Destiny - Negative reviews, all the same 'complaints'...

[batmang]

So, is it me, or are these reviews for Destiny sounding like a bunch of whiners who have insanely high expectations?

If I had to compare, Destiny is 432642753758488478658x better than Watch Dogs.
Watch Dogs.... in MY opinion, was the biggest flop of a game that I've ever purchased.
It was boring, zero engagement, completely a dumb game... again.. this is MY opinion.

Destiny however, I'm enjoying VERY much. The AI is smart, fun, and engaging. The story isn't too bad, and the multiplayer is very fun. I think Bungie did a great job and I'm really enjoying the bounties and strikes, the game is a blast. These reviews I'm reading and watching from big sites and YouTuber's are all saying the same thing.

"You go here, shoot, and go back, shoot, and go here shoot, its... lack luster."

Really, it's lack luster!? The beautiful visuals/environment, smart AI, and cool loot/drops is lack luster? The multiplayer is lack luster? The game mechanics and solid framerate is lack luster?

What the heck is wrong with these reviewers?????????!

Destiny is everything Bungie said it would be: It is a great game. It's not World of Warcraft, but they never said it would be a full fledged MMO.

TL;DR: Destiny is awesome, reviewers are blind.

 

[PenguinPower]

I haven't played yet, but I keep hearing is it is Borderlands-repackaged. Any merit to that claim?

 

[cmdrdredd]

I haven't played yet, but I keep hearing is it is Borderlands-repackaged. Any merit to that claim?

Not once you play it. People see fps and loot and plaster false titles online.

The game is better than the complaints. People complaining probably didn't put more than a couple hours on it. As Bungie said, the game does not start until level 20.

At level 18 you have access to vanguard marks (to buy vanguard legendary gear) and the strike playlists that are level based strikes starting at 18 that are challenging and reward you with vanguard gear and marks. Then you can get gear with light+ on it and level past 20. Once you do then you can take on the weekly challenge which pits you against the toughest bosses. You can earn exotic (gold tier) gear from those as well as raids.

Before this, it's all about leveling up.

 

[canestim]

I played the beta and thought it was ok. I never had high expectations for it. I think it's a pretty good game just not for me. Being online and being in situations where you cannot pause is not ideal for me. Now if I had time to dedicate without having to pause it might be different. I don't mind with games like BF4, I can just exit the map if it's something important and then get back in later. But not being able to pause and having to start a section over isn't ideal for me since fetch type quest are already repetitive as it is. But I think it's a quality made game, just has to fit your style and needs of play.

 

[Tweak155]

Not once you play it. People see fps and loot and plaster false titles online.

The game is better than the complaints. People complaining probably didn't put more than a couple hours on it. As Bungie said, the game does not start until level 20.

At level 18 you have access to vanguard marks (to buy vanguard legendary gear) and the strike playlists that are level based strikes starting at 18 that are challenging and reward you with vanguard gear and marks. Then you can get gear with light+ on it and level past 20. Once you do then you can take on the weekly challenge which pits you against the toughest bosses. You can earn exotic (gold tier) gear from those as well as raids.

Before this, it's all about leveling up.

This is just sounds stupid to me. Possibly they should have started you at 20 then? There are plenty of games that engage you from the get-go. This just sounds like a lame excuse.

I have no opinion of Destiny either way. I won't judge it til I try it.

 

[PenguinPower]

Not once you play it. People see fps and loot and plaster false titles online.

The game is better than the complaints. People complaining probably didn't put more than a couple hours on it. As Bungie said, the game does not start until level 20.

At level 18 you have access to vanguard marks (to buy vanguard legendary gear) and the strike playlists that are level based strikes starting at 18 that are challenging and reward you with vanguard gear and marks. Then you can get gear with light+ on it and level past 20. Once you do then you can take on the weekly challenge which pits you against the toughest bosses. You can earn exotic (gold tier) gear from those as well as raids.

Before this, it's all about leveling up.

How long does it take to get to level 20?

 

[cmdrdredd]

How long does it take to get to level 20?

Took me 14 hours and 20 minutes

 

[cmdrdredd]

This is just sounds stupid to me. Possibly they should have started you at 20 then? There are plenty of games that engage you from the get-go. This just sounds like a lame excuse.

I have no opinion of Destiny either way. I won't judge it til I try it.

No, it's just that you don't get access to the best content until then. Before that you do everything that was in the beta except on more planets and have more story to do. You are purposely finding excuses to hate it like everyone posting fake reviews on metacritic.

a good 75% or so of the game is locked out until you hit 18. You can't earn vanguard marks, can't do strike playlists, can't earn motes of light (until 20), can't do the weekly challenges, can't participate in raids, engram drops are more common too once you get to higher level.

 

[Tweak155]

No, it's just that you don't get access to the best content until then. Before that you do everything that was in the beta except on more planets and have more story to do. You are purposely finding excuses to hate it like everyone posting fake reviews on metacritic.

a good 75% or so of the game is locked out until you hit 18. You can't earn vanguard marks, can't do strike playlists, can't earn motes of light (until 20), can't do the weekly challenges, can't participate in raids, engram drops are more common too once you get to higher level.

Where? I said I have no opinion on it personally. I just hear this same defense for many games, not just Destiny.

 

[Jetasis]

If I had to compare, Destiny is 432642753758488478658x better than Watch Dogs.
Watch Dogs.... in MY opinion, was the biggest flop of a game that I've ever purchased.
It was boring, zero engagement, completely a dumb game... again.. this is MY opinion.

+1...

Watch Dogs for me was the the worst XBone game I'd purchased up to that point. Running around and one button "hacking" everything lost it's appeal in about an hour for me.

It hurts my brain to try to figure out why certain people like/dislike certain games. It's just personal preference. What draws me to Destiny is the apparent constant updating and events that should take place. This weekend there's the crucible event for example. Next week we have the lvl 26 RAID. There's going to be new characters in the Tower soon with special offerings. More Public Events are coming. For me this is the biggest appeal... Yes the constant "run to 'x' and deploy your ghost" does get a little tired but they clearly have a boatload content to keep the play varied. The metacritics can say what they want... I'm playing this game and loving every second of it and the more I play, the more hooked I am. It's got everything I want - and more coming soon.

Jet

 

[Topweasel]

Where? I said I have no opinion on it personally. I just hear this same defense for many games, not just Destiny.

Its an MMO problem or feature depending on how you look at it. It's like license unlocks on GT or saving money for a McLaren P1 in Forza and so on. You get good and or high enough you get more awesome stuff to do. That is the big difference between an RPG and an MMO. There is a grind in an MMO that doesn't exist in single player games because the focus in those games are the story.

 

[purbeast0]

stop getting butthurt over reviews. they have no effect on how much fun you have with the game. they are all opinions.

you are being a big baby too by crying that their opinions don't agree with yours.

 

[SAWYER]

Nailed it^

 

[cmdrdredd]

I have seen you bitch about people spewing trash about the xb1 before. Don't act holier than thou.

 

[Wingznut]

Any game with the popularity and hype of Destiny is going to bring about naysayers. Some criticisms will be fair, and some will not. Some will be because expectations are too high, some because there is just a certain amount of people who just want to shit on something popular.

And then lather/rinse/repeat for the next big game.

 

[artemicion]

stop getting butthurt over reviews. they have no effect on how much fun you have with the game. they are all opinions.

you are being a big baby too by crying that their opinions don't agree with yours.

I wouldn't call it butthurt, I think it's a pretty valid talking point. Are Destiny reviews being docked points because of the pre-release hype rather than the actual merits of the game? Are game reviewes lowballing scores to deliberately generate clicks from aggregator sites? And I do agree with OP re: what's up with Watch Dogs scores. I thought it was a mediocre game as well.

I haven't played the game yet, but interested in hearing these opinions from non-industry reviewers, since I don't entirely trust industry reviewers, so I think OP's post is valid.

 

[Anteaus]

Destiny is a good game; however, it is a by the numbers Bungie FPS. I won't presume to speak for anyone else, but from my perspective the main reason to play Destiny is because Bungie created an amazing universe that is easy to get absorbed in. From a gameplay standpoint, the game isn't anything special. Even the online aspect is a bit shallow.

That said, they have already announced that there will be 4 full games including the first, released every 2 years or so, with numerous DLC packs in between. While the game we see today can be underwhelming, many of us see it as the foundation of good things to come and therefore worth playing through. From that perspective, any grinding done today to max out your character is still going to be useful when the next game comes out and you get to continue the story with it.

That may not be enough for many to stay interested in the game, but it's something to look forward to.

I hope Bungie does more with the ships in future releases.

 

[ImpulsE69]

So I read many reviews about this game and I noticed the same thing. Most of the reviews were favorable overall, but definitely were let down overall.

I had no "hype" over this game as the very first videos I saw of it looked pretty run of the mill. I did play the beta though (because, why not, I did actually like Halo/Halo2 quite a bit). The game is just...that..nothing special, or at least, nothing other games have not done before and (some) better (at least in the PC world). That being said, I gave it an honest try. What I found was, basically repetition with little interaction or choices. The reviews (from users and sites) all kind of state the same thing. What you see at the beginning is what you see at the end. There is very little variance in the game and it is repetitive. Supposedly these people have finished the game.

The hype surrounding this game was manufactured and very focused, and it worked. It's not bad but it isn't that great. There are many other probably as interesting games out there.

3 of 5 stars.

(next cmdr is going to respond with YOU DIDN"T PLAY FAR ENOUGH INTO IT, you only played the beta! Oh well, guess it should have engaged me enough to want to? And apparently many people agree).

 

[purbeast0]

I have seen you bitch about people spewing trash about the xb1 before. Don't act holier than thou.

not when they spew opinions of them not liking it, i don't care. to each their own. it's when people start spouting bs about things that i just try to clear it up. same with when people do that for the ps4.

oh, and i don't go starting new threads about it when there are 2 threads about the topic on the first page already.

 

[dguy6789]

I think saying it is Halo meets Borderlands 2 is a good way to summarize what the game is like in a few words.

What I like:

-The gameplay/combat is very tight, feels solid, and has weight, just like Halo. The game is fun to play.
-The lore is great.
-Atmosphere is really well done.
-PVP feels more like Halo multiplayer than MMO pvp(this is a good thing)

What I don't like:

-The worlds aren't big enough, there isn't enough to explore. I want to be able to walk to the mountains and things I see in the distance.
-There aren't really many rewards for exploring.
-The social interaction is really kept to a minimum. This game could really benefit from a Phantasy Star Online sort of lobby and game making system imo.
-There aren't enough character classes and choices to make.
-Highly generic weapons and gear
-Group sizes are super small(usually 3 players max) when doing quests together

All in all I think it's a good game. I am nowhere near being bored of it yet and have to limit my time with it to ensure I don't play it too much. Nonetheless I can't help but feel it has a sort of Diablo 3 syndrome to it where it starts out leaving much to be desired but gets polished and patched into something really really great over time.

Bungie has said they intend to support the game for 10 years. In the future I'd like to see more player interaction, more character classes, more weapon types, and far more worlds to explore.

 

[Lil Frier]

So, is it me, or are these reviews for Destiny sounding like a bunch of whiners who have insanely high expectations?

If I had to compare, Destiny is 432642753758488478658x better than Watch Dogs.
Watch Dogs.... in MY opinion, was the biggest flop of a game that I've ever purchased.
It was boring, zero engagement, completely a dumb game... again.. this is MY opinion.

Destiny however, I'm enjoying VERY much. The AI is smart, fun, and engaging. The story isn't too bad, and the multiplayer is very fun. I think Bungie did a great job and I'm really enjoying the bounties and strikes, the game is a blast. These reviews I'm reading and watching from big sites and YouTuber's are all saying the same thing.

"You go here, shoot, and go back, shoot, and go here shoot, its... lack luster."

Really, it's lack luster!? The beautiful visuals/environment, smart AI, and cool loot/drops is lack luster? The multiplayer is lack luster? The game mechanics and solid framerate is lack luster?

What the heck is wrong with these reviewers?????????!

Destiny is everything Bungie said it would be: It is a great game. It's not World of Warcraft, but they never said it would be a full fledged MMO.

TL;DR: Destiny is awesome, reviewers are blind.

This is the post of a fanboy. "I don't agree with negative statements, so I'll point out something I hate, call it worse, and say the reviewers are dumb."

Honestly, the complaints are feelings I had. During the few hours I spent on the Destiny beta, I got nothing out of the plot. Like, it didn't seem like there was a goal, it didn't seem like there was an overarching story, it didn't seem like there was a setup for any progression. The real problem is that they try to push you the story during gunfights, and I'm too interested in hearing where enemies are coming from and what they're doing to listen to the monotonous Ghost (and this would be even harder in a group, where you're trying to discuss combat strategy over the monologue).

Something a review pointed out that I kind of thought of at first, then forgot, was the horrible naming. The enemies you first encounter are called "Fallen?" That sounds generic. The alleged "big baddie" is "The Darkness?" I mean, any level of imagination on naming it would have been appreciated. The storytelling is just weak and placed poorly into the game, to the point that I just missed it during the beta, and that turned me off. I know that a beta is a trial, but they can't just expect people to take a liking to a complete lack of presentation.

On top of that, I'd definitely call the gameplay AS A WHOLE lackluster. The gunplay is fine. It's a FPS, nothing exciting there. However, the additional abilities give the combat options/experiences nice depth. Where Borderlands uses a talent tree to just make your same attacks stronger, Destiny follows more along the MMO path of giving you more combat options with cooldowns and such to make the encounter somewhat dynamic, which is nice.

All of that stuff kind of broke down for me because of redundancy. The same couple of areas got boring quickly. The same enemies got boring quickly, mostly because there was no challenge (turning the difficulty up in the final game likely assists with that). I felt like I had a lot of cool abilities, but no real reason to use them, due to a lack of danger--and that's playing solo (I imagine it's even easier in a group, where the quantity of firepower will help against groups). So, a really nice core combat system is a bit wasted on boring, redundant encounters (something which definitely occurs is a true MMO like WoW).

As for the multiplayer, I played one match and couldn't tolerate it. That made me feel like PvP combat lacked any sort of balance, and the whole thing just felt...bleh. There was a really bad Defiance-like feel on the PvP side, where it was a decent open-world(-ish) shooter where the PvP felt tacked-on as a required activity, not something that was well-made. Yeah, part of the bitterness was getting kicked up and down the street because my gun sucked (didn't realize the mission was to do PvP, and I just wanted to try the gun out, and it turned out to be nice for PvE but total trash in PvP).

It's just funny though, because the way you describe Watch Dogs is almost the spot-on assessment I have for Destiny. It feels like a massive letdown, and while I wouldn't call it dumb, the involvement with the plot seemed pointless, and the lack of varied encounters, enemies, or environments made it an overall bore, though the core gameplay was fairly nice.

As for Watch Dogs, it felt imperfect but pretty nice. I didn't love the driving or shooting physics, but they were a step above GTA (a series I absolutely abhor), particularly on the driving side. The story wasn't phenomenal, but they were smart enough to try to tell me everything mid-fight (and combat had a cover system, so you could somewhat fight at your own pace, if dialogue was happening).

Basically, I would have probably given Watch Dogs a rating 1-1.5 points above Destiny, on a 10-point scale because while its core gameplay paled in comparison to Destiny, Watch Dogs at least kept me engaged (most of the time--it got redundant near the end of the campaign), and it didn't make me feel like everything was being done just to be done.

 

[Lil Frier]

(next cmdr is going to respond with YOU DIDN"T PLAY FAR ENOUGH INTO IT, you only played the beta! Oh well, guess it should have engaged me enough to want to? And apparently many people agree).

I agree entirely with this. If 2-3 hours of a game (regardless of the length) can't present the title in a good light, then you've either made a game I don't like, or you've written a terrible beginning of the story. I mean, people were getting all crazy because they loved what they played in the beta. I don't get why the beta is enough to say you like the game, but people then come back and say that the beta isn't enough to say someone doesn't like the game.

When you especially consider how short the campaign is for a "long-term" franchise with such weak multiplayer, you'd think that 15-20% of the campaign would be a decent representation of the title.

 

[purbeast0]

I agree entirely with this. If 2-3 hours of a game (regardless of the length) can't present the title in a good light, then you've either made a game I don't like, or you've written a terrible beginning of the story. I mean, people were getting all crazy because they loved what they played in the beta. I don't get why the beta is enough to say you like the game, but people then come back and say that the beta isn't enough to say someone doesn't like the game.

When you especially consider how short the campaign is for a "long-term" franchise with such weak multiplayer, you'd think that 15-20% of the campaign would be a decent representation of the title.

i dunno, i was pretty bored with the last of us the first 2-3 hours, but i never gave up on it simply because of ND's history of games, and i'm SUPER glad i stuck with it because it simply starts out slow to set the tone/story. but that is probably the only game ever i played that long that was actually kind of boring at first.

i remember playing twilight princess for like 6 hours and being totally bored with that game and never finishing it. i also played MGS4 like 1/2 before i realized how terrible it was heh.

 

[sze5003]

I played the alpha and beta. I feel I played too much of the beta though.

The game itself is nice and it's harder than the beta. They also took out all the item drops I got in the beta game.

I will say it's repetitive and I feel player interaction could be better. I don't notice anyone with mics in pve. Some missions are tough to do on your own unless you are about two levels above the recommended mission level.

The loot is interesting and sometimes it's a gamble on what you get. But I like how it scales to you level. The hardest part for me is grinding around because leveling up takes longer than in the beta.

I like the random world events and the raids you can do. Some of them can last about 45 min or more and sometimes people leave but another person comes in.

I'm having fun with the game and I don't think it's a flop. I also enjoy watch dogs but I haven't even finished that game yet. They both get repetitive at one point but that's really nothing new in games now.

I've only had the game since Tuesday and I'm level 12.5 now. I don't get to play a lot either. Because it takes me a while to level up I do get bored sometimes and need a break.

What I don't like is the beacon missions that make you travel all across the map but now that I'm higher level, I don't get killed when I encounter harder enemies.

I feel like the levels are large enough but they are static. The moon does have pikes you can ride and shoot from so that's useful.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I agree entirely with this. If 2-3 hours of a game (regardless of the length) can't present the title in a good light, then you've either made a game I don't like, or you've written a terrible beginning of the story. I mean, people were getting all crazy because they loved what they played in the beta. I don't get why the beta is enough to say you like the game, but people then come back and say that the beta isn't enough to say someone doesn't like the game.

When you especially consider how short the campaign is for a "long-term" franchise with such weak multiplayer, you'd think that 15-20% of the campaign would be a decent representation of the title.

Nope sorry...even Halo has more lore they could explore. I don't care what game it is, 3 hours tells you nothing. Calling the MP weak is an excuse for you suck because it's not exactly like some other game.

If you guys really want to troll you should try gamefaqs or neogaf...it's too easy to call you out here.