destiny thread


#1751

does this mean destiny is over on PC and the gang can get back together


#1752

Woooow, that’s some big news :open_mouth:


#1753

No, but it might mean the PS4 version doesn’t get timed exclusives.


#1754

uh woah


#1755

I didn’t see this coming, but it makes sense given Activision’s tone on earnings calls with regards to Destiny. They see this series as a failure so it’s no wonder they want to distance themselves from it.


#1756

i decided i wouldn’t play another lifestyle game but now i’m curious about d3


#1757

i am hype about this news

can i finally have destiny warthogs now plz


#1758

snort


#1759

cheese aside that line, and that moment, is one of the best pieces of writing in destiny

like they could have put anything in the log there to say “you did the thing”, “atheon’s time warp disrupted!” or something equally cheesy

“guardians make their own fate” functions both as a conformation that the correct action was performed and a rallying cry to complete the encounter and plug those bullets into it’s chest

it’s a pretty neat phrase

thanks for coming to my essay


#1760

F2P + Season Pass model for D3 could be interesting


#1761

:thinking:


#1762

After The Division became a massive hit as ‘Destiny at 65% quality’ and Ghost Recon Wildlands became massive as ‘Destiny at 50% quality’ I don’t feel confident predicting anything.

But Anthem is significantly worse than The Division. The shooting is sooooo ropey.


#1763

We did prestige eater of worlds today and it’s hilarious that it doesn’t also count as a normal mode run for records


#1764

bergusia forge is hard as balls btw

“recommended level: 650”


#1765

The thing that has kept destiny alive for so long is how good it’s primary verb feels. Anthem is pretty and looks like they have a lot of fancy technology going on there but the action doesn’t seem to read cleanly or have a strong hook. Nobody has matched destiny on this yet.


#1766

I agree that that’s why Destiny is Actually Good but I don’t trust my ability to predict the market that way, because The Division is doing very well without it.

Then of course there’s Bethesda, masters of the Eh, Good Enough action for going on two decades


#1767

The key to the success of Bethesda’s RPGs is that they are incredibly replayable. The different ways you can build a character is limited by absolutely nothing, and it’s actually really difficult to make a build that isn’t viable. You want your basic thief/fighter/mage? sure, whatever. You want to mix it up? Now we’re talking. How bout a stealthy two-handed greatsword user. How about a fighter mage that only uses Bound weapons and armor, but otherwise fights in melee. How bout a magical archer.

Even in Fallout, it still works. How about a smooth-talking boxer. How bout a mysterious gunslingin’ longcoat. How bout a mad scientist, running Int and Energy Weapons.

There’s never that moment where you’re stuck because it turns out you built wrong and now you have to start over because you took the wrong perk 26 hours ago. Every build works.


#1768

I think that’s an artifact of a single-player game without a competitive meta; most builds in most RPGs are as viable as those in Bethesda games. People just get worried when they run into a difficult patch and the culture might encourage them to restart when the game doesn’t; for example, it’s very hard to build wrong in a Souls game because the Defense stat is always growing and is such a leveler, but the difficulty and ‘git gud’ culture cause people to be anxious about it.

At any rate, yes, Bethesda games have good aspects that outweigh the poor combat and cause them to be Good to a huge number of people and yet a succession of issues including poor combat cause me to consider them bad, in the same way that I think The Division is bad and Ghost Recon Wildlands is bad and yet a bunch of systems, including ‘it’s where my friends are’, make them enjoyable to large numbers of people. But once we give that up we give up our critical voice.


#1769

In my experience, the only reason “most builds in most RPGs are as viable”, as you said, is that what you are able to construct is already pared down so much that, while you can’t make an unviable build, sure, you also can’t make an INTERESTING build.

Oh, you picked Fighter? Cool, you get no magic, dexterity, or stealth, but here’s 14 different ways to swing your sword that are all mechanically indistinct from each other, plus a small handful of utility attacks. Oh, you’re a rogue? No armor or 2h weapons for you, here’s your lockpicks and daggers, using anything else is going to be a severe penalty, if you’re even physically able to use it. Archer, eh? Well that’s ALL you get. Your choices are shooting one arrow or, if you’re very good, two. Maybe even shoot arrows real fast! Out of arrows? No melee combat for you, rangey. Run away or die! Unless we’re one of those games that doesn’t do limited ammo, in which case we’re going to nerf your damage per shot into the ground for some reason.

It’s like the difference between World of Warcraft’s (visual) character creation and the create-a-fighter mode in Soul Calibur or those wrestling games.


#1770

I mean, there was also the constant “you might not be able to use this really cool weapon/armor unless you leveled for it” threat in the souls games. Honestly, this caused me minor anxiety because dressing up characters is a primary joy for me.