There is a lot wrong with this post, I understand not being happy about things, but there are many things wrong about this post people need to understand. Problem 1: You hint at the bungie's story being a shell of itself. Well that can only really address the base game, it has only made huge improvements since then, especially with HoW. There are vast assumptions about how Activision and bungie influence took place, we don't know why certain staff quit or why things had to be changed. Some of those things may be highly personal. And when addressing an incredibly high standard that bungie had to meet with designing a new high budget game. That is the nature of all high budget games, not just destiny. Bungie has already agreed multiple times that they did not reach the bar of success they had hoped with the base game. They aren't hiding under a rock or ignoring it (that also doesn't mean they should address every individual fan, and they are absolutely entitled to respond once and leave it at that. If you have the time to type such a long post you have time to check twitter. Bungie has been quoted saying, "we are our worst critics." and that they always think they can do more. - http://www.gamespresso.com/2015/07/09/bungie-isnt-satisfied-with-destiny-still-a-ridiculous-amount-of-work-to-do/ Problem 2: You call the game early access up to this point. That's nothing but childish. You repeat that phrase throughout the post yet there is nothing factual or opinionated about it, it's more likened to childish name calling. They have released a game with enough content for people include yourself to invest hundreds of hours, that is no demo. Also they have added content, and much of it was free. Problem 3: You reference a reddit post, well not really reference, more of hinting at the addiction aspect of destiny then throw in a random link that you never mention again. In the reddit post, the guy mentions nothing of if Destiny broke the trend, it is purely speculation as to if this guy's formula was used in Destiny. As to respond to that, I would say almost certainly. and if so, so what? What developer doesnt want to make an excellent game that people want to play forever? Many games have followed this principle, and Destiny is not the first (see WoW, Diablo to name a few games off the top of my head.) The fact that this bungie employee was smart enough to analyze it and quantify it in writing is pretty fantastic, I bet that man would be amazing to talk to in person. Problem 4: You say vault space isn't going to be fixed. That is a very definitive statement to make for one who knows nothing of what happens behind Bungie doors. Also, it was improved once (https://www.bungie.net/7_Destiny-Update---04142015/en/News/News?aid=12773), so clearly they are listening. Problem 5: You claim that the smaller vault is purposeful to force the user to "change their habits." Im very curious as to how you came to that conclusion and speak so definitively about it? Do you have a quote to pack this up? Otherwise you need to state that this is simply how you feel. because continuing to use the guns you prefer doesn't require more vault space. Problem 6: You claim that the vault space wouldnt be a big problem if the dlc guns were better, but that doesnt make any sense either, because if you are running out of space that only means, you are collecting both previous and dlc guns. You also pose a question asking how do they combat it, then go on to mention the weapons 2.0 update, and wonder why people are being punished for overuse of favorite weapons, but the thing is that if you were thinking logically, you would know that having only a few favorite weapons would actually keep the vault clean more so, but you make the opposite, contradictory argument, and you never bring it back around to vault space, you just keep going on your random thought train. Problem 7: You claim that the nerfs are because of over use. However Bungie does not claim this. Even though they reference the use of guns like thorn in iron banner and ToO, they only bring these charts up (Weapons Tuning 2.0 New Post) to bring context to the fact that the gun is overpowered, and therefore being used alot, go read the paragraph immediately after the graph highlighting thorn's high use. Your logic stopped one step short by blaming the use of the gun instead of asking why it was being overused. That is an important question in the process. Your missed context here is blaming the gun nerf on over use. But that is not correct at all. Problem 8: This was my favorite one, i literally laughed out loud on some of these parts. The problem is that you assume things about the quality of the gun but provide not context or facts to back it up, you just see nerf in front of a weapon's name and assume it's going to shit, just because auto rifles died. The funny thing is that right now, auto rifles are the only unused gun type. all other guns are fairly balanced. (see datto tweet train). How can you genuinely think positively about this game, but be soo blindingly ciritcal of something that hasn't even happened yet? You claim, "What's worse is that X1 gamers are going to be excluded from realizing how amazing Hawkmoon was in PvP. It was the perfect counter Thorn.... An exclusive weapon that is set to drop Sept 15th will be invalidated before x1 gamers get a chance to use it. Such a shame." If you don't give valid argument to anything, please give me a valid argument for how the hell this is true? People if you read OP and read me as well, please know that this statement is COMPLETELY FALSE. It will still have 3 random bullets with bonus damage, it will still have higher impact than thorn, the only thing that changes is it''s very high range (which thorn is losing as well), and it can no longer have all the lic damage's proc on the same bullet. In essence it stops the one shot kill, it can still two shot and is still incredibly dangerous weapon. It will still outgun Thorn in good hands (and with a bit of luck) If you have proof of an argument otherwise, bring it on (but you don't, because there isn't any) Problem 9: This is my second favorite and revolves around the PvE complaints you make around the nerf of specific weapons. mainly G-horn, Black Hammer, and Icebreaker. These weapons will not be AS deadly as they were previously to allow other guns to be closer in competition. You give no proof the incapability or dominance of these weapons? If you think they are useless know, prove it. Don't just make some innacurate claim with no evidence. In your talk on g-horn, you talk about how much you covet the gun, and how all the LFG people who refused to let you in their groups if you didnt have it only motivated you. "It made my angry but more determined, to start building three characters and running strikes, NF's, and Raids consistently until [I] finally got one 800+ hours into the game" (numbers are not relevant, some have logged more hours than you but got the gun in the first two weeks) You go on to say, "But then is that the gamer's fault or the failure of Bungie to introduce a matchmaking system within Destiny?" Again here you choose to conveniently ignore the negative sides to matchmaking and how this can certainly create gamers that are just as ineffective as if you had not played in the first place. here is the contradiction I want to point out the most: You claim that G-horn drove you to play MORE. Yet later on in the post you say, "When quarterly earning are announced from Activision, Wall St. analysts and investors demand to know how Destiny is doing from a user engagement standpoint. By destroying our OP weapons this will cause our engagement levels on all activities [to] rise dramatically from week to week." Okay which one is it? Are they making you play more by making an OP gun that is impossible to get, or by nerfing them and making them less effective? It is a complete contradiction. You also have no idea what you are talking about and it is a brash overstatement with NO source that you make the earning quote. Yet you say you cite sources and have been gathering information... This is incredibly biased and misinformed. I hope no one actually believes this crap you are making up out of pure frustration. Knowing that this is a stupid argument to make, you go ahead and make a counter argument in advance. you claim that the strategy changes, but again you don't say how and have no sources for your claim? Its a 3 second nerf to Icebreaker. Let's be honest if you want to sit back there still, you will. But there is no proof out yet that strikes are taking longer, so why do you make these accusations? From personal experience some of my funnest strikes have been without any of these. In fact, like you, I have three characters on both systems. Right now I dont have icebreaker, ghorn, or black hammer on xbox. But strikes are not taking too long, I don't feel useless or powerless. I'm having fun using the guns I have and still breezing through. The reason I can breeze through is not the type of guns I have as much as it is my knowledge of the strikes and how to play them well.