I've not read alot of this thread. I've read a few reviews of the game and I am a bit baffled. I'm only up to level 7 even though I've had the title since launch. I don't disagree with the words contained within most of the reviews but I find some of the low scores perplexing. The game is disappointing in that it didn't live up to the hype but I feel like I'm playing a solid 8. Is that the consensus of gamers? I feel like the reviewers are overly docking points because this was such a big budget disappointment.
Agreed completely, though I'd even give the game a 8.5 to 9.0. It's a very solid FPS. The story is weak / cheesy, but since when has that absolutely killed a multiplayer centric FPS? I think too many reviewers are punishing it due to the hype and budget or what they thought the game was going to be, rather than what it actually is.
Also, I think it's fair to look at what reviewers scored other recent FPS games. Just one example...gamespot gave COD Ghost an 8. An EIGHT...for a screen tearing mess on current gen that recycled the same 10+ year old engine and called it "next gen". I've played the hell out of every COD since MW2 and this one was pure garbage.
Then look at BF4 which was absolutely broken for weeks after launch, and still had game breaking bugs until MARCH! I love the BF games and played the hell out of this one too in spite of the problems...but if it gets an 85 on metacritic after being the broken mess that it was, then Destiny deserves a lot better than what it's getting. The game is polished and does what it does well. The story is weak, like many other FPS, and there are arguably improvements that could be made to balance, like many FPS.