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

[cmdrdredd]

Demon Souls is a completely different type of game so it doesn't work as a comparison.



This is just a mishmash of unrelated tedious points. That you're trying to say it's the customer's fault if they find the game a let down is incredibly odd and I don't know why you feel the need to defend the game so much.

It works as a comparison when talking about story in games. Genre doesn't even matter. Some games don't give you the story. It is your fault when you buy a game then complain about stuff that was detailed and known. We knew how the game was played months ago. Someone saying "it's repetitive" now didn't pay attention.

 

[Veliko]

It works as a comparison when talking about story in games. Genre doesn't even matter. Some games don't give you the story. It is your fault when you buy a game then complain about stuff that was detailed and known. We knew how the game was played months ago. Someone saying "it's repetitive" now didn't pay attention.

Right... all the reviews and everyone else are wrong.

 

[zerocool84]

It works as a comparison when talking about story in games. Genre doesn't even matter. Some games don't give you the story. It is your fault when you buy a game then complain about stuff that was detailed and known. We knew how the game was played months ago. Someone saying "it's repetitive" now didn't pay attention.

No its impossible to know how repetitive the full game is from the Alpha and Beta since it was just a small part of the game. I'm really enjoying it as I love loot based games but no one knew that the whole game was going to be like this before it was released.

 

[sze5003]

Right... all the reviews and everyone else are wrong.

If we're talking metacritc review it's at a 75 which is average. Some reviewers find it a decent game not excellent. The user reviews are a joke...a 0 or a 4 I can't take them seriously.

Anyway I don't know why people need to feel like they have to prove any points. If you like it then you like it if you don't know or haven't played the beta, well then you can't expect to be surprised with excellence and compare it to cod. Those who don't like it don't buy it and shouldn't complain.

 

[cmdrdredd]

No its impossible to know how repetitive the full game is from the Alpha and Beta since it was just a small part of the game. I'm really enjoying it as I love loot based games but no one knew that the whole game was going to be like this before it was released.

Bungie basically said in an interview that is how the game is played. Except that you have more environments and new challenges.

 

[sze5003]

No its impossible to know how repetitive the full game is from the Alpha and Beta since it was just a small part of the game. I'm really enjoying it as I love loot based games but no one knew that the whole game was going to be like this before it was released.

I certainly did. I played the alpha and beta and besides not having the ability to level past 8 and use the high gear you found, or visit other planets, the beta and alpha gave me a very good overview of the gameplay. I wasn't expecting the full release to let you find vehicles, or have npc's on the planet besides the tower.

The story is alright and the beta didn't go much into it. I'm not all sure what it's about besides the basic concepts of the darkness and the guardians. I'm not a fan of the story being told while you fight because I'm not concentrating on anything but trying to stay alive.

 

[Lil Frier]

It is your fault when you buy a game then complain about stuff that was detailed and known. We knew how the game was played months ago. Someone saying "it's repetitive" now didn't pay attention.

While I agree with the sentiment here, but it also confuses me. You say we knew how it played months ago, but at the same time, you say that playing the beta's not a fair way to assess the game. What, media reports from before the beta are fair information, but personal experiences in a nearly-finished demo aren't? I guess I'm just confused about how you seem to be saying something that contradicts your previous stance a bit.

If we're talking metacritc review it's at a 75 which is average. Some reviewers find it a decent game not excellent. The user reviews are a joke...a 0 or a 4 I can't take them seriously.

Anyway I don't know why people need to feel like they have to prove any points. If you like it then you like it if you don't know or haven't played the beta, well then you can't expect to be surprised with excellence and compare it to cod. Those who don't like it don't buy it and shouldn't complain.

Ehh, I think ratings are too generous as a whole. For example, you call 75 average, but I think it to be a high rating. I have always stood by the idea that using a 0-100 scale, but calling anything under 60 worthless is dumb, because you're literally wasting more than half of the scale--in which case, why have it? I'm one to say that an average game should be sitting at 50, not 75. My short time with Destiny would put it at about 60, which would be a bit north of average, but nothing great.

So, while you say 0-4 ratings are throwaways, I would say that 4 is a valid rating. If you're a big story-driven player, and you agree with the general idea that Destiny does a poor job delivering a mediocre story, a 4/10 could be a fair assessment. You might not build your opinions on mechanics as much as atmosphere/experience, so the negatives of the game might stick out more, in this game's instance. It's almost the inverse of how people can praise Dark Souls, even while calling its controls shoddy.

 

[cmdrdredd]

While I agree with the sentiment here, but it also confuses me. You say we knew how it played months ago, but at the same time, you say that playing the beta's not a fair way to assess the game. What, media reports from before the beta are fair information, but personal experiences in a nearly-finished demo aren't? I guess I'm just confused about how you seem to be saying something that contradicts your previous stance a bit.

Not really. The beta is part of the whole game but it is an accurate representation of how the game progresses until you hit the level cap.

So people who start complaining about the vanguard bounties repeating etc. should have known that this is how it works. Now that we can go past level 8 and see the new areas and do new strikes, weekly challenges and all that, the game changes a bit.

 

[sze5003]

While I agree with the sentiment here, but it also confuses me. You say we knew how it played months ago, but at the same time, you say that playing the beta's not a fair way to assess the game. What, media reports from before the beta are fair information, but personal experiences in a nearly-finished demo aren't? I guess I'm just confused about how you seem to be saying something that contradicts your previous stance a bit.



Ehh, I think ratings are too generous as a whole. For example, you call 75 average, but I think it to be a high rating. I have always stood by the idea that using a 0-100 scale, but calling anything under 60 worthless is dumb, because you're literally wasting more than half of the scale--in which case, why have it? I'm one to say that an average game should be sitting at 50, not 75. My short time with Destiny would put it at about 60, which would be a bit north of average, but nothing great.

So, while you say 0-4 ratings are throwaways, I would say that 4 is a valid rating. If you're a big story-driven player, and you agree with the general idea that Destiny does a poor job delivering a mediocre story, a 4/10 could be a fair assessment. You might not build your opinions on mechanics as much as atmosphere/experience, so the negatives of the game might stick out more, in this game's instance. It's almost the inverse of how people can praise Dark Souls, even while calling its controls shoddy.

I've noticed most games that are 75 and up I enjoy and they are fine with me for the most part. But the 0-4 I don't take seriously because not all of them go into any detail. For the most part they are short worded. At least a 5 is valid if you want to say the story is not there or sucks.

Anything below 75 from major reviews I find sucks. I've noticed when I bought games that scored lower like this. But then again as long as there is a beta or trial period I could care less about reviews.

There are a lot more 0,1,3 user scores than there are 4 and up. Why even bother with a 0 if you want to say it completely sucks and not worth it. I will never rate a game 0 unless it's just unplayable or extremely buggy.

 

[Lil Frier]

I've noticed most games that are 75 and up I enjoy and they are fine with me for the most part. But the 0-4 I don't take seriously because not all of them go into any detail. For the most part they are short worded. At least a 5 is valid if you want to say the story is not there or sucks.

Anything below 75 from major reviews I find sucks. I've noticed when I bought games that scored lower like this. But then again as long as there is a beta or trial period I could care less about reviews.

There are a lot more 0,1,3 user scores than there are 4 and up. Why even bother with a 0 if you want to say it completely sucks and not worth it. I will never rate a game 0 unless it's just unplayable or extremely buggy.

Best reason why I can't take ratings from Metacritic users seriously:

http://www.metacritic.com/user/xbox720p10fps

The guy has 2 reviews on his profile, and here they are:

1. Destiny, Xbox One, 0/10

WORST gaming experience, 10 fps and sometimes 5fps, becouse xone cloud powering system offline.

PVP is bad 5-10fps, quests are not fun with crappy xone, dont know if my xone is broke.…

Does Destiny even use the cloud stuff at all? I don't think it does.

2. Destiny, PS4, 10/10

Good gaming experience, 30 fps and sometimes 100 fps, becouse ps4 is so superiour.

PVP is fun, quests are fun and semilong and so on. Bungie did great job with new gaming experience.…

Isn't Destiny running at 60 FPS on both consoles, and isn't it a locked frame rate?

Dude says that the PvP is bad on the One and great on the PS4, the quests aren't fun on the One, but they are fun on the PS4.

This, folks, is why it's so hard to accept Metacritic reviews. The morons.

 

[sze5003]

Best reason why I can't take ratings from Metacritic users seriously:

http://www.metacritic.com/user/xbox720p10fps

The guy has 2 reviews on his profile, and here they are:

1. Destiny, Xbox One, 0/10



Does Destiny even use the cloud stuff at all? I don't think it does.

2. Destiny, PS4, 10/10



Isn't Destiny running at 60 FPS on both consoles, and isn't it a locked frame rate?

Dude says that the PvP is bad on the One and great on the PS4, the quests aren't fun on the One, but they are fun on the PS4.

This, folks, is why it's so hard to accept Metacritic reviews. The morons.

Yea ridiculous lol. I've learned to just read the ign daily reviews that show up on my blink feed for games like destiny. They will usually have decent coverage like day 1, day 2, etc.

Or I just come here and read around what others think and then see if a beta or demo is available.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Best reason why I can't take ratings from Metacritic users seriously:

http://www.metacritic.com/user/xbox720p10fps

The guy has 2 reviews on his profile, and here they are:

1. Destiny, Xbox One, 0/10



Does Destiny even use the cloud stuff at all? I don't think it does.

2. Destiny, PS4, 10/10



Isn't Destiny running at 60 FPS on both consoles, and isn't it a locked frame rate?

Dude says that the PvP is bad on the One and great on the PS4, the quests aren't fun on the One, but they are fun on the PS4.

This, folks, is why it's so hard to accept Metacritic reviews. The morons.

Classic...the game is the same, minus the strike mission that is exclusive for a year.

 

[Anteaus]

You guys are sure putting a lot of effort debating each other on what ultimately is the same thing. Excluding outliers, general consensus places Destiny into the average to above average category. There is enough anecdotal evidence provided by both professional and amateur alike to come to that conclusion.

I certainly believe that under normal circumstances, using a beta to gauge the quality of the final game would be a mistake; after all, the beta seemed thin and many gamers assumed that Bungie purposely left out features out to keep the release version fresh and keep focus on the beta, which was primarily about load testing servers. I was one of those gamers and I was wrong. In actuality, the beta was a good gauge for the game as a whole, which is great on lore and thin on everything else.

Those that hold a love for grind are going to find more value, but for the average gamer Destiny is lacking in consideration of greatness. It was a great financial success; however, just like Call of Duty and Madden, critical success is often disconnected from commercial success.

 

[mnewsham]

Bottom line really is if you are okay doing the endless grind like most MMOs or Diablo and such, you'll enjoy Destiny end game. If you can't be bothered to grind for gear, you're going to be let down.

 

[hans030390]

As I said in the other thread, it is a very well put-together game, and they did the whole FPS + MMO-ish concept well, but most other aspects of the game are pretty standard stuff. I always enjoy my time playing it and look forward to moments I can play, but it lacks many things that make it truly incredible.

Doesn't mean you can't have hours of fun playing it, but it's far from the epic, revolutionary, or super unique game that was claimed. I think the next games will be more promising in this regard.

 

[KentState]

I would call Destiny a very average game and I too expected the alpha and beta to be more than a way to fine tune enemy difficulty. The one thing that Bungie has going for them is a solid release without server issues or bugs. This really had the polished feel that you get with the previous Halo launches.

 

[sandorski]

The game doesn't make much sense. Humans are down to 1 city, yet it is routine for every Player to go to the same microscopically small area of the planet, kill 30+ enemies, scavenge a few things, the enemy constantly replenishing it's inept forces to be killed again, and the Players returning over and over again to do the same thing.

How did the Humans, who are clearly superior to the enemy, end up in such a dire position? Perhaps there's some kind of reasonable explanation late in the game, early on though it doesn't make sense.

From what I see of the story, I can't help but think the Story is a ripoff of the Transformers. Outside beings come to Earth, eventually their old enemy shows up to destroy us all. Meh.

 

[Anteaus]

The game doesn't make much sense. Humans are down to 1 city, yet it is routine for every Player to go to the same microscopically small area of the planet, kill 30+ enemies, scavenge a few things, the enemy constantly replenishing it's inept forces to be killed again, and the Players returning over and over again to do the same thing.

How did the Humans, who are clearly superior to the enemy, end up in such a dire position? Perhaps there's some kind of reasonable explanation late in the game, early on though it doesn't make sense.

From what I see of the story, I can't help but think the Story is a ripoff of the Transformers. Outside beings come to Earth, eventually their old enemy shows up to destroy us all. Meh.

Not to mention it's a city that took centuries too build yet is chock full of advanced technology. There are all kinds of logic holes in the story and technology.

 

[sze5003]

I dunno it is a fantasy sci fi game afterall. I don't look for much logic in the story anyway since I only grab pieces of it as I play. I kind of wish it was told more in cutscenes before you go in and fight rather than while you are fighting.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Not to mention it's a city that took centuries too build yet is chock full of advanced technology. There are all kinds of logic holes in the story and technology.

How is that a hole in the story? The city took a long time to build but by the time building started Humanity was already colonizing the solar system. If anything the technology in the tower is less than what is would have been.

 

[Subyman]

It works as a comparison when talking about story in games. Genre doesn't even matter. Some games don't give you the story. It is your fault when you buy a game then complain about stuff that was detailed and known. We knew how the game was played months ago. Someone saying "it's repetitive" now didn't pay attention.

Back of the box says "bad writing, and vague story"? That's the purpose of a review to point out the good and bad and then put a value statement on it. The reviewers know what the game is and rated it accordingly. Its your fault for purchasing a FPS thinking its an RTS, but not for expecting a decent story out of a AAA game that advertises a "Grand Campaign Mode."

Its also a bit much to expect people to play hours of a beta before they have the right to complain about a purchase.

 

[sze5003]

It's better to play the beta and have an idea than to just purchase it and be annoyed you didn't like it.

I knew nothing about this game, had no idea what it was about other than I heard it's mmo like, online, sci fi, and an fps so I said screw it I'm not getting this.

Played the beta and turns out I really enjoy it. If people don't understand what a game's general gameplay is like after an alpha and beta, I don't know what to say. Had I not played the beta I would not have purchased it.

People now a days complain about everything. I don't think it's a bit much to play a demo for free and then decide or complain all they want.

 

[Veliko]

It's better to play the beta and have an idea than to just purchase it and be annoyed you didn't like it.

I knew nothing about this game, had no idea what it was about other than I heard it's mmo like, online, sci fi, and an fps so I said screw it I'm not getting this.

Played the beta and turns out I really enjoy it. If people don't understand what a game's general gameplay is like after an alpha and beta, I don't know what to say. Had I not played the beta I would not have purchased it.

People now a days complain about everything. I don't think it's a bit much to play a demo for free and then decide or complain all they want.

This is just a mish mash of mostly unrelated points.

No-one is really complaining about the 'general gameplay' - the complaints are about things like the non-existent storyline, something that certainly wasn't clear in the beta.

 

[sze5003]

This is just a mish mash of mostly unrelated points.

No-one is really complaining about the 'general gameplay' - the complaints are about things like the non-existent storyline, something that certainly wasn't clear in the beta.

I didn't understand anything in the beta about the story. From reading the whole thread the points aren't really unrelated. You will see people complained about various things.

I still don't understand the story in the full game and I've said before it's due to how it's told while you fight. It still doesn't make me complain that the game isn't good or fun. I pretty much knew what to expect from the alpha and beta..so I wasn't expecting a story like the last of us.

 

[Veliko]

Well you must have been addressing someone when you mentioned the complaints about the general gameplay.

I still don't understand the story in the full game and I've said before it's due to how it's told while you fight. It still doesn't make me complain that the game isn't good or fun. I pretty much knew what to expect from the alpha and beta..so I wasn't expecting a story like the last of us.

Sorry, what point are you actually making here?