But WoW came out a loooooooong time ago. You are supposed to learn from past games, not emulate one as it was at its release 10 years ago.
The developers didn't "fuck up". They made a choice during development that people aren't too fond of. Hell they can likely patch in better party and chat functions...A game like this has the ability to constantly evolve. Just like WoW and other mmo's. WoW today hardly resembles WoW from launch.
Personally, I think the game was released a year premature. I think the engine is solid and the game runs well overall; however, there is a deficit in overall content that makes me think they had to compromise to hit a delivery date. The polish is there, so you can't fault Bungie for production value.
I can think of four scenarios with operate under the assumption that the lack of overall content was intentional:
1. Bungie itself came up with the idea of splitting off content into DLC for the purpose additional revenue. If we ever find out that is the case and Bungie purposely released a game that is 1/3 of it's original self, then I'll never buy another Bungie title.
2. Bungie was pressured by Activision to split off content into DLC for the purpose of additional revenue.
3. Activision, and by extension Sony, pressured Bungie to get the game out on time, therefore causing Bungie to throw stuff out in order to meet deadlines.
4. Bungie made a subpar game. It wouldn't be the first time that a subpar game sold well simply because it came from a AAA developer.
I'm sure I'm going to get some hate for this next statement, but I wish Bungie had never left Microsoft. I like that Bungie got their independence, but maybe in this case there are worse things than working for MS, and that is working for Activision.
Personally, I think the game was released a year premature. I think the engine is solid and the game runs well overall; however, there is a deficit in overall content that makes me think they had to compromise to hit a delivery date. The polish is there, so you can't fault Bungie for production value.
I can think of four scenarios with operate under the assumption that the lack of overall content was intentional:
1. Bungie itself came up with the idea of splitting off content into DLC for the purpose additional revenue. If we ever find out that is the case and Bungie purposely released a game that is 1/3 of it's original self, then I'll never buy another Bungie title.
2. Bungie was pressured by Activision to split off content into DLC for the purpose of additional revenue.
3. Activision, and by extension Sony, pressured Bungie to get the game out on time, therefore causing Bungie to throw stuff out in order to meet deadlines.
4. Bungie made a subpar game. It wouldn't be the first time that a subpar game sold well simply because it came from a AAA developer.
I'm sure I'm going to get some hate for this next statement, but I wish Bungie had never left Microsoft. I like that Bungie got their independence, but maybe in this case there are worse things than working for MS, and that is working for Activision.
If they let randoms party up for everything you'd be here crying about how random people suck and ruin your strike or raid and they go off and do their own thing trying to get credit. This already happens sometimes in strikes as it is. It would be tons worse when you're doing special missions that are harder.
The voice chat thing can be changed, but then it would probably end up like every other game out there where random people mute everyone except friends.
I don't know if you've ever played an MMO or even an online match of any FPS game, voice chat can make you friends in game. How the hell do you expect to group up if you can't meet random people in game? MMO games don't seem to have those problems that you are talking about.
I don't know if you've ever played an MMO or even an online match of any FPS game, voice chat can make you friends in game. How the hell do you expect to group up if you can't meet random people in game? MMO games don't seem to have those problems that you are talking about.
The developers didn't "fuck up". They made a choice during development that people aren't too fond of. Hell they can likely patch in better party and chat functions...A game like this has the ability to constantly evolve. Just like WoW and other mmo's. WoW today hardly resembles WoW from launch.
If they let randoms party up for everything you'd be here crying about how random people suck and ruin your strike or raid and they go off and do their own thing trying to get credit. This already happens sometimes in strikes as it is. It would be tons worse when you're doing special missions that are harder.
Then there's no hope. Its all written right there.Sorry, what's your point here? Unless you're trying to claim that the lack of matchmaking is a good thing I simply don't understand the purpose of this post.
Then there's no hope. Its all written right there.
People would complain that random groups ruin their run. Especially on nightfall strikes where if you all die, you go to orbit. No checkpoint.
For the record, any time a developer makes a decision for their game that you don't like it doesn't mean they messed up. Things like that aren't by accident.
pretty sure that actually constitutes your opinion, but considering how you have been replying, in your mind that might as well be fact.A bad decision is a bad decision.
pretty sure that actually constitutes your opinion, but considering how you have been replying, in your mind that might as well be fact.
So you think that not including matchmaking is a good decision, then...?
Ah, I see, you just want to defend your favourite game from criticism.
If you defend Bungie's honour for just a bit longer, the Cryptarch is sure to give you an exotic weapon as a reward.
The problem is people join crucible and sit there. Literally they shoot maybe 3 people the whole match. They don't even try. At least if you gave some type of incentive to do well people would get better. The game doesn't reward progress in that way. It would be fine if you gave extra marks to the top 3 or ascendent materials or give a higher chance for the good drops for the top people. Even 5% higher chance to the top 3 would go a long way to make people feel their effort is worth something.If people are going to complain either way then logically it makes sense to implement matchmaking; that way those who want to use it can do so, whilst the others can still form groups manually.
Assigning loot randomly in PvP is probably the best way of doing it, otherwise you end up with all the best players getting the loot and creating an even bigger inbalance.
The problem is people join crucible and sit there. Literally they shoot maybe 3 people the whole match. They don't even try. At least if you gave some type of incentive to do well people would get better. The game doesn't reward progress in that way. It would be fine if you gave extra marks to the top 3 or ascendent materials or give a higher chance for the good drops for the top people. Even 5% higher chance to the top 3 would go a long way to make people feel their effort is worth something.
Sorry, but the notion that there's a large number of players joining PvP to just sit there without even trying is nonsense.
Rewarding extra marks would just mean those players hit their weekly limit faster.
And really people tend to play PvP stuff because they enjoy it rather than because they're trying to grind something.