Destiny - Review Thread
- Thread starter opticalmace
- Start date
- Status
TheGameChanger
Banned
Yup! Was almost as good as "The definition is right in front of you."
Well the only problem I see here is the assumption that the content in those games isn't seen as quality content. I'd disagree with anyone that says Titanfall's content isn't pretty much all quality, and as a result I think there's enough quality content in there for an 86% score to be justified, whereas (although I've only just got to Mars) I don't think the ratio of quality to throwaway content in Destiny is looking good at all so far. Of course you may disagree, but that's all these reviews are.. opinions. One of my favourite games ever is Daytona USA, a game with 1 car and 3 tracks... I've been playing it for more than half my life at this point. If I were writing a review for, there'd be no way I'm knocking it down to a 7 or whatever just because the content is lacking on paper.
My bad for that. You kept insisting that my post was a satire when it's clearly not by the definition provided. In a lot of the games I mentioned, the quality of the content is not nearly good enough to justify the small amount of content in them.
Wasn't Gamespot one of the only sites to give Demon's Souls GOTY in 2009? As much as I adore Uncharted 2 that was the right decision.
Though I do not always agree with them. The Last of Us should have been rated higher and Halo 4 was certainly not a 9, especially at launch.
But at least they seem to be spot on with Destiny. It really hurts to give a Bungie game a 6 but sadly, it needs to be done.
This alone has made my entire day worth it.
Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
To be fair, was Arthur Gies critical on Sim City?
Still hilarious, though.
Wow.Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
The issue is you get people parroting things they've read, making crazy comparisons and assumptions that are obviously untrue if they would just rent the game themselves they would know that. Then you have a thread full of agendas and misinformation labeled a review thread which is now by and large useless and counterproductive.
Reviews are one persons impression who has spent some time with the game hence the various scores. They are good for getting the flavor of the game to see if you would like it. That's it. Trying to dissect a game by reviews is obviously flawed. Titanfall, halo 4, bf4, and on and on show that method is flawed.
Too bad that's the argument a LOT of people are making in this and other places - "They rated Titanfall too high!"...like, yeah very possibly? Completely unrelated to Destiny though which is scoring right where it should.
I have trouble with calling Destiny an MMORPG. If Destiny is an MMORPG. PSO suddenly became one in retrospect. I guess PvZ isn't because I can't dance with other people in a hub world and buy stickers in the Tower. So wait, without the Tower, is Destiny not an MMORPG?
If it wouldn't be, then okay then, I understand that. DOA4 is an MMORPG then.
If it would be, then yeah, Monster Hunter 2 (PS2) is. In retrospect a lot of RPGs with anything similar to a hub world is an MMORPG in this new definition.
Calling Destiny MMORPG is a misleading use of the word. Diablo-like is actually a lot better, or PSO-like or whatever. In which case, you may call this semantics, but this is why so many people wanted to correct you when you said it was.
But this isn't a real discussion anyway so let's drop it. Sorry if my comment is a bit condensending, just want to explain why I don't want to call Destiny an MMORPG.
rselig1974
Neo Member
Destiny is what you get when an awesome MMO and an awesome Single Player shooter get together and f***. However, they both took a lot of meth during the pregnancy so the baby came out all jacked up.
Wow my feeling after two hours of the alpha seems be exactly how most people felt about Destiny. Its funny how sometimes first impressions, Dark Souls, can be completely wrong, but in Destiny's case it was spot on. They made a quality shooter and couldn't figure out how to make an MMO.
yurinka
Member
For what I have played, the game is great. But I only played around 12 hours, so I still have to play a lot more to get a proper opinion from the game. As I know the Hobby Consolas review was published before the release, so I'd bet they made it without playing the final game.
I wonder how many of them were rushed reviews, and if the fact they couldn't play the final game before the release affected the score, because some of them they may be angry about it..
As of now I don't understand the low scores, specially the ones coming from people who gave great scores to Halo 4 (due to the similarities with Destiny) or Titanfall (like Destiny it's a great futuristic FPS that for some may be short in certain features or content).
But as I said, I still have to play more. So maybe I'm wrong.
I wonder how many of them were rushed reviews, and if the fact they couldn't play the final game before the release affected the score, because some of them they may be angry about it..
As of now I don't understand the low scores, specially the ones coming from people who gave great scores to Halo 4 (due to the similarities with Destiny) or Titanfall (like Destiny it's a great futuristic FPS that for some may be short in certain features or content).
But as I said, I still have to play more. So maybe I'm wrong.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Just because they went for it on a far smaller scale doesn't change what it is at its core. The basic building blocks are there, and I think you very well know this. To me an MMO isn't just solely about player count, but also very much the structure and design of that game.
I mean, if it makes people feel better we can call it a Multiplayer Online FPS RPG, and leave out the massive part, but it absolutely borrows heavily from MMO game design. That's not a crime. However, when it apparently doesn't do a very good job in areas that are vital to making a player feel a sense of reward or continued motivation to keep playing and coming back for more, that kind of becomes an issue. Maybe the raw gameplay alone is motivation enough for many, but that alone isn't what was sold to people. Nothing at all wrong with people that feel the gameplay alone is rewarding enough to make up for the areas in which it lacks, but if you're going to include all these other things at all and talk about how great they are, then at the very least a lot more is expected than what players actually received. It doesn't really get a pass simply because it's not entirely in line with your traditional MMO experience. Never forget that a big part of the excitement in the first place was that these other elements would be totally up to standard and executed with pretty high quality in a game that played as Destiny did, that took place in a massive world as beautiful as what was built, with a story experience to match.
The game is a whole lot more basic and bare bones than what was promised, even if you were to decide to give them a complete pass on the story portion of the experience. That's pretty unacceptable. Forget the reviews or stuff from last year, just go back and read even interviews from just this year. You may be more than a little surprised at what was said.
Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
Wow, that makes like no sense at all. It isn't like you're going in with things to complain about. You're playing a game with the intention of having a blast, but if you see things you don't particularly like or care for, why wouldn't you mention those things if you personally as the reviewer didn't like them? You are tasked with basically weighing the game that you have in your possession against the promises and assurances that were made. If you're able to easily get past the promises, then perhaps the game that's in front of you can still be great, but not exactly if you're not enjoying yourself as much as you'd like to.
Just drop the first M. So Destiny would be something like a MORPFPS.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
Hiphopgamer has always been the lowest of the low common denominator, but to make yourself look significantly more shit at your job than Arthur Gies should probably be grounds for summary retirement.
The fault most people have with those reviews is the score itself, the rating instead of the words. The flavor part is usually not discussed nearly as much as the score. Some people feel Titanfall was rated to highly, but the contents of multiple reviews make it really clear what some people will get out of the game versus others.
Depending on the critic, the dissection of the game in question is up in the air. Jim Sterling is one of my favorite critics because he vocalizes what a game does well or poorly in a concise manner. His perspective is one I can relate to because of how he treats games and how he views them.
Eddie Griffin
Banned
Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
As opposed to just giving games with many flaws (oot for example) pretending they don't exist, and just throw in a 10 because bias or money?
Id take this over that easily.
I could give less of a fuck what Destiny makes, or Titanfall for that matter. I was just pointing out the weird double standards and lack of integrity it appears that some journalists have.
"It's literally in my job description to be critical" -Arthur Gies, 2014
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Fine. Disregard player count and you're left with the defining aspect of social features. Destiny lacks those as well.
Stone Ocean
Member
Eddie Griffin
Banned
Are you saying that Destiny is better than reach?
Effigenius
Member
Well, just another cautionary tale about when a company refuses to allow reviews before the game releases. Its too bad their excuse turned out to be bullshit when in fact they know they made a bad game.
No I didn't, I knew it was serious when I first saw it. Other people on the other hand assumed it was for the reasons I gave (more content = better, regardless of what the content is). As for the other games' content not being good enough... well, opinions again. I'm not looking to argue the quality of unrelated games here.
You're aware this is a review thread and not an OT right? Typically none of us would have played the game before we started posting here, if it weren't for the delayed reviews. If we're all supposed to just ignore the reviews and run out and try every game for ourselves, why wold a thread like this even exist? Why wouldn't we just be in the OT for this game instead?
You're basically complaining about people being on topic here.
You played Diablo 3 AT LAUNCH on pc and felt this way? I'm legit shocked. The loot was lame and by and large the launch thread will back me up on that. Difficulty was just flat out gear checks and pay to win by buying armor or grinding the crap out of the game.
What I'm guessing you did is played Diablo 3 after blizzard fixed everything and are assuming it always was this way on consoles.
I'll try to tackle this issue from another angle. The problem with calling Destiny an MMORPG is that once you do, there is SO MUCH wrong with Destiny that a 6/10 or worse score should suffice. Calling it an MMORPG rather than I dunno, FPSRPG (like Borderlands?) means that the fact that you cannot trade, or chat to players in the tower, etc. become huge issues. Even in terms of loot, the loot becomes very pointless until Iron Hammer comes out or when Raids come out. And we cannot expect Gamespot to ether not review the game or review the game based on assumptions of what Raids will be like, when none of us do.
What Destiny needs is more MMORPGness, in the sense that we have more areas and more reason to fight the same enemies over and over again, or at the very least different enemies. I mean, Bounties are like quests in MMOs but they don't have a silly explanation behind them and they are recycled day after day.
If Destiny didn't have it's gunplay, it would be attrocious honestly. With it, it doesn't make the lack of purpose to shoot any better. 6/10 is the perfect score for a game where all you can say about it is "fun to shoot things again and again, in nice looking envirnoments".
Or should we give that 8/10?
SneakyStephan
Banned
JigglesBunny
Banned
I don't have the time to comb through 146 pages of a thread but here's really the bottom line.
At it's core, Destiny is a fun shooter. It's content isn't plentiful and Bungie wasn't very honest about the size of the game, regardless, it has an undeniable addictive quality to it and it's fun. The PvP is good, the story wasn't, the mission design was repetive but it was still fun, moreso with friends or other players in general. Every positive had a negative which kept it from being great and keeping it more in the realm of good.
It'll give me my shooter fix until the Master Chief Collection but after that? I'll hop back in when the expansions drop for a bit.
If I had to score Destiny, it's fun as hell and just as addictive. But it's content is too thin to keep me interested for too long and Halo 1, 2 and 3
in 1080p, 60fps is going to be locking my time down for the foreseeable future.
Destiny is a 6/7 game. With more content, missions that weren't simply hold X/Square and hold off a group of the same enemies while you only have one life and some real exploration? Probably a 9.
At it's core, Destiny is a fun shooter. It's content isn't plentiful and Bungie wasn't very honest about the size of the game, regardless, it has an undeniable addictive quality to it and it's fun. The PvP is good, the story wasn't, the mission design was repetive but it was still fun, moreso with friends or other players in general. Every positive had a negative which kept it from being great and keeping it more in the realm of good.
It'll give me my shooter fix until the Master Chief Collection but after that? I'll hop back in when the expansions drop for a bit.
If I had to score Destiny, it's fun as hell and just as addictive. But it's content is too thin to keep me interested for too long and Halo 1, 2 and 3
(and maybe 4...)
Destiny is a 6/7 game. With more content, missions that weren't simply hold X/Square and hold off a group of the same enemies while you only have one life and some real exploration? Probably a 9.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I'm fine with dropping it, but I think it's a legitimate discussion.
A ton of people do consider PSO an MMORPG. It's frequently mentioned as people's "first MMO."
Stuff like Monster Hunter is a bit more difficult, since there is no leveling or player customization outside of gear. I could see how some people would consider it one, though, especially the first one.
Without the Tower would Destiny still be in this camp? I guess that depends on whether or not removing the Tower also removes all of the merchants, and faction vendors.
EventHorizon
Member
All those Guard The Dinklebot quests don't just write themselves....Oh wait.
Forsythia
Member
I've finished the story mode, played some strikes, did a few patrols and played some games in the Crucible. The only thing that saves this game is the gunplay, which is top notch. The rest is pretty half-assed.
That 6 from GameSpot is spot on.
This game is almost the exact same as Defiance. And while that game is seriously flawed, that game at least has a sense of an open world, has more loot, has more events and I can actually meet other players. I had more fun with that game than with Destiny.
At least Destiny has convinced me to pre-order Borderlands; The Pre-Sequel.
That 6 from GameSpot is spot on.
This game is almost the exact same as Defiance. And while that game is seriously flawed, that game at least has a sense of an open world, has more loot, has more events and I can actually meet other players. I had more fun with that game than with Destiny.
At least Destiny has convinced me to pre-order Borderlands; The Pre-Sequel.
Hiphopgamer in meltdown mode.
ANSWER THAT...
Oh, Christ. Fuck off with that ridiculousness, Hippity Pip Pop.
I don't want to have to defend Gies, of all people.
The Librarian
Banned
Is this another variant of the "devs are lazy" comment?
It was five, and a lot of that time went into building a new engine.
Destiny being a blend of genres may make this worse than normal but reading this thread very very few people are even close to the actual flaws and problems the game has. And those are the people that played it.
The story is weak. The gameplay is great. The Co op is the best an fps has to offer. The loot drops are a bit sparse but not brutally so. People wanted more or expected more content and variation. These are legit criticisms.
The social aspect is janky. The only way you can make friends really is pugging strikes then friending the good players. If you already have friends the game welcomes you with open arms. That's another fair criticism.
No way is the a 7.5 game when it's contemporaries scores are taken into account. This is, imho, an industry backlash after bf4, titanfall, and watch dogs. Where they were criticized on their high scores so now the reviewers are grinding on destiny.
ArkkAngel007
Member
It's something that goes over a lot of people's heads.
But if it weren't for scores these review threads would probably be fairly empty.
SneakyStephan
Banned
I've finished the story mode, played some strikes, did a few patrols and played some games in the Crucible. The only thing that saves this game is the gunplay, which is top notch. The rest is pretty half-assed.
That 6 from GameSpot is spot on.
This game is almost the exact same as Defiance. And while that game is seriously flawed, that game at least has a sense of an open world, has more loot, has more events and I can actually meet other players. I had more fun with that game than with Destiny.
At least Destiny has convinced me to pre-order Borderlands; The Pre-Sequel.
I've mentioned defiance a few times in this thread but noone ever replied
I wonder how the people who think destiny is being treated too harshly by critics feel about the 64 metacritic score for that game, and where they were when this happened.ProvenDeadly
Member
And lying about what was in the final game.
I think a lot of the time was spent scaling back their ambitions, and actually making a 'shippable' product.
People keep saying this. When did the Devs lie about the games content?
ProvenDeadly
Member
So they were too ambitious, scaled it back, and still acted like the original ambitions were still in tact?
ArkkAngel007
Member
At some point though, just focusing on that isn't going to move the discussion forward.
There's enough to discuss about the contents of the game and the execution of that content without having to wave the marketing flag.
Umm... Not been in this thread very long have you?
Mostly I lurk in GAF. But I just had to write a thank you to all of the posters whose posts
I've read in this thread.
By and large, the comments and arguments have been insightful. More, the comments (and the reviews) have helped me. I watched the ads, several YouTube series on the beta gameplay and features and I perused a copy of the strat guide. I thought the strat guide was good as those things go). I don't own a next gen console yet. My TVs don't even have HDMI ports. The hype and info on destiny was such that I thought it was time to upgrade. Now, I know I can wait. So, thanks gaffers. You helped me dodge a bullet.
I've read in this thread.
By and large, the comments and arguments have been insightful. More, the comments (and the reviews) have helped me. I watched the ads, several YouTube series on the beta gameplay and features and I perused a copy of the strat guide. I thought the strat guide was good as those things go). I don't own a next gen console yet. My TVs don't even have HDMI ports. The hype and info on destiny was such that I thought it was time to upgrade. Now, I know I can wait. So, thanks gaffers. You helped me dodge a bullet.
I cringed reading that. He doesn't understand the purpose of reviews at all.
Gaming is an expensive hobby. We pay hundreds of dollars for a platform and $60 for a new game. With deceptive marketing tactics such as fake demos, bullshots, and PR speak, how can we know if a game is worth it?
If flaws, especially major ones are there, it is best to point them out. If a game truly isn't worth our hard earned money, then everyone deserves to know. Sure, you can have fun with almost any game but these are not free. And with a disappointing game, you're not just wasting your hard earned money, you're wasting time.
The Librarian
Banned
Lying about what? Game development is a very fluid, difficult process. Some of the stuff they said was gonna be in there could've been cut after they said anything.
Saying "they lied" is kinda unfair.
- Status