{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by FlyingSculpin:
7/13/2015 6:13:36 PM
21
I made a rather lengthy rebuttal to this in another thread, I'll edit if I can find it.
The casino argument might make sense if I could drop some money into a slot machine and play as much as I want. There is a major difference between paying every single time you play and paying once to play as much as you want. Addiction is a much needed component of a game, otherwise games become disposable.
Edit:
[quote][quote]Danny has a problem with Destiny. He doesn't think it's a bad game, but its development surfaces some troubling ethical questions about the role of game design in keeping players addicted. Especially when expensive DLC is involved.[/quote]
Good points on behavioral game design, but I don't agree with the overall sentiment against it.
He talks about "removing content" which is an unfounded argument that needs to stop being pushed around, it's asinine to believe that because Bungie had already created some content that it should be given to you, that's not how business works. That's like going to a fast food restaurant, seeing some food sitting under the warming lamp and expecting them to give you that food along with your order, because it's made already. It's like going to work on payday and only getting half of your paycheck, because you already did that work two weeks ago and your boss doesn't feel like paying you for it now. It's a terrible argument and it needs to go away.
Games should be addictive, that's the point, I want something that keeps me coming back, not something I play for a couple of days then collects dust on my shelf for eternity. Speaking of games that collect dust, expensive DLC? As apposed to purchasing a new game, at full price, and playing it a fraction of the amount of time put into Destiny? Destiny is a cost effective game, it provides the addiction and enjoyment, things that a game SHOULD have, at a very reasonable cost IMO.
He makes a point about games being "worth it" if it culminates in an ending. He's promoting disposable games, which I believe is way more unethical than tapping into behavioral science. If you're happy purchasing new games all the time and trading them in or selling them because they aren't worth playing anymore than I guess that's where our views differ, because I'm not okay with that.
The guy said it himself, Destiny does not have a sub, meaning that the cost of support and infrastructure has to be obtained through game and DLC purchases, meaning that DLC at regular intervals is NEEDED to support the cost of hosting your game environment, fixing bugs, and implementing features.
Perhaps you're against Bungie/Activision making money off of their games, that their games should be sold at a price that is just enough to cover their costs and put food on their tables, that this very successful commodity that they are providing shouldn't grant them financial gains. In a perfect world everyone would work for free and share their products openly, but this isn't utopia, this is reality, and if you create a successful product you should be rewarded for it.
tl;dr - Addictive games > disposable games.
P.S. - When I say "you" I mean the people that are against behavioral game design or companies profiting off of their products.[/quote]
English
-
Some stuff about what you said (Please keep in mind I am on mobile, so expect typos): The whole problem with cut content, for me at least, is that the cut content in destiny prevented the game from being a complete product. Let's assume for the second that both dlcs were complete prior to release (which is not true, but it serves the example). Destiny on release was lacking in content. Only one race had an endgame activity, the story was lackluster and incomplete, and the events were sporadic and poorly done. Post both dlcs, all major races(besides the cabal) have full sets of raid armor, appropriately themed endgame activities, a slightly more flushed out story (still far from what it should be), and consistent pvp events that challenge players. The problem is that these dlcs didn't add extra fun, unnecessary content. They added vital content that should have been present in the first place. To see why that difference is important, look at fallout 3's dlc. None of those dlcs were required to have a complete experience. The base game provided plenty of content and exploration by itself. The dlcs were true add ons instead of the gap fillers put out by bungie. At release, destiny was suffering from a lack of content. Anything that they had ready that would alleviate this issue should have been in the game. This is why cut content is so unacceptable. Also, games shouldn't be addictive. They should be interesting. I should want to play destiny because of my curiosity about the game and my interest in outfitting my gaurdian in awesome gear. I should never think ,"here is my destiny checklist for the week". Addictive games just lead to repetitive content that is aimed at keeping people playing instead of keeping people interested. This leads to a player thought process that forces people away from your game. Instead of the player thinking, "Let's go kill skolas so I can get a new gun!", they begin to think "I've got to go kill skolas as many times as possible to maximize my chances of getting a single gun". In other words, creative/interesting games> addictive games. Sorry for the wall of text, but I wanted to do justice to your reply.
-
Lack of content is not cut content, it's, well, lack of content. I would have been happy with more content at release, but that's not really my call. The anecdotal argument that other games have more content isn't really all that important to me, other games don't provide the same experience you'd get with Destiny. So while you can argue that Fallout has more content to plow through I can argue that Fallout doesn't have a co-op experience or a good multiplayer experience, it has more of a play through and put away feel to it. The content argument is very linear and doesn't do much really compare games sufficiently. Again, this is another area where you might have certain games that excel in story telling while others excel in gameplay. Obviously the consensus is that Destiny is lacking in the area of story telling, this is an area where other games like Last Of Us excel immensely, but Last Of Us also had some finicky controls, it just doesn't have the same feel as a game where the focus is gameplay and smooth controls. Again this brings me back to the idea of linear comparison, the idea that every game focuses on the same things and should be equal on all fronts, it's just not the way it is.
-
I'm not saying lack of content equals cut content. I am saying that destiny had so little content to begin with that leaving out content just hurt the game even more. The Kings watch, for example, has been finished since the games inception (you could glitch in to the area). Having these cut areas would have helped the games longevity. When it comes to content, the ability to replay the same thing does not equal extra content. While there are definitely different styles of content development, destiny didn't reach any point of good content development. Sure, the gunplay is good, but that is no excuse for a lack of story. Destiny's world is completely new, and needed in game explanations for its world. Even if you wanted to keep players in the dark about certain concepts, the main story needed to provide a scope and a cohesive story that it didn't have. In terms of content types, gameplay and story aren't mutually exclusive. It is possible to have both, and when establishing a world like destiny, it is necessary to have both.
-
The area may have been created, but was the encounter created and thoroughly play tested already? Probably not. I'm curious what exactly the expectation was? More content would be nice, but no amount of content would be enough for people that play all the time. How many hours of gameplay should be expected from a game at release? What features should a game focus on and what should it avoid? This game is a year old already and it is still going strong, so I'm not sure what you're saying about longevity, this game definitely has it. Gameplay and story ARE mutually exclusive, in fact many games have been created solely for multiplayer. Battlefield for instance did not have a campaign until Battlefield 3, I sunk over 2000 hours into BF2 because the mechanics of the game were that compelling. Counter Strike is also a campaign-less game, but it's one of the most played and openly modified FPS games in history. The idea that every game must come with a new and compelling story is a new one, but it's not a requirement to create a great game. It may be for you, but it's definitely not for everyone.
-
When you ask about the quality of the encounter: Fact is it really didn't change that much. You went in and fought an enemy called in uber captain. Now you go in and fight 3 captains and a servitude. That shouldn't have taken 6 months to "polish". This game also has a far shorter longevity than you think. The fan base of this game has showed serious drop off, especially among the day one players. While destiny continues to bring new players in, it is losing a lot of the people that keep it going because the content isn't diverse enough. When it comes to games like counter strike, these games sell themselves based on super nuanced and perfectly balanced gameplay. Destiny doesn't even come close to that sort of gameplay. In essence, it may be possible to go only one way or the other when it comes to gameplay and story, but destiny isn't a game that Can lean to either side. It depends on both as its selling point, because of the new setting it uses to facilitate the gameplay. In counter strike, the premise is fairly simple. In destiny, the premise is far more complicated, and completely unexplored by past games (destiny's universe is unique). Because of this, it requires a story to successfully complete the game. In the case of destiny, it is absolutely necessary to have both story and gameplay.
-
And the entire mission up until that encounter? Voice acting? I'm assuming that you are game designer? Or should I just take your word on how long things should take? Who even said it took six months, it could have been finished the day after initial release, that doesn't really change anything. What exactly do you do for a living? Just curious so I can chime in with an expectation that I'm not qualified to make. You know that based on what? Nothing really, it's all anecdotal, but if you could provide me with the stats that support this claim I'd be like see it. But again, what's the expectation, that a purchase you made last year should be providing hours of entertainment on a daily basis, forever? Seems pretty far-fetched to me, the old players are burned out and will come back when more content is available, just because someone isn't playing it all-day-every-day anymore that doesn't mean they wont return with they have more stuff to do. Perfectly balanced game play? Are we living in fantasy land? You must have never really got into CS and Battlefield on the PC. I understand that Destiny, in the way it was created, does require a story, but the game play above all is the most important aspect of an FPS, bar none. To restate, I'm not defending the story, it was a flop, but again, that's not why I play this game.
-
I don't understand why you have started with the personal attacks. I am having a discussion with you, and have been nothing but polite up to this point. If you continue to resort to this type of argument, I will not respond. You are missing the point of what I am saying. The point isn't, "It was all done before the dlc and Bungie is lying OMG". The point is that destiny was in major need of content upon release, and having that area open and some slightly different content placed inside could have extended the longevity of the game. My experience with counter strike is admittedly limited, but the gunplay seems to be (from what I have played) extremely well balanced. From what I have played, there is no obviously op weapon, like thorn or old suros, that nearly everyone uses. I have no active player stats to throw at you, but I do have the personal experience of psn friends who don't play the game anymore. I'm not saying that destiny didn't provide me with hours of play. What I am saying is that destiny was light on new experiences and heavy on repeating old ones. That means it had little content, even if it had a lot of replay-ability.
-
I apologize if that came off as a personal attack. My intention was to point out that you do not know how much time it took to "polish" the encounter, and even if it was polished already, the voice acting or other aspects may not have been done until recently. Not everything is completed at once, different people contribute in different ways, at different times, to create the end product. I understand that point, but it relies on an assumption, you seem to believe that the game is dying, that it doesn't have longevity, but all you've provided is anecdotal evidence. Counter Strike works on a bank system. The game starts you with a fixed amount of cash and you can purchase gear at the start of the round. Now, if you spent all your cash first round and die quickly the next round you will not have much cash to get the weapons and gear you need, while the opponent can now buy more armor, more grenades, and better weapons. The AWP is one of those better weapons, it's a one hit kill sniper. Now, if that doesn't sound like a game that can QUICKLY become VERY lopsided I'm not sure what does. Again, I'm going to beat the dead horse, but how much content is enough? You keep saying "more content" we need it for "longevity" but you don't really articulate what that means or how it would put people that burn through content at a high rate in a better position than they are now, over a year later. I'm not against more content, not at all, but I do not believe having more content would really change much, if anything at all, in the grand scheme of things.
-
Cutscenes, an actual story, custom gaming. Thats what Destiny needs.
-
You drop money in the Bungie/Activision slot machine about once every 3 months, assuming you are picking up the DLC. I don't see the difference. That's why they have a "10 year plan". If Bungie can get $100 per year from players with expansion, that will be $1,000 each.
-
Nobody was forced to purchase the DLC to continue playing, if you wanted more content you payed for it. Let's be real, if this game was like a casino you'd be paying for every life. Die in crucible? Pop in 25 cents for another life. Want to play the nightfall? Throw in $1 for every attempt. Doing a raid? That'll be $3. ToO? $10 for every punch card...
-
So sad that this counts as a "successful product". I mean, do you base this on sales only? Or ratings and reviews?
-
I sure as hell don't base it on salty forum goers. I don't like the Twilight series, lots of critics don't like it either, but doesn't mean it wasn't successful.
-
Ok so success in sales you cant deny, they did get all our money. The loot system was broken, got better after HoW. Still broken No custom going, not a successful strategy. Ultimate replay-ability gone forever. No consistent balance for weapons in pvp endgame modes (ToO and IB) Need i go on. Look if i come off as salty its because ive put in way more hours, you barely can have an opinion man. Just basing it on your stats alone is enough.
-
[quote]The loot system was broken, got better after HoW. Still broken[/quote] The loot system was always meant to be RNG, there's nothing broken about it, that's the way it is designed. You may not agree with an RNG system, perhaps it could have higher drop rates, but it's definitely not broken. [quote]No custom going, not a successful strategy. Ultimate replay-ability gone forever.[/quote] Perhaps you could rephrase this, I'm not sure what this means. Custom Games? like crucible matches? Sure it would help the replay-ability but it does not dictate the replay-ability. [quote]No consistent balance for weapons in pvp endgame modes (ToO and IB)[/quote] They have balanced the weapons, A LOT, far more than most games do. Thing is, in order to gather good statistical data they need A LOT of data. Then they use that data to make tweaks where necessary. I guarantee if they were tweaking stuff all the time rhetoric would quickly change from "they don't balance" to "they change too much", there is literally no pleasing people that are going to nitpick on every little detail relentlessly. [quote]Look if i come off as salty its because ive put in way more hours, you barely can have an opinion man. Just basing it on your stats alone is enough.[/quote] "I've played more; you don't get to have an opinion." is NOT an argument. If anything it is a good COUNTER to your argument since we've both invested the same amount of money, yet you've apparently played substantially more than I have, and somehow still think Bungie is a casino that's out to extort us for money at every turn.
-
Edited by ZaddyZealot: 7/13/2015 10:47:45 PM[quote][quote]The loot system was broken, got better after HoW. Still broken[/quote] They claimed that the better performers have a better chance at getting better loot except ive still seen people at the mid or even bottom get better loot while first gets absolutely nothing. So still broken [quote]No custom going, not a successful strategy. Ultimate replay-ability gone forever.[/quote] You never played Halo or Halo 2 or 3. Ok so allow me to enlighten you, instead of matching with randoms we could completely customize a match solely with our mates and have mods like changing the time, guns, or gear, etc on the map. Imagine playing rumble with only your buddies with thorn or tlw locked so no one could use it. This would allow you to practice strategies and have unique experiences that would never have been achieved with the current set up. No drops/loot or exp gained just pure old school Halo fun. [quote]No consistent balance for weapons in pvp endgame modes (ToO and IB)[/quote] You think Thorn is balanced? Look the devs even admitted that autos were superior in the beginning, shotys got buffed and thorn wasnt that impressive till TDB. They admitted thats the way they want it, a certain gun will reign supreme at one point or another throughout destinys lifetime. "I remember when suros was the king, now that time has passed. Its thorns turn now." That will never truly be balanced, ever. And they like it that way. [quote]Look if i come off as salty its because ive put in way more hours, you barely can have an opinion man. Just basing it on your stats alone is enough.[/quote] I keep saying this but again i like this games pvp now only. I have played everything since vanilla so i got to experienced the game on multiple levels. It seems you got in around tdb or how so lets be real here. You opinion is very narrow.
-
[quote]They claimed that the better performers have a better chance at getting better loot except ive still seen people at the mid or even bottom get better loot while first gets absolutely nothing. So still broken[/quote] ToO? The best players get guaranteed gear from Borther Vance, and the best of the best go to the lighthouse. Do you want only the good players to have any fun? Because that's what it sounds like. [quote]You never played Halo or Halo 2 or 3.[/quote] I have played those games and I'm fully aware of the custom matches component, but this isn't Halo and the mechanics of this game are completely different. Firstly Halo isn't an RPG the way Destiny is, you don't collect gear and weapons, they're given to you, there's no real level progression, there aren't unique classes with unique abilities, etc. etc. Now if they went and completely removed all the of the aspects that make this game Destiny then I'm sure it would be simple to allow custom matches. As it is there is a lot of different things that need to be sorted out in order to make a comprehensive custom match designer. I think it would be great to create custom matches, and I'm sure they'll get there someday. [quote]You think Thorn is balanced?[/quote] Did I say that? Absolutely not. I said they do balance the game, you can't deny that. Sorry that they don't balance the weapons every day? I'm not sure what to say to you, so I'll just quote myself. [quote]I guarantee if they were tweaking stuff all the time the rhetoric would quickly change from "they don't balance" to "they change too much", there is literally no pleasing people that are going to nitpick on every little detail relentlessly.[/quote] [quote]I keep saying this but again i like this games pvp now only. I have played everything since vanilla so i got to experienced the game on multiple levels. It seems you got in around tdb or how so lets be real here. You opinion is very narrow.[/quote] I have the game on both systems and I've been playing since release. Clearly you're the narrow minded one here, and as such this will be my last reply to you. I'm frankly not interested in having a conversation with a condescending elitist that thinks his opinion is the only one.
-
You do have some vanilla guns, I'll give you that. Was solely basing it by medal score so Ive just put a lot more into crucible than you.
-
I don't think dropping money in every spin or every three months is really the issue here. You drop money in and RNG spins every chance it gets. Most stick around hoping the next RNG spin will be the big hit. That's exactly like a slot machine.
-
That's a pretty ridiculous argument, are you saying that people only play for drops? So if I get that drop I'm looking for I shouldn't bother using it, because the drop is all I wanted, I didn't really want to play the game... I just want drops. Give me drops. Then I can go play something else, because drops are all I want. Most people stick around because they like playing the game.
-
Not saying people don't like the game but do you think a gambling addict walks away on a big payout? Nope. Neither will someone praying to RNGesus. It's all about the next one. That's why we crank out the same strike for the 1000th time. All I need is this or all I need is that. Then they get it. Do they quit afterwards. Nope.....because we are junkies.
