Its only "disappointing" to gamers like yourself who have NO IDEA how to explore the depth of a game. But hell, that's your loss...not mine. I'm probably close to 150 hours into this game...and STILL feeling like I've only scratched the surface.

It seems "gamers like me" are most of the press and a very large part of their customer base. And if so many feels that they fail to live up to their promises, then Bungie have no-one to blame but themselves.

No. "Most of the press" are professional critics who do nothing but play games all day every day...and have basically lost sight of the purpose of games. FUN.. I love Machinima's response to all the critical negativity toward Destiny. One guy just basicaly said "Hey, are we just not allowed to have FUN anymore?" .....and went on to pointing out how just about everyone in their office is playing the game at every spare moment they have...and that most critics have lost sight of the purpose of what they are doing (answering the question for the consumer..."Is this game fun to play?" That is just a chore they hve to get through in order to write a review..and get back to the "rest" of their lives. Which is probably why "critical acclaim" has nothing to do with what titles actually sell the best, and are the most popular. To further cement the Abusurdity...they pointed out some of the games that were supposedly 'better" than Destiny...according the the "76" Metacritic gave it. It was just so ridiculous I couldn't stop laughing. It used to be that a 6/10 was reseved for a game that was BROKEN in some fundamental way. It's controls were clumbsy. Its code was glitchy. Etc... Not anymore, apparently. Now you just have to be a high-profile (AAA) target...and in the sights of an irritated critic.

[quote]It used to be that a 6/10 was reseved for a game that was BROKEN in some fundamental way.[/quote] I remember when 6/10 used to mean a game was merely average. Not broken, not great, just middle of the road average. Usually fun without delivering anything innovative or ground breaking. It was when anything less than 8/10 started to be regarded as crap that the problems with reviews really started.

In any grading/rating system I've ever ben a part of, 60% is a failing grade. ...and thank you for demonstrating my point about critics *losing the point*, and feeling that the purpose of a game is to be "impressive" and "innovative". The purpose of a game is to be FUN TO PLAY, and ENTERTAIN the gamer. Anything else is gravy. I don't care if a game is "innovative"...if it's not fun to play. I don't care if its innovative if it IS fun to play.

On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is worst and 10 is best then anything around 4, 5 or 6 is OK. Not terrible, not fantastic. It's not a pass or fail thing, it's a simple grading system. As best as I can remember, Official Playstation Magazine UK (and 2 generations of 8-bit and 16-bit system focused magazines before them) used a system that generally went like this: 1. Awful 2. Bad 3. Poor 4. Below Average 5. Average 6. Above Average 7. Good 8. Great 9. Excellent 10. Perfect Destiny is far from being a 10/10 game (I remember back in the PS1 days, only 3 games that I can remember ever got 10/10 from the major magazines). It's also far, far away from being bad. The point I was getting at is that review scores stopped being any sort of accurate or reliable indication of the quality of the product as soon as certain publishers started buying 9's and 10's. I've had a lot of fun so far, and aside from a few annoying things (lack of matchmaking in certain modes, lack of easy communication between players) it's a good, solid game.