Does Destiny 2 feels like a sequel or an expansion?

#51
Sequel.

It's everything Destiny should have been, along with the learnings of the last 3 years too.

New sandbox, different meta, new narrative, refreshed mechanics, new asset models...I could go on.

It FEELS like Destiny, but then it's like they took the first game and turned everything up to 11.
 
#58
I find it interesting how both this and Splatoon 2 have struggled to shake off the label of not being a true sequel.
There seems to be an expectation for shooters that shake things up a bit for the sequel to be as different from the original as the original was from its genre contemporaries
 
#60
A sequel that plays it very safe. There is too much content in the game to call it just an expansion. It has four brand new planets (returning planet with no area) to explore, large campaign, tons of new weapons, many quests, five new strikes, whole new set of maps, whole new raid and so on.

It's enough content to warrant a whole new game. It just seems ignorant to call it just an expansion.
This.

Wish they didn't repeat many of the exotics, but other than that...yeah, its a sequel.
 
#62
I feel like Splatoon 2 has managed to shake off the stigma a bit since it actually came out. They basically changed everything they could possibly change without fundamentally messing with the core gameplay. I haven't seen nearly as much unironic "lol it's a port" as there was pre-launch.
Splatoon 2 is a better sequel than Destiny 2. There are many more monumental changes for the better in Splatoon 2 compared to the previous game, like Salmon Run. The campaign is similar in structure to Splatoon 1 but the levels are completely new and use interesting new mechanics while also making use of nearly every weapon type. League battles are a nice addition, and they didn't retroactively make changes that hurt the experience overall like Destiny 2 did (ability charge times are way too long)
 
#64
I see it more as a refresh. There was just too flawed a base to stretch D1 out another 3-5 years, yet they werent quite ready for a balls to the wall revolutionary sequel either

I don't see any problem with it. I'd rather have this and pc support than another bunch of expansions.
 
#67
It felt very samey and it sounds like there isn't a glut of new and original content. I definitely wouldn't have bought it if it were console exclusive, but the PC beta convinced me that I really would like the ability to play 60+ FPS Destiny from time to time, so I purchased the PC version.

Do you consider the following games to be expansions or sequels?
-Assassin's Creed 2
-Uncharted 3
-Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2
-Titanfall 2
-Splatoon 2
Of those, I could certainly see the "expansion" argument applied to Splatoon 2.
 
#70
A sequel that plays it very safe. There is too much content in the game to call it just an expansion. It has four brand new planets (returning planet with no area) to explore, large campaign, tons of new weapons, many quests, five new strikes, whole new set of maps, whole new raid and so on.

It's enough content to warrant a whole new game. It just seems ignorant to call it just an expansion.
I don't think the amount of "content" dictates whether or not something feels like a sequel or expansion.

For example, I would argue FFXIV: Stormblood has more content than Destiny 2, but that's an expansion through and through.

I don't consider Destiny 2 an expansion, but I can reasonably see the argument being made that it is due to (mostly) marginal improvements.
 
#73
It's defintely closer to an MMO expansion than an traditional 3-year gapped console game sequel. This isn't really a question, or debatable.
Umm yes it is? Again, how would D2 be a expansion, and Uc2, Titanfall, gears, Halo, Assassins Creed, and on and on be sequels than? It's silly it's a sequel, has a whole new campaign that is longer than most shooters, 4 new planets. It has everything typical sequels do.

I don't think the amount of "content" dictates whether or not something feels like a sequel or expansion.

For example, I would argue FFXIV: Stormblood has more content than Destiny 2, but that's an expansion through and through.

I don't consider Destiny 2 an expansion, but I can reasonably see the argument being made that it is due to (mostly) marginal improvements.
Stromblood is an MMO to a monthly service fee mmo......apples and oranges.
 
#76
Not sure if my opinion means much since I didn't play the original Destiny thoroughly, but as an avid MMO played it feels like the Heavensward or Stormblood to the original FFXIV. So I'd personally say expansion. I guess it depends on your standards for what an expansion is though.
 
#79
Stromblood is an MMO to a monthly service fee mmo......apples and oranges.
The argument was based solely about the amount of new content in Destiny 2. So no, comparing just content is not comparing apples and oranges. If the poster wanted to contextualize that he was referring to just $60 retail packages, go ahead. That's not the case though.
 
#81
The full break from Destiny 1 alone makes it a sequel. You're not expanding on anything, so it's not an expansion.

Though in theory, as long as it continues the story, all expansions are sequels.

(the next installment (as of a speech or story); especially :a literary, cinematic, or televised work continuing the course of a story begun in a preceding one)
Not all sequels are expansions though. You can't build a whole new house unattached to the old one and pretend it's an expansion of the old house. Can't expand if there's nothing you're expanding from. Doesn't matter if it uses old assets or has similarities to the old one: it's now a new entity.

Destiny 2 is a sequel, not an expansion.
 
#83
Name 1 sequel that does? This makes no sense either.
Well to take the OP's suggestion.

Halo 2 added online multiplayer, dual weilding, vehicle jacking, 4 player co-op.
Likewise, Halo 3 added Forge, character customisation, etc

I'm open to know what the big new feature for Destiny 2 is, but in my first 20 hours, I haven't found it. Splitting weapons into kinectic and energy? Telling the story in the actual game this time?
 
#86
Feels like a sequel to me.

If you had played Destiny 1 for hundreds/thousands of hours and you go into D2 then you're not gonna know how everything works. You'll need to figure it out. There are so many changes and they are good changes imo. Shooting/combat feels just as good as it did but everything else is improved greatly.

In D1 you had a map with missions, strikes, and patrol mode. It wasn't explorable except patrol mode. If you were in patrol mode and wanted to play the next story mission you had to go to orbit and select it.

Now the map has multiple landing zones (used for fast travel). If you want to play a story mission you travel to it. If you want to do an adventure (kinda like a side quest) you travel to it. Patrol beacons and Public events are still in. The are also lost sectors. Everything takes place in the one map now. If you're doing an adventure you can still do patrols. It's all the one instance.

Other changes are related to vendors and engrams. When you do activities on planets you earn tokens which can be redeemed at vendors to level them up. Once you hit lvl 20 and level them up you get an engram which automatically decrypts. Engrams you find also auto decrypt if they are blue. More powerful ones you need to take to the social hub and decrypt like you would in D1.
 
#87
Name 1 sequel that does? This makes no sense either.
With you calling the game a "masterpiece", it's no surprise to see you itt throwing shade at people who feel its an expansion.

Finally got the time to check out the full game at my buddy's house, he is really into it and almost max level haha. He said it feels like an expansion, but not like the typical Destiny 1 expansion. More like a larger expansion, but I guess that's hard to explain.
 
#89
If you don't like the game then you consider it an expansion. If you do like it, it's a sequel. May not be true for everyone but I'm sure for most responses, it is.

And I completely agree with anyone who says if you consider this an expansion, you should consider things like Assassin's Creed sequels and Uncharted sequels to be expansions as well. And I love those two franchises but yeah.
 
#91
For me it feels like an expansion pack. I think its a very good step up from D1. But it feels so much the same. Same enemies etc. And just one week into it I am already bored. Feels so much the same. Maybe my expectations were just to high. Even though I kept them low because I knew.
Man, I feel you there. When I saw the hive come back along with the other races, a lot of the wind was taken from my sails. I still enjoy it, but it just doesn't give me that feeling that's I got from the first. I feel very "been there, done that".
 
#94
Man, I feel you there. When I saw the hive come back along with the other races, a lot of the wind was taken from my sails. I still enjoy it, but it just doesn't give me that feeling that's I got from the first. I feel very "been there, done that".
There's one returning race in particular that gave me that feeling. One that seemed to be pretty soundly dealt with in Destiny 1.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
#96
Sequel and it's now one of my benchmarks for most improved sequels. Most every activity has been evolved in a great way. It's a far more welcoming, pleasant, and constantly fun experience.
 
#97
Well to take the OP's suggestion.

Halo 2 added online multiplayer, dual weilding, vehicle jacking, 4 player co-op.
Likewise, Halo 3 added Forge, character customisation, etc

I'm open to know what the big new feature for Destiny 2 is, but in my first 20 hours, I haven't found it. Splitting weapons into kinectic and energy? Telling the story in the actual game this time?
That's 2 games you cherry picked...and considering they overhauled PVP, added 4 new planets, with all new story, like every sequel. How is Gears 2 a sequel and Destiny 2 not?

Faction wars is new
Adventures - New
Lost Sectors - New

It's a sequel by the very definition.

I like how you add small things like vehicle jacking and ignore all the new things in Destiny.
 
Yes it is...context is key. MMO's are far bigger , and FF15 has a monthly fee paying for all that content.
Then the original poster should have contextualized it, that would make his point much stronger. As it was, it's very easy to poke holes in.

My point is that whether or not a game should be called a "sequel" should not solely be based on the quantity of new content.

I said I didn't even consider it an expansion, so it's not me personally disagreeing with the guy, it's me saying his argument is weak.