Destiny

Destiny
 
 

Marketing is a complicated thing. If you’re about to release a new product, conventional wisdom might suggest that the more advertising spend you throw at it, the more anticipation you build, and the more successful the product will become.

But the reality is more complicated than that - you have to hype up whatever it is you’re selling enough to get people interested, but without overselling it, lest the final product not live up to expectations. Good marketing isn’t just about money, it’s about striking the perfect balance between braggadocio and authenticity.

 
Ad FeedbackAdvertisement

As has been a trend lately with videogames, Activison went with the more-is-more approach with Destiny - with a large chunk of the game's $500 million budget directed towards advertising. Between live action trailers, a Google Street View-style map of the planets players can visit, and all manner of gameplay trailers, press releases, and previews, it’d have taken a concerted effort to not hear something about the game in the last few weeks.

And fair enough, too. This is a new game from Bungie, the studio who created Halo: Combat Evolved, a game that refined the first-person shooter genre and introduced elements that are now standard, like regenerating health. From the way Activision and Bungie have been talking about it, Destiny was set to bring about a new era of first-person shooters, to change the way we think about the genre.

It’s for this reason that, despite it being a decent enough game, I feel so let down by Destiny. I was expecting something mind-blowing, but what I got was an enjoyable, but generic and unremarkable sci-fi shooter that does little to push boundaries, and stumbles with the few innovations it does attempt.

Destiny is best described as “safe.” In an effort to not rock the boat, the game sticks religiously to the tried and true: if you’ve played a first-person shooter at all in the last 10 years, you’ll find yourself right at home (which is handy, because there’s no tutorial or manual of any description).

Enemies are varied enough, though with a few exceptions, they’re mostly your stock standard FPS fodder that you’ll take on in the stock standard FPS fashion - careful use of cover and well-timed shots to take out snipers, back-peddling and bullet spray to stop rushing melee attackers, and so on. They’re not particularly smart, for the most part, with a tendency to stand around and let you line up headshots in a gentlemanly fashion; though admittedly, this is truer for some than others.

Bosses are impressive from a visual perspective, but are more or less just bigger versions of the regular enemies in terms of mechanics, and they all demand the same approach - find the weak point, shoot it, and avoid the big attacks that are usually clearly telegraphed.

Role-playing elements keep you getting stronger and hanging out for the next level up or piece of loot, but are light enough that you’ll pick it up quickly, even if you’ve never played an RPG before. Earning experience from downed enemies and successful missions helps you level up, and with each level you get a new ability or perk. Growth is strictly linear, which makes the requirement to manually activate each upgrade as though you’re spending skill points an odd and annoying one, though you have a bit of freedom at higher levels when you’re forced to choose which perks from a set of mutually exclusive ones to have active at any given time.

There are no stats to deal with beyond attack power and defence, both of which are governed by gear, and armour, recovery, and agility, which are determined by class selection and currently selected passive abilities. Like the FPS side of things, the RPG elements are strictly by-the-book, doing nothing wrong, but nothing memorable, either.

The safe, careful approach is applied to the plot, too, which basically amounts to “those guys are bad, please shoot their heads off.” It’s the standard good-versus-evil affair that’s been being told for thousands of years, with no surprises or complex character development to muddy the waters; functional, but forgettable.

It’s not helped by a particularly sterile brand of world-building. At first, the beautiful, panoramic backgrounds and detailed textures of the worlds you visit will take your breath away, but it doesn’t take long for that veneer to give way to environments that feel like exactly what they are - carefully manufactured maps designed for shooter gameplay, without the slightest hint of any kind of life. Even Venus, a lush, tropical world (and the only one that’s not a dusty, desert wasteland) feels more like diorama in a glass bottle than a living, breathing world.

Sticking to the familiar isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because it’s familiar for a reason. Destiny’s mechanics are solid, and the story, while not particularly memorable or engaging, isn’t terrible. But in sticking so close to what we know and have played hundreds of times before, Destiny struggles to set itself apart from a sea of Halo clones.

The point of difference that’s been the core of Bungie’s message since Destiny was announced is its “connectedness”. This is a game where you’re not the big damn hero, saving the world all by your lonesome (even though the plot involves exactly that), but one of many heroes, part of a thriving community. To that end, Destiny delivers a persistent, online world and a multiplayer experience that we were told be revolutionary.

Revolutionary? It’s anything but. Destiny is often described as a massively multiplayer online (MMO) game, one in which hundreds or thousands of players all co-exist in the same space - not necessarily playing together, but interacting with one another, and being part of something bigger. Destiny is more of an MMO-lite, it has the persistent world and occasional run-ins with other players, but with three basic actions (wave, point, and dance) as your only means of communication, the social aspect is all but null and void.

However, you still get all the problems that come with an always-online game: a requirement to have a stable internet connection in order to play, a dependency on the game’s servers to be running smoothly, and an inability to pause the game. We put up with these in multiplayer games because they’re part and parcel of a functional online infrastructure, but the core of Destiny’s main campaign is more of an “online singleplayer” game.

At best, the always-online element adds nothing to the game, while not getting in your way too much either; at worst, you have random encounters with players named SmellyUndiesLUL destroying any sense of immersion, and an inability to pause when nature suddenly calls during a big boss fight.

There are, of course, more traditional multiplayer modes as well, both co-op and competitive. On the competitive side of things, you have the Crucible, which continues Destiny’s trend of playing it safe and sticking to the formula. There’s a limited, but diverse array of game modes which will be immediately recognisable to fans of the genre, and a decent selection of passable, but not particularly noteworthy maps on which to fight. Sadly, anyone wanting to play through a variety of game modes in one session without having to back out to matchmaking every time is out of luck, as there are no playlists of any sort for the Crucible.

For those concerned about the RPG elements, fear not. Gear is normalised in competitive multiplayer, so everyone is more or less on even footing. The only exception to this is to do with abilities gained through levelling up; you only have access to whatever skills you’ve unlocked, so if you go into the Crucible at a low level, you’re going to be hindered to some extent by a lack of mobility options and stat-boosting perks unlocked at a later stage.

For co-op, you have Strikes, Destiny’s answer to dungeons in MMORPGs, and the single worst thing about the game. Strikes are horrendous. They’re glorified horde modes, sending you and two others to one of the same locations you visited in the singleplayer campaign and pitting you against wave after wave of the same enemies before a big, ugly boss.

The problem is that, despite being a co-op mode, they demand no cooperation or teamwork beyond reviving allies who have fallen; regular enemies either rush you or stand back taking potshots, while every boss is functionally identical and requires the same strategy - find and shoot the weak point while avoiding the big attacks. There’s nothing whatsoever to encourage, or force any kind of teamwork, to the point that Strikes just feel like three people playing a singleplayer game, albeit on the same map and against the same foes.

To make matters worse, they’re unreasonably, frustratingly difficult. And not from any kind of complexity that can be overcome by strategy, but from sheer weight of numbers. If you attempt a Strike at its recommended level, you can expect to be overrun by more enemies than you can feasibly handle, giving you little to no time to focus on attacking the boss. When you do actually catch a break and hit the big baddie, you’ll find that they have a ridiculous pool of health - to the point that taking down a boss will take anywhere from ten minutes to half an hour, depending on how over-levelled you are. And, if you should be unlucky enough to get wiped out, you have to start the whole thing again, from scratch.

The real kick in the teeth is that once you get to the level cap of 20, farming strikes to get tokens for better gear is basically what the game is reduced to. Bungie is promising big things with Raids, six-player dungeons that can only be attempted by a pre-formed group of friends, that are said to require high levels of coordination. The first Raid won’t be in the game until September 16, though, so for now - and for anyone who isn’t able to find five friends with matching schedules to form a raid group - Destiny’s endgame amounts to repeating the game’s most tedious, boring, and terribly designed element ad nauseum. And honestly, given what I’ve seen with Strikes, I don’t have much hope for Raids either.

Destiny isn’t a bad game, by any means. If you like sci-fi shooters, you’ll get a good 20 hours of enjoyment out of this. But that’s really all it is; a fun, forgettable shooter that plays it safe and sticks to what’s been proven, with nothing to really set it apart from its peers. But maybe that’s for the best, because Destiny’s one area of attempted innovation - its hyped up social elements, persistent world, and multiplayer gameplay, are its biggest failing.

Update: The $500 million figure was the overall budget for Destiny - both production and marketing - not just marketing, as initially suggested by the review.


Destiny
"An enjoyable, but unremarkable sci-fi shooter."
- Destiny
7.0
Good
 
Follow Own it? Rating: M   Difficulty: Medium   Learning Curve: 5 Min


 

Relevant Articles

 

Comments Comments (70)

 
Posted by Ubercuber
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:32 AM
19
Safe is the best way to describe what Ive seen. Its like when movies are designed for the 4 quadrants to best get a return on investment.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:41 AM
21
Good review matt.

I'd say the innovation comes with it being an MMO FPS that works well without group chat and 400 emotions (which non MMOers hate) and instead utilising group chats. Not very innovative but different in that sense. It seems more like a persistent borderlands 2.

Great neutral review though, which can't be easy off the heels of a hype train like Destiny's.
 
 
 
Posted by Bunnny
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:42 AM
14
Whoa. That's what I've felt but couldn't figure out the words.
Great review.
 
 
 
Posted by darkap
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:44 AM
10
pretty spot on review, hopefuly they add alot more with dlc and raids, higher lvl cap would be nice as well
 
 
 
Posted by oconnomiyaki
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:46 AM
15
Just one thing: you mention that there are no stats apart from attack power and defence, but so far I've seen discipline and strength for titans. There's also weapon alignment to consider, as ice throwing star (or whatever the hell it's called) is better against wizards, etc.

For the rest of it, yeah, I've been telling people it's "comfortable". It's not going to set the world on fire, but when I come home from work it's nice to have something like this to just snuggle down into and play. I don't necessarily agree with you about the lack of tactics -- which is perhaps why you found them hard -- as I know in fireteams we were timing our shots so that we could pull down a shield on some of the elders without then going out of ammo and hating ourselves for it while their shields recharged as we reloaded.

The biggest problem it has is that it's c*mbersome to add someone outside of your friends list to a party, and the only way to talk to people is via fireteam, even in PvP.

To be honest, although I like it and I can see myself playing it for longer than most games these days, it does strike me as Titanfall v2.
 
 
 
Posted by LukeB
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 11:27 AM
8
Nice review.

I'm enjoying the game well enough, I wish there were more characters I'could latch onto in the story or with the people you interact with in the Tower. It's a waste that they have so many amazing voice talent, and they're relegated to saying naught but a few generic lines of dialogue. An introductory cutscene or pop-up video chat when they message you would have really helped the immersion. As it stands, I'm constantly missing out on story details or dialogue because people in my party are chatting. On the plus side, I don't mind replaying missions, and you pretty much have to in order to level up your secondary subclass.

There are a few more RPG-lite stats too. Some armor boost your Intelligence, Discipline or Strength. All of which help increase something, from increased damage, to a reduced cool down time. Right up to lvl 20 it seems, most uncommon armor only boosts one of these stats, but the better equipment boost multiple as well as giving bonuses like giving a quicker reload speed.

It's certainly one of the better examples of a co-op FPS. Reminds me of the Spartan Ops missions in Halo 4, but some work definitely needs to be done on expanding the story (outside the Grimoire cards).
 
 
 
Posted by LeftoversNZ
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 11:31 AM
2
Summed up perfectly for how i've been feeling about the game and also pretty much what I was expecting after playing the Beta. It's enjoyable and i'm having fun with it but currently it's not going to go replacing Battlefield as my most played game.

What i'm going to be curious to see is the development of the franchise in the coming years. Now that they've made the big up front investment in IP, game engine and other technical palava and played it safe this time round perhaps the "real innovation" will come with Destiny 2.
 
 
 
Posted by czk51
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 11:36 AM
3
'safe' - nailed it.
 
 
 
Posted by mchumdinghy
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 11:44 AM
2
Even several days after launch I still don't even know how I would describe destiny to someone in the space of an elevator ride and I think that might be Destiny's biggest problem
 
 
 
stevenz
Posted by stevenz
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 12:17 PM
3
The level cap is 20!? Geez, I got to 11 in one day without even particularly trying hard, that doesn't bode well for longevity.

Very enjoyable game, but I don't disagree with anything the review says. It's a sort of amalgam of Halo, Borderlands (sans craziness) and WoW, but yeah, doesn't really offer anything new. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but in any war, you're presumably going to largely be encountering much the same foes, so the lack of variety in that aspect is probably "realistic".

Those bloody spidertanks though... Grindy McGrinderson.
 
 
 
Posted by Kyimo
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 1:07 PM
5
11 September 2014, 12:17 PM Reply to stevenz
The level cap is 20!? Geez, I got to 11 in one day without even particularly trying hard, that doesn't bode well for longevity.

Very enjoyable game, but I don't disagree with anything the review says. It's a sort of amalgam of Halo, Borderlands (sans craziness) and WoW, but yeah, doesn't really offer anything new. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but in any war, you're presumably going to largely be encountering much the same foes, so the lack of variety in that aspect is probably "realistic".

Those bloody spidertanks though... Grindy McGrinderson.
yeah, the soft level cap is 20, you stop leveling via EXP at that point.
after that high level gear has the Light stat which boosts your level to a max of 30.

the daily quest system is based around being level 22(can be done at 20 but will be harder) and the raid "The Vault of Glass" requires level 26 i think it was.

also strikes can be replayed/played at a higher level with modifiers(think skulls in halo). but i think they are set, rather then you get to choose which are active.
 
 
 
Posted by Bappernz
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 3:09 PM
2
Sounds like pretty standard for a new always online title, should get better with time and more content however
 
 
 
Posted by TenguNZ
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 4:02 PM
3
Good review! Unlike the Watchdogs hype I thought this game delivered on most levels but it is safe and overly repetitive. Hopefully the expansions and other DLC in the future will make it worth continuing playing down the track.
 
 
 
Derd0n
Posted by Derd0n
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 4:14 PM
-14
So, wait a second. The game is out like two f**king days and someone is already attempting a review? That's f**king bold, gotta say that.
20 hours playtime... its only the damn story, which is admittetly boring, right. Remember the Diablo games? People definitely don't play this sh*t for its good story.
But anyhow. Haters gonna hate...
 
This comment has been down-voted by the community.  
 
Posted by sakuraba
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 4:31 PM
3
Hey great review i really wasnt sure about this game. Cheers
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 5:07 PM
20
11 September 2014, 04:14 PM Reply to Derd0n
So, wait a second. The game is out like two f**king days and someone is already attempting a review? That's f**king bold, gotta say that.
20 hours playtime... its only the damn story, which is admittetly boring, right. Remember the Diablo games? People definitely don't play this sh*t for its good story.
But anyhow. Haters gonna hate...
The reviewer may have already played the beta and then played the full version long enough to know how it plays.
Also if Matt has dedicated enough time to it to have a feel for how the game plays, this is supposedly a revolutionary game so you cant really guess the exact amount of time required to fully "appreciate" a game.
How long should the review wait to come out? 20 hours of gameplay? 100? its all arbitrary.
Especially as your measuring them in Days. Matt probably played more of it in 2 days than I will in 2 weeks so this would help someone with limited time like me decide if he wants to play this game.

If the reviewer doesn't like a game how long should they suffer through it?

Plus if you actually read the review it looks like Matt has definitely played enough of the game to have a great understanding of the game and form a backed up opinion.

And looking at the comments it seems that a lot of people either a) agree with him or b) enjoyed reading his review.

If you like the game for reasons other than the general public then there is an option to do a reader review when you feel the right number of days has passed.
 
 
 
slymeburger
Posted by slymeburger
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 5:13 PM
5
11 September 2014, 05:07 PM Reply to drunk_monk
The reviewer may have already played the beta and then played the full version long enough to know how it plays.
Also if Matt has dedicated enough time to it to have a feel for how the game plays, this is supposedly a revolutionary game so you cant really guess the exact amount of time required to fully "appreciate" a game.
How long should the review wait to come out? 20 hours of gameplay? 100? its all arbitrary.
Especially as your measuring them in Days. Matt probably played more of it in 2 days than I will in 2 weeks so this would help someone with limited time like me decide if he wants to play this game.

If the reviewer doesn't like a game how long should they suffer through it?

Plus if you actually read the review it looks like Matt has definitely played enough of the game to have a great understanding of the game and form a backed up opinion.

And looking at the comments it seems that a lot of people either a) agree with him or b) enjoyed reading his review.

If you like the game for reasons other than the general public then there is an option to do a reader review when you feel the right number of days has passed.
I actually agree with DM for once.

This review is spot on. Its a good game, not as amazing as expected but still really good.

A bit generic but nothing wrong with that.
 
 
 
Posted by jtbthatsme
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 5:20 PM
5
I think the review does a good job of summing it up. I played the beta and that was fun I could at least find people wandering around (although very few) but now at full release on XB1 I struggle to connect to friends for more than a minute or two, For the last day with my moderate NAT I couldn't manage to get to the tower managed to start 2 crucible matches all which lasted about 1 minute before getting kicked for supposed network issues.

This has left me playing today no crucible matches, I managd to get to the tower after running a 5 metre ethernet cable to my modem but I found not a single player walking around the tower or in the missions over the entire time I played so far today (about 5 - 6 hours so far).

I am nearly at the level 20 cap in 2 days so I find this to be annoying as well it was actually my biggest fault in the beta levelling up so quick makes for little sense of achievement in replayability and this is supposed to be a MMO FPS type game.

The levels are good looking but also quite generic in gameplay if I can't party up there's no raiding or fireteam strikes that I can do and no achievements for playing with friends or my clan.

So for me the best thing I can say about this game is that I rented it. After Friday's return I will maybe get it out or borrow my friends in a month or so but otherwise I don't think they'll make a long lasting franchise out of this like they had with Halo.....or maybe that should be a enjoyable long lasting franchise as you can bet your bottom $$$ they'll be onto a sequel soon enough so they can have the game playing as people were hoping for and expecting in this one.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 6:55 PM
4
Comment has been removed.
*sigh* as you can see from a lot of comments a large number of people agree with matt including saying safe is the perfect word for it. This includes people taking part in the NZG community defusing your argument about not playing with friends.

A review is a reviewers opinion of a game.

People are allowed to have different opinions so stop being condescending and sarcastic.

How about instead of just criticizing others opinions you write a reader review. You will find the option to do that centimetres below your condescending and immature comments.
 
 
 
Posted by oconnomiyaki
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 7:10 PM
4
So I played my first strike outside of a fireteam. I think that this game is going to get a lot of unfair criticism in the same way that it would be unfair to criticise WoW based on it's Looking For Raid option. The review also gives it away somewhat: "and for anyone who isn’t able to find five friends with matching schedules to form a raid group". Okay, yeah sure. And WoW is super sh*tty at 90 if you don't have 9 other people. And trust me, it's hard to find 9 other people who don't think gaming/WoW is everything and everything. But no one says WoW is a bad game.

Why am I saying this? Am I overly defensive? Well I'm just saying that it's easy to criticise -- and fairly -- an experience where the make-up of the group is cobblestone and the communication is zilch. But that doesn't reflect what the game could be.

I get now what I meant what Bungie said about early reviews not reflecting the full game. If I had no PSN friends, this game would be balls. Fortunately, I have lots of people I can for complete firetream and raid groups with that will give me a great experience.

I mean, none of them want to commit to a WoW raiding regime, so I'm sure they are on "normal people". ;)

Doesn't invalidate the rest of the criticism about communication, story, and vibe, but I think it's WAY too early to talk about the game as a whole if you're basing it on cobbled together groups because you needed to have a review up ASAP.
 
 
 
dtrulez
Posted by dtrulez
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 9:02 PM
-
Comment has been removed.
When I first got into the game and watched the introductionary video on Mars, with all the great background music I thought, wow, it looks and sounds like a AAA sci-fi movie like Prometheus for instance. I was blown away by it....few minutes later I felt like I am home, played like half life 2 and halo in a mixed gameplay, which was great for me.

My first dissapointment came when I reached the Tower, it felt too smal, I expected something like the Citadel in Mass Effect. The big dissapointment for me for now is that there is no chat and you can't form a pickup group, which I think is game breaking experience.

Anyway I will give it a chance in the few months to see what updates are in store for the game, and if its boring people will stop play it anyway.
 
 
 
pd_33
Posted by pd_33
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 9:10 PM
-3
I would have to disagree. 20 hours is not enough time to write a detailed review of the game. At this point the game is basically a very polished beta, with little bit of content. And everything that is available so far is highly good and polished. If I had to describe Destiny in a word. I would say it is very Polished shooter. Maybe the reason why the reviewer disliked the game was because he tried to solo everything. And Destiny is meant to be played with other players. That's my one complaint about the review. You cannot expect the game to be easy in the first few days of release, when you are basically playing in Wow greens.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 9:22 PM
9
Comment has been removed.
I thought you were a jerk and you're getting thumbed down because of the attitude.

You are allowed to disagree but don't be a d*ck about it.

So things you said wrong because you asked for it.

The cynical statement about how could they revolutionise it? They said they were going to revolutionise the genre, if they didn't make that promise then it wouldn't be held against them.
And to make that daft statement "You poke out from cover and shoot them in the head...that's so 1995" isn't a fact.
In fact bungie revolutionised the genre with halo in 2001. So if they revolutionised the genre and said they were going to again... And didn't then that should be held against them.

So this review is matt's experience of the game which is supported by many people. This will help people who have similar tastes decide if they want to buy the game.

If you think that he was unfair then you can give constructive criticism instead of being a jerk.

I disagree with the review but it is a good review, well written, supported by facts. Just things matt didn't like, I did.
 
 
 
dtrulez
Posted by dtrulez
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 9:24 PM
2
11 September 2014, 09:10 PM Reply to pd_33
I would have to disagree. 20 hours is not enough time to write a detailed review of the game. At this point the game is basically a very polished beta, with little bit of content. And everything that is available so far is highly good and polished. If I had to describe Destiny in a word. I would say it is very Polished shooter. Maybe the reason why the reviewer disliked the game was because he tried to solo everything. And Destiny is meant to be played with other players. That's my one complaint about the review. You cannot expect the game to be easy in the first few days of release, when you are basically playing in Wow greens.
You said it's meant to be played with other players. Ok, but why then you can't party with them or talk to them to make a party. It's a major inconsistency.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 9:28 PM
7
11 September 2014, 09:10 PM Reply to pd_33
I would have to disagree. 20 hours is not enough time to write a detailed review of the game. At this point the game is basically a very polished beta, with little bit of content. And everything that is available so far is highly good and polished. If I had to describe Destiny in a word. I would say it is very Polished shooter. Maybe the reason why the reviewer disliked the game was because he tried to solo everything. And Destiny is meant to be played with other players. That's my one complaint about the review. You cannot expect the game to be easy in the first few days of release, when you are basically playing in Wow greens.
If the game is essentially a polished beta then they shouldn't have released it yet.

To say a reviewer shouldn't review a game released because it's essentially a polished beta is silly. A reviewer reviews the game in.the state that it is in when they play it.

Also yea the game may be a 10/10 for someone who only plays multiplayer but there are people who want to play the solo campaign, so this review would be useful for them.
 
 
 
SoloAce
Posted by SoloAce
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:48 PM
2
11 September 2014, 04:14 PM Reply to Derd0n
So, wait a second. The game is out like two f**king days and someone is already attempting a review? That's f**king bold, gotta say that.
20 hours playtime... its only the damn story, which is admittetly boring, right. Remember the Diablo games? People definitely don't play this sh*t for its good story.
But anyhow. Haters gonna hate...
I just wanted to say thank you, your review is as accurate as it is going to get, Although I was expecting a (6/10) from you. 7 is a game I would be more than willing to play, especially with the lack of decent next gen games out. I unfortunately have grown bored of Destiny in less than 2 days.

I also just finished reading the only other critic review out right now. He gave Destiny a 9! He is currently getting called out for writing a "bs review" by a majority of the respondents.

For all the Matt haters, please don't give negative comments if you fall under one of these categories: 1) don't own Destiny, 2) You are under the legal driving age, 3) You can list the amount of games you have played on one hand.

Thanks Again. You have gained one follower.
 
 
 
SoloAce
Posted by SoloAce
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:56 PM
1
Thank you Matt for the most accurate critic review currently available. I was expecting you to rate destiny a (6/10). 7 for me is a game i would pick up, mostly for the lack of good next gen games.

I just finished reading the only critic review available. He gave destiny a 9! He is now suffering from a wave of hate, they are calling it a "bs review". I for one have grown bored of destiny in less than 2 days.

Please do not leave Matt negative comments if you fall under any of these categories:
1) Don't own Destiny, 2) You are under the legal driving age, 3) Your lack of gaming, can fit all games played on 1 hand

Thanks again Matt. You have gained one follower.
 
 
 
SoloAce
Posted by SoloAce
On Thursday 11 Sep 2014 10:58 PM
2
Thank you Matt for the most accurate critic review currently available. I was expecting you to rate destiny a (6/10). 7 for me is a game i would pick up, mostly for the lack of good next gen games.

I just finished reading the only critic review available. He gave destiny a 9! He is now suffering from a wave of hate, they are calling it a "bs review". I for one have grown bored of destiny in less than 2 days.

Please do not leave Matt negative comments if you fall under any of these categories:
1) Don't own Destiny, 2) You are under the legal driving age, 3) Your lack of gaming, can fit all games played on 1 hand

Thanks again Matt. You have gained one follower.
 
 
 
ShankYouKindly
Posted by ShankYouKindly
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 12:03 AM
-
Comment has been removed.
Finally, someone with some sense. I have put about 30 hours into the game now and am just beginning to scratch the surface. I was actually in agreement with the review until he started going on about the strikes. They are possibly the best element of the game. Amazing co-op gameplay.
 
 
 
ShankYouKindly
Posted by ShankYouKindly
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 12:13 AM
-5
11 September 2014, 09:22 PM Reply to drunk_monk
I thought you were a jerk and you're getting thumbed down because of the attitude.

You are allowed to disagree but don't be a d*ck about it.

So things you said wrong because you asked for it.

The cynical statement about how could they revolutionise it? They said they were going to revolutionise the genre, if they didn't make that promise then it wouldn't be held against them.
And to make that daft statement "You poke out from cover and shoot them in the head...that's so 1995" isn't a fact.
In fact bungie revolutionised the genre with halo in 2001. So if they revolutionised the genre and said they were going to again... And didn't then that should be held against them.

So this review is matt's experience of the game which is supported by many people. This will help people who have similar tastes decide if they want to buy the game.

If you think that he was unfair then you can give constructive criticism instead of being a jerk.

I disagree with the review but it is a good review, well written, supported by facts. Just things matt didn't like, I did.
Bungee never once promised to revolutionize the genre man, this is getting irritating. Activision is behind the hype, and guess what, hype isn't anything. It is YOUR expectations, and that should never be a part of a review, as reviews should be absolutely objective and unbiased.

This game will take so.e time to fully sink in with people, but just you wait.
 
This comment has been down-voted by the community.  
 
ShankYouKindly
Posted by ShankYouKindly
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 12:18 AM
-3
11 September 2014, 09:22 PM Reply to drunk_monk
I thought you were a jerk and you're getting thumbed down because of the attitude.

You are allowed to disagree but don't be a d*ck about it.

So things you said wrong because you asked for it.

The cynical statement about how could they revolutionise it? They said they were going to revolutionise the genre, if they didn't make that promise then it wouldn't be held against them.
And to make that daft statement "You poke out from cover and shoot them in the head...that's so 1995" isn't a fact.
In fact bungie revolutionised the genre with halo in 2001. So if they revolutionised the genre and said they were going to again... And didn't then that should be held against them.

So this review is matt's experience of the game which is supported by many people. This will help people who have similar tastes decide if they want to buy the game.

If you think that he was unfair then you can give constructive criticism instead of being a jerk.

I disagree with the review but it is a good review, well written, supported by facts. Just things matt didn't like, I did.
The one thing bungie has promised from day one is another great bungie shooter. They have delivered, and them some.
 
 
 
spectre855
Posted by spectre855
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 4:33 AM
6
This is an excellent review! You've really nailed how I feel about the entire experience so far and 7 is the number I had in mind. I think the biggest letdown for me is that I expected something at least a bit better story-wise than what we got. The Halo series sits in my top 10 of all time and a huge part of that was the amazing story and atmosphere. You really felt like you were in the middle of a war for survival. The actual gameplay here feels, for lack of a better word, pointless. Why am I doing any of what I'm doing?

Mmo-like interaction with other people could have made up for the lack of story, but this is in no way an mmo. The other humans playing around you might as well be npcs since there is literally no way to interact with them. Seriously, watching another person near you mowing down a group of enemies doesn't really feel any different than watching a dragon mow down a bunch of npcs in Skyrim. The level of interaction is the same.

Co-op and pvp aren't bad at all which are why I don't feel like buying this was a complete waste but I think there are plenty of other games that do these just as well or better. I'm starting to think that AAA games require so much complexity and investment that they're never going to really reach the creative pinnacle that they used to.
 
 
 
Posted by Goonertron
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 4:37 AM
3
Seems like my opinion so far as well, wish the game had more of the tone that the launch trailer presented, Led Zeppelin blasting in boss fights and just more humour. It's such a sombre story that I don't even really pay attention to it. But the main gameplay and leveling is pretty fun so far.
 
 
 
TrialMonkey
Posted by TrialMonkey
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 7:52 AM
2
No stats to manage beyond attack power, defense, armor, recovery, agility, strength, discipline, and intellect. Yeah, kind of a limited selection there.
 
 
 
Hippeus
Posted by Hippeus
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 8:01 AM
2
Nice review. Its how I feel about the game. Doesn't really set itself apart from a lot of FPS games like Halo for me. Don't get me wrong I like the game. Its just it didn't have that "Oh ****" next gen shooter we were promised.
 
 
 
Posted by SpawnSeekSlay
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 8:31 AM
4
I agree with the review.
Was hoping for more, diasappointed in some features, happy with the visuals, but ultimately still enjoying it alot and Im sure Ive only touched the surface. It is a safe game, But im hopeful that the sequels will build on the solid base, which is exactly what I think this game is.
 
 
 
Posted by Dvst8u
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 8:40 AM
2
i remember the good ole days of video store hiring , then i could make my own opinion on a game before i bought it...shame we still all cant do that now...?
 
 
 
Posted by cortez72
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 9:27 AM
2
I am glad this game isn't a traditional MMO. I was burnt out by MMO culture some time ago.

I shudder to think of the experience of standing in the tower with people shouting "Moon Strike: Level 30 only, LF sniper, no warlock class."

Otherwise a little disappointed to hear the game experience isn't terribly deep. I've had a hard time getting into it due to a lot of disconnect with the Aussies I play with. Will give the game a proper spin Sunday see how I come up.
 
 
 
Posted by LoftyDog
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 9:47 AM
3
good review. mirrors my time with the beta. Good but not great. I'll get it eventually but probably wait for a good sale first.
 
 
 
Posted by atipuss
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 9:53 AM
3
great review :) 7 sounds about right to me
 
 
 
d_3847
Posted by d_3847
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 10:12 AM
3
For those who are considering buying Destiny, or perhaps wanting to play, here's a healthy review I fully agree with, after spending 20+ hours with the game myself. I'll only add my criticism of the "competitive" multiplayer, as a competitive player.
Destiny's multiplayer has been grossly advertised as 'competitive' as well as 'compelling' but it's more the antithesis. It's not so much that the multiplayer is unbalanced, but rather over centralizing meta and noncompetitive. It's an arcade shooter that's CoD formulaic at best, instead of the competitive arena shooter as promised.
The first major problem is the lack of custom games. This is actually a big deal. We can forgive Bungie for the lack of map forging, but with only 4 basic meta games, and the inability to create and play custom games, this is the bane of competitive possibility. (No MLG, no tournament play, etc.)
The second, of course, is the lack of a competitive ranking system. Win, lose, draw, everyone gets XP, the best players aren't recognized, and nothing matters.
By nature of spawning with power weapons (i.e. Shotgun or Sniper), map and weapon control are meaningless. In Halo, power weapons spawn in strategic points on the map, promoting team synergy, map control, map abuse (movement and positioning), and weapon control. Utilizing and more importantly maintaining power weapons like the Sniper Rifle means you earned it.
Destiny's argument to this criticism is the ammunition. While you have the ability to spawn with a Shotgun or Sniper, you must scavenge the map for ammo. After hours on multiplayer, and exploring all playable maps, this is false. No player must scavenge for ammo - heavy ammo crates are not only easily accessible but also quite frequent. No need to control the map; acquiring more ammo for power weapons is a trivial affair. Throughout all games, with no effort, I was able to fuel ammunition for the Sniper or Shotgun in all games, effectively Sniping or Shotgun rampaging through every game.
The second argument Destiny conjures in regards to power weapon spawns is the illusion of balance. All players have the ability to spawn with the Sniper, so it must surely be perfectly balanced! You can get what everyone can get! This is fallacy and brings about the second major problem with power weapon spawns.
All players able to spawn with Snipers forces all players to play and think the same banal way, and effectively relinquishes any incentive for map abuse. Strategic routes of travel and effective map points are undesirable in the face of 6 Snipers. All players able to spawn with a Shotgun further discourages tactical map points and their routes, and actually promotes camping. No one may safety engage (especially in close quarters), as its an noncompetitive Shotgun fest.
The maps themselves are rather bland, and any possibly crafty designs are irrelevant. Regardless, some maps like the Moon fully encourage the use of vehicles and turrets, another bane to competitive play.
A few miscellaneous points to remove competitiveness and players kill:
1. Auto-aim
2. Slow aiming/scope speed
3. Receiving Supers regardless of how awful you play.
 
 
 
SmellyUndies
Posted by SmellyUndies
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 11:42 AM
16
Bahahaha.
I can't believe of all people that could have ruined your online gaming, it was me = SmellyUndiesLUL.
This has to be the lamest claim to fame I've ever had.

Sorry my name ruins your immersion but I'll make sure to continue ruining everyone elses. don't you worry friend.

Jokes aside, really enjoyed the review man.
This is still my personal favourite game on PS4 at the moment and it'll stay that way for a while.
Small world eh?
-SmellyUndiesLUL (Ruiner of immersion)
 
 
 
HigoChumbo
Posted by HigoChumbo
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 12:53 PM
10
Created an account and signed in just to say you guys have a new fan, NZgamer.

Greetings from your proud antipodes (that'd be Spain ^^)
 
 
 
Posted by Romulus
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 2:40 PM
6
This must be the most controversial review ever posted.
 
 
 
grieving
Posted by grieving
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 2:42 PM
9
12 September 2014, 11:42 AM Reply to SmellyUndies
Bahahaha.
I can't believe of all people that could have ruined your online gaming, it was me = SmellyUndiesLUL.
This has to be the lamest claim to fame I've ever had.

Sorry my name ruins your immersion but I'll make sure to continue ruining everyone elses. don't you worry friend.

Jokes aside, really enjoyed the review man.
This is still my personal favourite game on PS4 at the moment and it'll stay that way for a while.
Small world eh?
-SmellyUndiesLUL (Ruiner of immersion)
If it's really you, this review just became awesome.
 
 
 
Posted by ModifiedSoul
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 3:39 PM
3
im really really liking this game, the only things its not doing right for me is the size or scope of the game BUT im kinda thinking No Mans Sky may have ruined (or spoiled) me as far as exploration is concerned

dont completely agree with the review (still i think its a good review)
BUT i do agree with the score (go figure ?)

good game
 
 
 
SmellyUndies
Posted by SmellyUndies
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 3:59 PM
8
12 September 2014, 02:42 PM Reply to grieving
If it's really you, this review just became awesome.
Yep it's me.
One of my friends on a forum actually pointed out I got noticed by a reviewer and I had to check it out.
Such win.
 
 
 
Posted by MonkeyMan
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 7:45 PM
1
This is what I expected but it seems everyone else got caught up on the hype train
 
 
 
Posted by Tzeit
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 9:25 PM
-2
$500 million and they couldn't make me give a damn.
 
 
 
stringcheeesebanana
Posted by stringcheeesebanana
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 10:42 PM
1
Still waiting to see if I want this game. Some conscerning things in this review
 
 
 
pd_33
Posted by pd_33
On Friday 12 Sep 2014 11:28 PM
-7
11 September 2014, 09:28 PM Reply to drunk_monk
If the game is essentially a polished beta then they shouldn't have released it yet.

To say a reviewer shouldn't review a game released because it's essentially a polished beta is silly. A reviewer reviews the game in.the state that it is in when they play it.

Also yea the game may be a 10/10 for someone who only plays multiplayer but there are people who want to play the solo campaign, so this review would be useful for them.
Yes the game is a polished beta I will stand by that. No way is it safe. This is one of the first highly polished online persistent world MMO game. And when you review an MMO in 20 hours, your review will lack credibility. Because the best thing about an MMO is the end game. Not the grinding out your levels to level 20. It is the end game that MMOs or as its known a Persistent World Shooter. Which is a very unique type of game, in no way is it safe. It is incredibly ambitious project, which over time (here is the keyword here). Over time, grows into something great. You cannot review this game without experiencing raids, strikes. I found the strikes in this game very fun to play. I guess the reviewer played a completely different game from the one I did. I have a great sense of accomplishment when I and a team of 2 other players destroyed the Devil's Layer.
 
This comment has been down-voted by the community.  
 
procion
Posted by procion
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 7:37 AM
2
So why did it bother even getting 7(.0)? I could not buy into the hype of this game and it seems it cannot even rest on it's laurels (whatever ones it has). Goes to prove the point that no matter how much money you throw at something, it still needs to be able to earn it's own worth, despite the free ride monetary wise it's desperately being flung at by big daddy Activision..
 
 
 
Posted by ActualTats
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 1:38 PM
2
Hmmm, this review has put me in two minds whether to pick this up or not. I was hoping for something ground breaking. Might wait this one out now...
 
 
 
Posted by Tzeit
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 3:24 PM
-1
13 September 2014, 07:37 AM Reply to procion
So why did it bother even getting 7(.0)? I could not buy into the hype of this game and it seems it cannot even rest on it's laurels (whatever ones it has). Goes to prove the point that no matter how much money you throw at something, it still needs to be able to earn it's own worth, despite the free ride monetary wise it's desperately being flung at by big daddy Activision..
Pretty much this.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 3:43 PM
6
12 September 2014, 11:28 PM Reply to pd_33
Yes the game is a polished beta I will stand by that. No way is it safe. This is one of the first highly polished online persistent world MMO game. And when you review an MMO in 20 hours, your review will lack credibility. Because the best thing about an MMO is the end game. Not the grinding out your levels to level 20. It is the end game that MMOs or as its known a Persistent World Shooter. Which is a very unique type of game, in no way is it safe. It is incredibly ambitious project, which over time (here is the keyword here). Over time, grows into something great. You cannot review this game without experiencing raids, strikes. I found the strikes in this game very fun to play. I guess the reviewer played a completely different game from the one I did. I have a great sense of accomplishment when I and a team of 2 other players destroyed the Devil's Layer.
Fine if it's a polished beta then it should loose points because it has been released as a full game. The review should reflect the state the game is in when it is released.

If I'm buying a game for $120 then I don't want a beta.

You say MMO alot but bungie emphasised the hell out of this not being an MMO so treating it like one would be careless.

If I released a game and said it was not a FPS and then you compared it too FPS's that would be silly.

Also this review is useful for people who aren't necessarily MMO players. I don't like MMO's, I found this review useful, and bought the game as a 7 is a good score, and thanks to this review I had realistic expectation of what the game is like and am enjoying it.

Saying " I guess the reviewer played a completely different game from the one I did." is just being silly. Of course he played the same game, but he had a different experience to you hence a different opinion.

If you feel this review was too harsh you can write one on this site so give that a try.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 3:48 PM
7
13 September 2014, 01:38 PM Reply to ActualTats
Hmmm, this review has put me in two minds whether to pick this up or not. I was hoping for something ground breaking. Might wait this one out now...
I'd recommend it if you want to enjoy a MMO style FPS. I've been enjoying the hell out of it.
The story is average but the gameplay is great.
 
 
 
Posted by Wertbag
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 4:27 PM
6
I hate people who say "you didn't play it right", that it is designed for groups, for friends or some such. It's bollocks, you should be able to play a MMO anyway you prefer. Want to solo it? Fine. Want to play with half a dozen friends? No worries. Want to join an international team and group with people you've never met? Absolutely your choice. I've personally played solo through many MMO's and never had a problem with it.
There should never be anyone saying the way you are doing it is wrong, there is no such thing as a wrong way to play a non-linear persistent game.
 
 
 
fatbot
Posted by fatbot
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 6:56 PM
2
Good review. The shooting mechanics are pretty solid (apart from random enemies trying to steal your targeting reticle sometimes) and it makes for a fair game while grinding for gear if that's what you're into. That ending though - I won't spoil it - is really bad which matches the story too. So if you're looking for a shooter with a good story, this isn't it
 
 
 
Posted by ModifiedSoul
On Saturday 13 Sep 2014 9:09 PM
3
13 September 2014, 06:56 PM Reply to fatbot
Good review. The shooting mechanics are pretty solid (apart from random enemies trying to steal your targeting reticle sometimes) and it makes for a fair game while grinding for gear if that's what you're into. That ending though - I won't spoil it - is really bad which matches the story too. So if you're looking for a shooter with a good story, this isn't it
I wouldn't say its story is bad but i would say it's un finished, so much left to be answered and the grimoiras only add to that list,
 
 
 
Posted by baileynz
On Sunday 14 Sep 2014 8:29 PM
-
Excellent review, pretty much agree with everything. Early days for me and it does feel repetitive, but it does look and feel great.
 
 
 
fatbot
Posted by fatbot
On Sunday 14 Sep 2014 11:13 PM
1
13 September 2014, 09:09 PM Reply to ModifiedSoul
I wouldn't say its story is bad but i would say it's un finished, so much left to be answered and the grimoiras only add to that list,
Yeah, the story definitely feels unfinished. I thought I was about half way through the story when I came across the end credits
 
 
 
Schwacko
Posted by Schwacko
On Monday 15 Sep 2014 9:05 AM
1
Yes, the game is very repetitve but honestly that's not a deal breaker for me. I played wow for 6 years and that game is about as repetitive as you can get, hit the level cap grind dungeons to get better gear so you can grind raids to get even better gear. The formula works, and as long as they continue to add more strikes and hopefully a new planet the game will be great. I have mostly gamed on pc a lot more than console and this is the first game since burning crusade wow era that I have spent more than 5 hours on a single gaming session. It's an 8.5/10 in my book, but everyone is entitled to their opinion and the review was very well written.
 
 
 
Schwacko
Posted by Schwacko
On Monday 15 Sep 2014 9:05 AM
-
12 September 2014, 09:25 PM Reply to Tzeit
$500 million and they couldn't make me give a damn.
well it's a shame because you are missing out on a really fun experience
 
 
 
slymeburger
Posted by slymeburger
On Monday 15 Sep 2014 10:07 AM
1
Spent the weekend playing it at a mates place. 8 Would be my ranking too,
 
 
 
JLoco11
Posted by JLoco11
On Tuesday 16 Sep 2014 1:46 AM
-
Let me explain why mentioning someone by name in a review about "destroying your sense of immersion" is a bad idea.

I know SmellyUndies, he's on my friends list and I party with him almost daily on the other side of the planet in the US. To say 1 person ruined YOUR immersion (and do it by name), shows you are a completely clueless reviewer and quite possibly 1 jack@ss of a gamer.

No single player can ruin "immersion" in Destiny. The content, world and time it takes to play this game doesn't even come close to that level of stupidity you just wrote. Not to mention, you feel the need to name drop and not give a reason why. What happened, did you die and he didn't revive you? Did he teabag your corpse for doing something stupid? You certainly can't talk or hear people in Destiny and even so, Smelly isn't a child who will talk trash on a mic for the sake of being a jerk.

My gut instinct, you did something stupid and he refused to help you. But hey, that 1 person in a gigantic world ruins your experience right! Why give details of your own incompetence when you can mention someone by name on a website to make yourself feel like King Sh!t for the day!

Now let's say I decided to name drop. Let's say I decided to mention this reviewer is a total f#ckin moron on a 17K youtube channel, twitter and Twitch and that anytime someone sees you online, they should take a sh!t on your corpse just for giggles. Take this as a lesson learned, if you want drop names on a review, you better hope it's not someone who has the means to communicate this to other people willing to really "destroy" your immersion in a video game.

And most of all, if you are going to mention people by name, you should hope there aren't communities out there that have the ability to stick up for their friend and tell you what an idiot you really are.
 
 
 
Posted by Jono91
On Thursday 18 Sep 2014 9:30 AM
1
12 September 2014, 02:40 PM Reply to Romulus
This must be the most controversial review ever posted.
Yep, if one thing is for sure, it's certainly got people talking! And arguing! I guess it shows how polarizing this game is.
 
 
 
Posted by Gadgetgamers
On Saturday 20 Sep 2014 11:59 AM
1
11 September 2014, 10:32 AM Reply to Ubercuber
Safe is the best way to describe what Ive seen. Its like when movies are designed for the 4 quadrants to best get a return on investment.
Yeah I will second that, Safe :)
 
 
 
Brizilla
Posted by Brizilla
On Tuesday 23 Sep 2014 2:38 PM
-
Not really an online gamer so will give this a miss, but im glad im not missing out on too much
 
 
 
Rahulk
Posted by Rahulk
On Monday 6 Oct 2014 1:28 AM
-
Well reasoned review, I was very disappointed to hear about the lack of story. I was planning on getting this game on release but now I'll probably wait for a price drop.
 
 
 
Posted by darkap
On Wednesday 22 Oct 2014 1:47 AM
1
So after playing this for over a month now I still find it to be quite an average game. But I cant seem to stop playing it! its soo addicting for some reason