wouldn't let them answer questions. By the way, did they ever follow through with upping the resolution like they implied they might? I haven't touched it in months but I heard they have a mode with no Mechs so at least they probably fixed that nasty screen tearing in one game mode now.

All developer's hype and shill their games to be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Respawn is just as guilty.

You avoided answering when they said they were changing the face of FPS games.

 

[antitrop]

You avoided answering when they said they were changing the face of FPS games.

Respawn's emphasis on Titanfall was simply "fun". Anything else was game journos and EA/MS marketing.

 

[NullPointer]

Yea, that was what I assumed he was going for, which is why I used Warframe as an example. If you're going to compare Titanfall to CS:GO, you may as well compare Destiny to Warframe (or many other F2P games). Should the next fighter from Capcom have to price itself against Skullgirls? Or is it purely based on the amount of content, so Tekken and Virtua Fighter should never be able to retail for similar prices?

There is no one answer there, except to say that products will be directly compared to each other if they're both options for the consumer.

It doesn't matter that GT6 came out on the PS3 and Forza 5 was out on a next gen system - they were in direct competition. Warframe and Destiny are comparable for being similar co-op focused loot-shooters, but the price and price model differences will also come to bear when judging how content rich something is, among other factors.

And any and all $60 games will be judged against the best of the $60 games as well, because those flagship titles end up setting the bar for that price.

Development woes, budgets, timelines and whatever else don't matter one bit when products are priced the same and available at the same time.

 

[Papercuts]

Respawn's emphasis on Titanfall was simply "fun". Anything else was game journos and EA/MS marketing.

Yeah. The ever touted "have you seen it" had nothing to do with respawn either.

 

[Brashnir]

I don't see a problem with it, I thought it was a really good read. We shouldn't be bad mouthing someone trying to break from the "and the graphics and the sound and the story" mold that every reviewer has been using since the beginning of time.

I'm not bad-mouthing him. This game places psychological addiction over quality game design, and that review is just another piece of evidence of its effectiveness.

We need to get away from this notion of a game being "addictive" as a positive trait. It's not.

 

[breakfuss]

I'm not bad-mouthing him. This game places psychological addiction over quality game design, and that review is just another piece of evidence of its effectiveness.

We need to get away from this notion of a game being "addictive" as a positive trait. It's not.

Tell that to trophy hunters, lol.

 

[Synth]

There is no one answer there, except to say that products will be directly compared to each other if they're both options for the consumer.

It doesn't matter that GT6 came out on the PS3 and Forza 5 was out on a next gen system - they were in direct competition. Warframe and Destiny are comparable for being similar co-op focused loot-shooters, but the price and price model differences will also come to bear when judging how content rich something is, among other factors.

And any and all $60 games will be judged against the best of the $60 games as well, because those flagship titles end up setting the bar for that price.

Development woes, budgets, timelines and whatever else don't matter one bit when products are priced the same and available at the same time.

Ah, I've kinda jumped into replying without given the context much thought. I just looked at the quote he was replying to (which mentioned the game's quality rather than price) and assumed the "CS is $15" was attempt to say that Titanfall should not be allowed to sell for $60.

I don't disagree with the idea that a $60 game competes with another $60 game in terms of what they both offer... but as per my previous response, I do think if that the content of a multiplayer focused title, and that of a pve focused title aren't very compatible for direct comparison. And even between games of the same type, I wouldn't say that Tekken has X characters, so it should cost more than Virtua Fighter that only has Y characters.

I think CS:GO would be fine to sell for $60, if it were a unique game and not essentially a remaster of a remaster of a retail game of a mod. I had no problems with the full retail price charged for games like Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, or Battlefield 2.

 

[firehawk12]

That Kotaku review reads like the diary of a gambling addict.

In other words, someone who plays loot games. lol

 

[rac]

If it was still a new version a 15 year old game, that began as a freely downloadable mod for another game... probably. If it was the initial release of it... then maybe not.

Except titanfall is an initial retail release and people are still disappointed about the lack of content. If it was a $20 game at release and it was scalable to lower end PCs it might have had legs on PC. Instead people stopped playing it because the content wasn't there.

 

[firehawk12]

Except titanfall is an initial retail release and people are still disappointed about the lack of content. If it was a $20 game at release and it was scalable to lower end PCs it might have had legs on PC. Instead people stopped playing it because the content wasn't there.

Ultimately, that's the way all shooters work though. CoD on PC, for example, is pretty dead as well. Not every game can be Dota2.

 

[KJRS_1993]

All developer's hype and shill their games to be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Respawn is just as guilty.

So what you're effectively whinging about is the fact that developers like to market their product?
Well that's a god damn shock if ever I heard one.
#brokengaming.

Who'd a thunk it, genius.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

This is the best review I have read as well. Accurately describes the same feelings of pull and push that I have experienced. Such an amazing framework, yet so many glaring holes that pull you away from the experience. This is seriously the first game I have both thoroughly enjoyed and frustratingly opposed at the same time. Destiny truly is an experience of it's own. I think it's fun in it's own right to just be a part of the conversation, and experience the game myself. Glaring commissions/design decisions aside, the experience as a whole has been an adventure, and i'm excited to see where it takes me next.

Bring on the patches Bungie! I can't wait

Kind of mirrors my feelings on it right now. I have never been so frustrated and disappointed in a game that I'm enjoying so much. You're tearing me apart Bungie!

 

[Synth]

Except titanfall is an initial retail release and people are still disappointed about the lack of content. If it was a $20 game at release and it was scalable to lower end PCs it might have had legs on PC. Instead people stopped playing it because the content wasn't there.

There are all sorts of reasons why Titanfall on PC is probably not as healthy other than the price. It's not exactly like the PC crowd takes to COD in the way console gamers do either, and Titanfall was exclusive to Origin.

The game's done pretty well on the Xbox however, constantly sitting above CoD and BF4 on most people's "popular on Xbox" lists. Would it have done even better at $20? Sure... what game wouldn't?

 

[rac]

Ultimately, that's the way all shooters work though. CoD on PC, for example, is pretty dead as well. Not every game can be Dota2.

They would do a whole lot better if they would just alter how their games were monetized. Just steal the idea of crates and keys from valve and they'd see way more profit.

The game's done pretty well on the Xbox however, constantly sitting above CoD and BF4 on most people's "popular on Xbox" lists. Would it have done even better at $20? Sure... what game wouldn't?

And the way devs/publishers sell games on Xbox probably isn't going to be the best for PC.

edit: For a MP only title.

 

[firehawk12]

They would do a whole lot better if they would just alter how their games were monetized. Just steal the idea of crates and keys from valve and they'd see way more profit.

Oh, all shooters should be f2p now. Or very lost cost. Valve has proven that to be the case.

It's just that EA doesn't seem to have the infrastructure to do anything like that for whatever reason. Each game they make seems to have microtransactions up the butt, but they haven't figured out a way to just make it a platform.

I suppose I should also credit Respawn for not wanting their game to be full of that stuff - you can't buy burn cards/credits, for example - but if the game was free and the maps were free, more people would probably be playing it right now.

 

[Ingueferroque]

This backlash is still crazy to me. It's fine if you don't like the game, but does it seriously deserve this type of response?

I'm very happy with it, by the way. It's quite an amazing experience to me on many levels, even if it could be improved in some. But I don't see any 'game breaking' experiences unless random loot drops really bother you.

 

[QaaQer]

This backlash is still crazy to me. It's fine if you don't like the game, but does it seriously deserve this type of response?

I'm very happy with it, by the way. It's quite an amazing experience to me on many levels, even if it could be improved in some. But I don't see any 'game breaking' experiences unless random loot drops really bother you.

who are you responding to?

 

[AlphaDump]

Kotaku posted a new review

http://kotaku.com/destiny-the-kotaku-review-1637735501

All that shooting is glued onto a character-leveling structure a la World of Warcraft. As you play, the game provides regular drips of experience points, which allow you to level up, which in turn grant you new powers (like, say, a double-jump or a black-hole grenade) and the ability to access more powerful weapons.

I hate to nitpick but... with that comparison, it gives off the impression that Destiny is like WoW . Only when it comes time to judge it as so, that it suddenly isnt an MMO.

At times, I've felt as though I'm playing Destiny "wrong" by farming exploits and choosing boring missions over enjoyable ones. But if I'm playing incorrectly, why has the game been designed to reward that style of play?

I cannot fathom what motivated this design decision. Why on earth didn't Bungie make legendary engrams always grant legendary gear, then just make them drop less frequently? Did they want to create a dysfunctional relationship between their game and their players? Did they want their game's defining emotion to be resigned anger, to abuse us into distrusting their systems?

If so, they were successful. I no longer trust the excitement I feel at seeing a purple engram, because I no longer trust Destiny itself. Yet I get excited anyway, and before I know it I'm standing in front of that cave, shooting monsters and hoping for a jackpot. As it turns out, unhealthy game design begets unhealthy play.

kind of surprised they wrote Yes...

 

[rac]

I suppose I should also credit Respawn for not wanting their game to be full of that stuff - you can't buy burn cards/credits, for example - but if the game was free and the maps were free, more people would probably be playing it right now.

Add skins that people would want to have that have no effect on actual gameplay. I really don't understand how devs aren't doing this, its free money.

 

[Patroclos]

You avoided answering when they said they were changing the face of FPS games.

My bad. I agree that I think of it a lot of that hype was media generated, probably that line as well. I consider it to be the same thing however. Respawn wasn't sitting somewhere saying, "Now hang on guys, dial this hype back a bit. We are going to be releasing a game with X number of maps at X resolution with a single player mode that will not even be viable to play 1 month after launch." They NEVER tried to slow the hype, they rolled with it. If you want obfuscation and misleading info just look up anything Respawn ever said about their "single player game".

If you think Respawn are such good guys and heroes then please explain the resolution debacle. It's totally clear that they were less than forthright regarding that and textures and etc. Please. I'm not trying to start shit but come on man, these are businesses. Respawn is not some plucky little posse of do-gooders in white hats and Bungie isn't sitting around a table in robes like Sith-Lords somewhere plotting to shove 10 years of DLC down your throat.

 

[PacinoMan]

I'm not bad-mouthing him. This game places psychological addiction over quality game design, and that review is just another piece of evidence of its effectiveness.

We need to get away from this notion of a game being "addictive" as a positive trait. It's not.

Oh but it absolutely is.

 

[Jobbs]

This backlash is still crazy to me. It's fine if you don't like the game, but does it seriously deserve this type of response?

I'm very happy with it, by the way. It's quite an amazing experience to me on many levels, even if it could be improved in some. But I don't see any 'game breaking' experiences unless random loot drops really bother you.

yes. after how they pitched and misrepresented the game prior to release, and what it turned out to be? they deserve backlash, sure, to the extent that any bad game sold on lies and hype deserves backlash. game's a bit of a joke.

(my opinion, of course, based on nearly 40 hours of play)