{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/27/2015 5:26:03 PM
12
70% of that video makes me think Bungie is listening and cares about the fans/ players in Destiny. But i still can not shake the feeling the year 1 Beta was on purpose and Bungie truly believed we would not see the cut content dlcs for exactly that. Cut content.
English
-
it's activisions decision when the release date is and how the content should be handled, not bungies
-
They weren't cut.
-
lol you're blind.
-
Lol. I can see the tinfoil from a mile away.
-
Whatever helps you sleep at night, bud. The fact is, the shit was already in the game. You know it. I know it. Everyone with a clue knows it. The fact that nearly every playspace was broken into months before they were released... some of them in BETA, even, is proof enough. Not to mention the fact that nearly everything we have in the game now was shown at some point even before the vanilla game was released... Denial ain't just a river in Africa, friendo.
-
Ah. You're bringing up the fact that the areas were broken into. This has already been discussed numerous times. If that's you're only point. Then you're not really saying much. Unfinished areas. That changed after expansion downloads. There is one area definitely, shown before launch. Maybe more. But that was already explained. Served a different purpose and looked different. It doesn't help me sleep at night. I just don't jump on a bandwagon and become a conspiracy theorists. Have you seen Alex Jones Destiny videos? I mean BDobbins. Quit being paranoid. Game developers aren't evil entities out to steal your money.
-
Yes, criticize one fact as if it were the only fact, ignoring other facts in an attempt to obfuscate the situation. Typical denialist strategy, really. And no, you obviously don't jump on the conspiracy theorist bandwagon. You'd much rather jump on the "I like this game, therefore I'm going to deny every shred of evidence that might make my cognitive dissonance flair up, causing me to remember the fact that I'm being suckered into continuously paying out the ass for a game that was so blatantly sliced to pieces in order to get the aforementioned money being pulled from my ass." bandwagon.
-
No. I deny the baseless accusations. There was probably a ton of content cut before release. That's the problem. The game launched in poor shape. Any DLC we are getting was made after the fact. There is no evidence to support you. You, like many others are connecting dots to make your story a reality. When the truth is, you don't even know what went down with the game. None of us do.
-
lol no evidence to support me? Content that was shown in trailers a year before launch and wasn't released until nearly a year after launch (at a price) isn't evidence? Level geometry being in the game (and in some cases, obviously finished) during "preview alpha" and beta, which then isn't released until months later (at a price) isn't evidence? UI placeholders for content being in place well over a year in advance, along with datamined evidence of such aren't evidence? I mean seriously, they've withheld tertiary subclasses, ghost shells, shader and sparrow variants, etc from you for a year, and are making you pay 75% of the price you already paid to access that content that was already there, and you're okay with that... absolutely incredible. And no, it's literally impossible for them to throw together a DLC within 3-4 months and still have time to test it before release. Testing alone generally takes at least a month or two (and that's being generous), and you want to believe that the content was made after release? You're a fool. There's a reason people generally hate season passes and day-1 DLC, which have plagued the industry for years now. It's because content is blatantly CUT from a game and SOLD later. And moronic people make excuses (just as you're doing), to justify paying for an incomplete game on release, and paying again to finish it later. The real truth is, [i]you[/i] don't know "what went down" with the game, and are content to make excuses and remain willfully ignorant of the most likely scenario. Myself and many others, on the other hand, who actually know a thing or two about game design, and who know how the industry works, are able to make educated guesses based on the preponderance of the evidence.
-
Please learn how games are developed as well as the structure of large game studios, then please provide all-encompassing, irrefutable evidence of this because "geometry assets were there" isn't enough. How long do you think map development takes in comparison to coding all the weapons, all the systems, every quest or bounty, and then debugging and polishing it all? Not quite as long, huh? Don't you think they'd have extra time to work on some other stuff since this is a big studio we're talking about and they don't just have one team responsible for every map in both PvE and PvP? Let me also give you a little problem to solve to tell if you understand the process here; I'm gonna list two options and I want you to tell me which is better and why. Option 1 is that after they finish developing the base game map, they stop there and leave the map as is. Option 2 is that as the coding side of things gets everything in the base game put together and some side teams start work on the DLC, they try to shove as many extra map assets as possible into the file before the game goes into Alpha and Beta. As information is gotten back from the alpha and beta, they work on the main part of the map some more while possibly trying to sneak in a little bit of extra work on the stuff that isn't in the base game, leaving some of that extra stuff in the map but unfinished. I'm not going to go into specifics about what the biggest difference in execution of these two plans is, because whether or not you have the foresight to think about it from an efficiency standpoint is the purpose of this question. That's the only hint you'll get. Also, I'll just leave this out there; if you think Option 2 is better, you're supporting Bungie's decisions in making the game. Better come up with a pretty good explanation as to why Option 1 is better if you want to be stubborn about this.
-
lol "I choose not to believe obvious facts, therefore you don't know how games are made." You have no idea what I do or don't know. You're inferring I don't because you think it undermines my argument. That's called an ad-hominem remark. Google it. Also, your proposed situation is illogical. First, for obviously being a loaded question. Second, for implying the only possible options are those proposed. And third, obfuscation. Your proposal is a convenient assumption not based on facts (obvious because other developers generally don't do this, and when they do, the backlash is swift and decisive, unlike Destiny where too many denialists try to justify bad practices). Not to mention, you contradict yourself, attempting to argue that content wasn't present in the game before release, then attempting to justify content being present in the game by trying to argue that coding/balancing weapons takes longer than map design, which isn't true at all. Evidence of this is the fact that every month or two, a patch is released that re-balances weapons. Not to mention the entire itemization system is overhauled within the very short timespan of a few months between each successive content release. So this concept of coding and testing weapons being an excuse for not releasing existing content until a later date for a price just doesn't stand up to scrutiny at all. You also mention "coding quests" as part of the excuse for not releasing content, when those quests merely re-used existing playspaces in most instances. With the geometry out of the way, setting event triggers and scripts is actually pretty trivial in any game engine if you have any idea of what you're doing. This, of course, all leads to the safe assumption that [b]you[/b] are the one who actually doesn't understand game design. The only thing left is testing, really. So your argument is that taking an extra couple months to test finished content is justification for charging $20 for it... Content was shown and marketed 2 years ago that was only released months ago. This includes upcoming content as well. Content was also in the game over a year before it was released (at a price, no less). The overall content of the game was also quite obviously made with this exact business model in mind. A very different game than the one that was released is what was sold and marketed to us (yourself included) before launch. It is blatantly obvious that the business model for this game was to release an incomplete product, and then re-sell existing content later at a premium to any sucker willing to fork over the cash. You can deny facts, accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about, and parrot Bungie's excuses all you want. But it doesn't change the overall situation. I'm slightly sympathetic toward Bungie as I know it isn't 100% their fault. Activision has a large part to play (that contract having a firm grip on Bungie's testicles, as it were). But at the end of the day, Bungie agreed to it and Bungie executed it. I have to hand it to them though... withholding the content for a few months instead of making it day-1 DLC is truly a slick way to pull the wool over the eyes of the masses. And getting them to pay more than the price of the average DLC to boot... tsk tsk.
-
Well Bungie has said since day one that Destiny is going to be always changing
