Support NeoGAF

[Ur_momshere]

Don't worry kiddos, Destiny has sold over $500 Million to stores worldwide.... it broke records and records of records...

Sniff, sniff... I smell something in the air...

 

[Eddie Griffin]

So would you say Destiny has more or less content than Titanfall and Killzone Shadow Fall.

 

[Ivory Samoan]

The music though...

...yep, it's amazing.

The sound design is one of the best I've heard in a ...well, any game (yes, including HL2's amazing SD).

 

[Synth]

So would you say Destiny has more or less content than Titanfall and Killzone Shadow Fall.

Never played Shadowfall. But as for Titanfall... Destiny has more content, but far less that's worth playing.

 

[Fjordson]

The music though...

So it's typical high quality stuff from Marty? Still a shame he got fired.

I wonder if Bungie will release it standalone.

 

[gatti-man]

Bollocks. You ship out game, it's open season for reviews, period. You don't get to say "b-but wait the better stuff is yet to come!" as a defense of your weak product. Either delay your game to include the "better stuff", or accept that people will review the product you shipped. People paid $60 for the product, not for half a product with maybe some more content later.


Do tell. Are you seriously suggesting that the reviewers haven't played the game? Which common criticisms, specifically, are not valid?

They haven't if they haven't played the raid. That's one of Destiny's unique features and they didn't delay it because it's not ready did you even read my post you quoted? Hence why I think you haven't played the game. You couldn't just run the raid. It's going to be hard and if you don't understand that you haven't played Destiny which I'm taking as an admission since you sidestepped that question in my last post.

 

[antitrop]

Never played Shadowfall. But as for Titanfall... Destiny has more content, but far less that's worth playing.

I agree with this. Titanfall has far better execution on its rather meager offering.

 

[KAP151]

After reading Geoff's review at Giant Bomb - I really couldnt agree more.

Apart from the score and some beautiful scenery - this has been one of the most repetieve and downright dissapointing games ive played for some time.

I hit level 15 last night and I am struggling to continue. I will finish the story missions but have zero intention of keeping this game after thats done.

 

[AHA-Lambda]

Like this. The author even picks Wolfenstein as the better game than the big 3 hyped games.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...earned-from-titanfall-watch-dogs-and-destiny/

Glad to see someone call out the "big 3". It's quite sad that, in one way or another, each of the 3 biggest new franchises to kickstart the new generation have all missed their mark.

 

[Ivory Samoan]

So would you say Destiny has more or less content than Titanfall and Killzone Shadow Fall.

Can't speak on Killzone SF, but I put a ton of hours into Titanfall, and Destiny stomps it in terms of content.

It has much, much more content than Titanfall.

I thoroughly enjoyed Titanfall, but to be honest I did constantly think to myself "this is pretty bare bones...man".

 

[robotrock]

The music though...

Yeah I'm going to be really bummed out when Destiny 2 doesn't have a Marty O'Donnell OST. Severely bummed.

 

[breakfuss]

No lie, anytime someone posts defensively (ex. "did reviewers even play the game!?!") I scan their avatar to see if there's a Destiny insignia. Try it. Hasn't been full proof but yeahhhh.

Anyway, PvP is where it's still at for me right now. I'll give the game that, at least. Disappointing since I didn't buy it for that, lol, but it's pretty damn fun. Won my first match of rumble. Have they elaborated on why they disabled mics/communication outside fire teams? Even in competitive modes? It's so freaking weird.

 

[Sodding_Gamer]

They haven't if they haven't played the raid. That's one of Destiny's unique features and they didn't delay it because it's not ready did you even read my post you quoted? Hence why I think you haven't played the game. You couldn't just run the raid. It's going to be hard and if you don't understand that you haven't played Destiny which I'm taking as an admission since you sidestepped that question in my last post.

Destiny's unique feature you mean?! Which requires 6 people to play. I can bet over half of Destiny players will never actually experience this one raid.

 

[Bold One]

Still enjoying the game, not perfect, then again what game is?


Overhyped definitely

 

[Heavy_D_Forever]

It will be interesting to see how many used copies are sitting on Gamestop shelves in a few days. Hopefully I will get a decent amount when I trade it in.

 

[Jobbs]

Wait a second, did anybody these reviews ever get to 20 or beyond before writing these reviews or did they just try to be the first to get a review out?

I get the feeling some of these reviews were hastily written. When you get to 20 you just hit a brick wall in this game -- you can run the strike playlist stuff and do the *same exact* missions *over and over* to get better gear so you can run the *same exact* missions more. It's a little better if you like to do PVP, but really, I just don't know how you can give the game a pass with such a dire, dire lack of substance and content, and giving it an 8 like GT did is giving it a pass.

 

[QaaQer]

not to mention the slow as molasses combat which while well suited for playing with thumbsticks from a couch 8 feet away with a 60 degree FoV, would be coma inducing to anyone with a setup more suited for FPS.

at the very least, it would take a total rebalancing of the game.

oh yeah, i forgot about FOV. BL2's 90 FOV was much better as well.

 

[HTupolev]

60 degree FoV

Since it's relevant:

I haven't measured the FoV in the final game yet, but if it wasn't changed from the alpha and beta, it should be 72. A smidge above Halo 3.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Still enjoying the game, not perfect, then again what game is?


Overhyped definitely

This is pretty much my feeling. I'm enjoying it, and I'm in for the long haul w/ the Digital Guardian edition, but there's no denying that it's got some major flaws that are exacerbated by both the pre-launch hype and the developer's pedigree.

 

[Northeastmonk]

The Original Leak + Full Document

*Note* this is in regards to Halo: Reach. However, Metascore is apparently a major factor to Activision according to the document.

Just thought this might be interesting to some, I'm not at all implying Bungie is about to get nuked by Uncle Bobby and Co. After all, the game is selling like mad.

Who writes this stuff? You have to think they're the people writing all the checks for funding rather than the actual script of the game. I wonder if recording labels do something similar. What I don't understand is how the legendary game designers of yesterday are thinking everything is going in other directions while Activision is still on the same track. They're in there to win it. They have that Atari feel to them. They rose to the top and now they're making so many games that are similar to each other. I doubt they'll end up like Atari, but time will only tell.

 

[RespectThySole]

I mentioned this before in the Titanfall review thread, but this simply isn't true. A baseless 0 score does far more damage to a game than a 10 score for multiple reasons. The first being that someone scoring the game a 10 may very well honestly believe it's a 10 (I'd score Phantasy Star Online a 10), whilst someone scoring it a 0 almost certainly doesn't actually believe that's the correct score for it. Secondly the metascore is done as an average of all user scores... so if 1000 people score it a 0, and another 1000 score it a 10, the it's equivalent to 2000 people scoring it a 5. This fucks up the average for all those that'll then be rating the game what they actually believe it deserves.

It's a shame, because user scores really should be more helpful than those from publications, but people simply can't help themselves but fuck them up every time a big game releases.

Not really. If the game's reception is more positive then negative, there is no way that the average user score would be a 4 or 5. That is the point. It doesn't matter whether it is actually worthy of a 0 if the content of their review shows why they hated the game. Yes, a user may think it is worthy of a 10, but what makes it so when there are so many inherent flaws? Objectively, Destiny cannot be rated a 10 no matter how much fun you've had with it. There is a reason why there hasn't even been a single review that awarded it a perfect score. This not happening is actually rare for this type of hyped up game because there are usually at least a few reviewers who give big releases a 10 due to getting caught in the hype and overlooking flaws. This has not even occurred once with Destiny.

Also, it may "fuck up" the averages as you say, but this is no different than any other game. People award 10s and 0s based on how they feel, even if it's not a good way of rating the game. There is a reason why Destiny's user scores are much lower than the usual for this type of hyped up game. It can in no way be compared to CoD4 in terms of reception, the user scores DOUBLED Destiny's. We didn't make excuses for low user scores for any other game and there is certainly no reason to make excuses for Destiny now with user scores this low. Destiny is a flop in terms of reception, even Watch Dogs was slightly better received than this.

The metacritic "0s" argument doesn't even make sense because on other sites like Amazon where 0s aren't allowed the user scores are still low.

 

[speculawyer]

They haven't if they haven't played the raid. That's one of Destiny's unique features and they didn't delay it because it's not ready did you even read my post you quoted? Hence why I think you haven't played the game. You couldn't just run the raid. It's going to be hard and if you don't understand that you haven't played Destiny which I'm taking as an admission since you sidestepped that question in my last post.

Pfft. So no one should review a game on the market until the last patch is shipped? Lunacy.

As soon as a game hits the shelves, it is fair game for reviews. If there is some magic part that makes the game great, they should have included it in the shipping version .

Bungie knows this. Activision knows this.

Companies can decide not to send out early review copies if they wish (and which Activision did with this game). But once it is on the shelves, people are going to buy it and review it as is. NHL 15 just got completely slammed for the same reason. They promise to add more features in the next couple months .. . that doesn't help people without internet connections. That doesn't reflect what was shipped.

 

[Bold One]

This is pretty much my feeling. I'm enjoying it, and I'm in for the long haul w/ the Digital Guardian edition, but there's no denying that it's got some major flaws that are exacerbated by both the pre-launch hype and the developer's pedigree.

Definately, the Multiplayer is crack-like in its addictive nature

Bungie will have taken the backlash to heart (hopefully) and start making changes, if they are serious about their magnum opus, its a game that will change by leaps and bounds.

in its current state its like Diablo 3 at launch in its vanilla state

I am with you, in it for the long haul

 

[lexi]

Vanilla Diablo 3 was fun until the endgame though.

 

[speculawyer]

Glad to see someone call out the "big 3". It's quite sad that, in one way or another, each of the 3 biggest new franchises to kickstart the new generation have all missed their mark.

Well, that leaves the field wide open for additional new IPs coming this fall & spring. Some interesting ones too.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I thought all of the Earth missions were awful, but honestly, from Mars and beyond, I've really been enjoying the story missions. The gameplay is very fun.

The way the story is told is rather poor and I'm constantly left with more and more questions about the universe, but I've been able to follow the plot.

 

[antitrop]

Vanilla Diablo 3 was fun until the endgame though.

Exactly. I had a blast up until like... Inferno Act 2. But it took me a decently long time to get to Inferno Act 2, though. Like at least 60 hours or so.

 

[JimmyRustler]

Just finished the game. Wow, that has got to be the lamest ending I have ever seen in a videogame. Did they deliberately not want us to care at all?

Anyway, all in all I enjoyed my time with the game. Will probably max out hunter and warlock as well. Not sure if I'm gonna grind for new weapons or something. Is there any completely new content added later on or is it just the already existing strikes in hard mode?

 

[Steel]

Vanilla Diablo 3 was fun until the endgame though.

There's fun to be had in Destiny as well. The endgame also sucks. PVP makes it a bit better, however.

I think the comparison to Diablo 3's Vanilla state is apt in this particular situation. However, I feel as though, unlike Diablo 3, Destiny's problems will be solved in several paid expansions rather than just one. They've implied there will be more than one expansion pass necessary to get all the dlc, so you'd probably have to spend $70 on passes when all is said and done.

 

[postcyberpunk]

Well, that leaves the field wide open for additional new IPs coming this fall & spring. Some interesting ones too.

Alien Isolation-- our savior. Not new, but still.

 

[EventHorizon]

I mentioned this before in the Titanfall review thread, but this simply isn't true. A baseless 0 score does far more damage to a game than a 10 score for multiple reasons. The first being that someone scoring the game a 10 may very well honestly believe it's a 10 (I'd score Phantasy Star Online a 10), whilst someone scoring it a 0 almost certainly doesn't actually believe that's the correct score for it. Secondly the metascore is done as an average of all user scores... so if 1000 people score it a 0, and another 1000 score it a 10, the it's equivalent to 2000 people scoring it a 5. This fucks up the average for all those that'll then be rating the game what they actually believe it deserves.

It's a shame, because user scores really should be more helpful than those from publications, but people simply can't help themselves but fuck them up every time a big game releases.

You are right that the average of user scores is pretty much meaningless, but I find the individual scores extremely helpful. Generally the 10s and 0s are a quick indicator of a review that is trying to push an agenda. They can be safely avoided. If a game truly deserves a 10 then there should be ample 9 reviews making the same case. I read the 7-9 reviews in order to get the general feeling of the game.

TL;DR User review scores are useful for identifying the reviews to read, not for the score themselves.

 

[Pritchardo]

Seriously how does TF blow anything out of the water. I say this as someone who loves TF. There isn't enough variety at all. The guns are dry and don't allow for different tactics like Destiny. The mp variety is weak and the map variety is incredibly limited.

The titans while cool at first also suffer from the same lack of variety and customizeability. Teamwork and meshing of abilities in Destiny puts it above TF for me. The fact that Destiny also has entire world's to explore while TF has nothing else. TF is half of an amazing game.

destiny's multiplayer is a unbalanced mess??

 

[Synth]

Not really. If the game's reception is more positive then negative, there is no way that the average user score would be a 4 or 5. That is the point. It doesn't matter whether it is actually worthy of a 0 if the content of their review shows why they hated the game. Yes, a user may think it is worthy of a 10, but what makes it so when there are so many inherent flaws? Objectively, Destiny cannot be rated a 10 no matter how much fun you've had with it. There is a reason why there hasn't even been a single review that awarded it a perfect score. This not happening is actually rare for this type of hyped up game because there are usually at least a few reviewers who give big releases a 10 due to getting caught in the hype and overlooking flaws. This has not even occurred once with Destiny.

Also, it may "fuck up" the averages as you say, but this is no different than any other game. People award 10s and 0s based on how they feel, even if it's not a good way of rating the game. There is a reason why Destiny's user scores are much lower than the usual for this type of hyped up game. It can in no way be compared to CoD4 in terms of reception, the user scores DOUBLED Destiny's. We didn't make excuses for low user scores for any other game and there is certainly no reason to make excuses for Destiny now with user scores this low. Destiny is a flop in terms of reception, even Watch Dogs was slightly better received than this.

The metacritic "0s" argument doesn't even make sense because on other sites like Amazon where 0s aren't allowed the user scores are still low.

I'm not saying that Destiny specifically is being harmed more than usual by this practice (you may even notice that I don't rate Destiny very highly at all personally), but the idea that the 10's and 0's balance out is just wrong, because a 5 as a default score is already going to be seen as awful. If anything this practice is likely to ensure that smaller games have a better chance at a decent user score because nearly all scores will be applied to a blank slate (as they should be) rather than a very deeply rooted score of 5, that now needs a LOT of positive reviews to noticeably move the needle.

Also there's nothing objective about anyone's score for any game. Would my 10 score for Phantasy Star Online be an objective score? No... and it doesn't need to be. I like it that much, so that's how I'd score it. I don't think it's impossible to score Destiny a 10 simply because it isn't (anywhere close to) perfect. What I do think though, is that anyone scoring it a 10 becomes exponentially less likely as a result.

If we had a way to score a game objectively, then we'd only need a single review.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Just finished the game. Wow, that has got to be the lamest ending I have ever seen in a videogame. Did they deliberately not want us to care at all?

Anyway, all in all I enjoyed my time with the game. Will probably max out hunter and warlock as well. Not sure if I'm gonna grind for new weapons or something. Is there any completely new content added later on or is it just the already existing strikes in hard mode?

The ending isn't in and of itself such a bad thing, but it really needed to be earned. Unless it's preceded by a momentous accomplishment, the whole thing just rings hollow.

 

[antitrop]

destiny's multiplayer is a unbalanced mess??

I haven't played enough of Destiny's PvP to say one way or the other, as it turns me off at a base level enough that I will never get invested to find out.

But Titanfall's balance was one of its greatest successes, in my opinion. Balancing the mech combat and the infantry combat alone and together was stated as a core objective of Respawn from the very beginning and I think they nailed it.

 

[spootime]

No lie, anytime someone posts defensively (ex. "did reviewers even play the game!?!") I scan their avatar to see if there's a Destiny insignia. Try it. Hasn't been full proof but yeahhhh.

Anyway, PvP is where it's still at for me right now. I'll give the game that, at least. Disappointing since I didn't buy it for that, lol, but it's pretty damn fun. Won my first match of rumble. Have they elaborated on why they disabled mics/communication outside fire teams? Even in competitive modes? It's so freaking weird.

I've noticed this as well (about the avatars).

As for titanfall, it definitely felt like it didnt really have all that much content. Also the gameplay gets boring pretty quick. I think it kind of devolves into that mindless cod feeling after you've played it for a bit. One thing I will say about Titanfall is that it has some of the best multiplayer map design I've ever seen (except for that tropical map fuck that).

 

[Timmay]

Vanilla Diablo 3 was fun until the endgame though.

Exactly. Blizzard had to fix the end game and AH. Destiny is flawed from start to finish and I don't see them being able to fix that in the first game. Hopefully they can in the 2nd.

 

[Ivory Samoan]

Like this. The author even picks Wolfenstein as the better game than the big 3 hyped games.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...earned-from-titanfall-watch-dogs-and-destiny/

That's a good write up, and I think the parallels he draws with release version Diablo 3 are extremely on the mark.

I can see Bungie taking on board the criticism, acting on it by implementing changes and improvements along the way and pulling a Reaper of Souls on us with the expansions.

That would be pretty darn cool.

 

[Northeastmonk]

Just finished the game. Wow, that has got to be the lamest ending I have ever seen in a videogame. Did they deliberately not want us to care at all?

Anyway, all in all I enjoyed my time with the game. Will probably max out hunter and warlock as well. Not sure if I'm gonna grind for new weapons or something. Is there any completely new content added later on or is it just the already existing strikes in hard mode?

It definitely wasn't like Return of the Jedi. The ending didn't move me at all.

The heart of the game has more life to it than the plot does

RotJ had substance and life to its ending.

 

[Bold One]

Vanilla Diablo 3 was fun until the endgame though.

Diablo 3 today is a different story,

 

[BigDug13]

That's a good write up, and I think the parallels he draws with release version Diablo 3 are extremely on the mark.

I can see Bungie taking on board the criticism, acting on it by implementing changes and improvements along the way and pulling a Reaper of Souls on us with the expansions.

That would be pretty darn cool.

Doing that works in the PC market, but does it really work in the console market to finally fix your game a year later? It seems like console players are more likely to move on. Diablo had a large cult following of PC players.

 

[Maxim726X]

After really putting some hours into the game over the past few days I would say I agree with the Gametrailers review. I think Destiny is a solid 8. It's got a great gameplay foundation, and I really enjoy the play spaces they've created. I also enjoy the general loot game.

It just needs a better executed story to really sell it, and some tweaks here and there.

I agree. Put in about 17 hours so far and I'm still really enjoying it... Certainly does have flaws, and honestly the worlds don't feel organic in the slightest. Borderlands had more in that department IMO, but the core mechanics feel right and there's just enough variety of the weapons to make it interesting. Don't know if I'll be playing it in 3 months, but I'm having a good time thus far.

 

[Indiedevs]

Actually it was a about 8 million shipped, $500 million worth of product.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...visions-destiny-ships-500-million-in-one-day/

Wow, you can sell a game on hype alone. Who cares if it's good or not?

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Exactly. Blizzard had to fix the end game and AH. Destiny is flawed from start to finish and I don't see them being able to fix that in the first game. Hopefully they can in the 2nd.

Mhm, i agree with Lexi, I had a blast till Inferno Act 2.

And yeah, it took Blizzard time to rectify that mistake, that huuuuge leap in difficulty. I think 2 years till they shipped out the patch that fixed the problems? And it was a glorious fix. Can Bungie do the same? ....The fact that we're saying already that there's huge problems with the game should speak volumes.

 

[antitrop]

Wow, you can sell a game on hype alone. Who cares if it's good or not?

We learned this earlier in the year with Watch_Dogs, fresh out the Ubisoft Crapola Factory to become the fastest selling new IP ever.

 

[Indiedevs]

We learned this earlier in the year with Watch_Dogs, fresh out the Ubisoft Crapola Factory to become the fastest selling new IP ever.

Yeah, but the game was a straith up lie. The game they had at E3 2012 wasn't the game they released. How the hell did they get away with that? This is why you shouldn't be hyped for The Division or The Crew. Assassins Creed is the same game anyway, so I know what to expect there.

 

[antitrop]

Yeah, but the game was a straith up lie. The game they had at E3 2012 wasn't the game they released. How the hell did they get away with that? This is why you shouldn't be hyped for The Division or The Crew. Assassins Creed is the same game anyway, so I know what to expect there.

Preaching to the choir. Most of GAF saw W_D for what it was, generic Ubiworld BS with above average graphics that were nowhere nearly as good as what the general public thought they were excited for.

Watch_Dogs is like the lowest trade-in offer that Gamestop possibly offers, so I guess plenty were disappointed. They almost want you to pay them to take the game back, at this point.

 

[RespectThySole]

I'm not saying that Destiny specifically is being harmed more than usual by this practice (you may even notice that I don't rate Destiny very highly at all personally), but the idea that the 10's and 0's balance out is just wrong, because a 5 as a default score is already going to be seen as awful. If anything this practice is likely to ensure that smaller games have a better chance at a decent user score because nearly all scores will be applied to a blank slate (as they should be) rather than a very deeply rooted score of 5, that now needs a LOT of positive reviews to noticeably move the needle.

Also there's nothing objective about anyone's score for any game. Would my 10 score for Phantasy Star Online be an objective score? No... and it doesn't need to be. I like it that much, so that's how I'd score it. I don't think it's impossible to score Destiny a 10 simply because it isn't (anywhere close to) perfect. What I do think though, is that anyone scoring it a 10 becomes exponentially less likely as a result.

If we had a way to score a game objectively, then we'd only need a single review.

Exactly there needs to be a lot of scores to move the needle because most people are not impressed with the game. There is no other reason why the user scores would be so low.

If it is a game that is liked by most of the public, the user scores will reflect that and not be hysterically low. Look at TLOU, Dark Souls and Mass Effect as examples of games that are generally loved by most who play them.

The user scores are between 8.3-8.9 and are very near to the critic's score. Sure, there were people who gave these games 0s also, but there was clearly a much more positive reception than negative unlike what has happened with Destiny.

Many big titles have great user scores, stop trying to make it seem otherwise.

Yes not every person will enjoy a game to the same extent as another, but when there are many clear flaws with a game I can't call it a 10 just because I like the game. I loved Perfect Dark Zero, but it wouldn't make it any less silly for me to call it a perfect 10 with it's obvious flaws. I might not care about them as much as another, but it is not worthy of being rated a 10.

If I can't rate a game a 0 or 1 using your logic because of what the game does right, then I can't rate it a 10 considering what it does wrong either.

 

[Cavalier]

Is it really true that Destiny has over 180 awards and nominations even before the game came out? Or is it just marketing hype?

It's hard to believe a game that plays dreadfully boring won that many awards.

 

[antitrop]

Is it really true that Destiny has over 180 awards and nominations even before the game came out? Or is it just marketing hype?

It's hard to believe a game that plays dreadfully boring won that many awards.

Vertical slices can be deceiving. Always have been, will continue to be.