I'm enjoying it right now but just don't see the longevity of the game as it is now. There just isn't enough content to keep it going months from now without these expansion packs coming out every couple months.
I think that what you're describing is what cmdrdredd and I mean when we mention the FPS/console crowd's lack of patience. If you've ever played
WoW, you know that it's REALLY bad about letting content dangle for months. Patches have 3 weeks' worth of content for some, yet they drag on for 4 and 5 months. MMO players can find a way to fill that time, but the console crowd will just move to the next, big thing.
With the base game of
Destiny, people are already complaining about lack of content, before it's all even out there. So, that means that we're going to see a lull in content while games like
Sunset Overdrive,
Halo: The Master Chief Collection, and
Forza Horizon 2 launch on the One,
Driveclub and
LBP3 launch on the PS4, and
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare launches on both.
What's going to be EXTRA-interesting is that the first expansion of
Destiny is going to launch during the beta of
Halo 5: Guardians on the One (which runs from late-December to mid-January).
I had another thought too. These are the same reviewers who gave games like Titanfall 9/10 scores. If ever there was a game that was light on story and heavy on repetition, that game is TitanFall. The jury is out on how well Destiny will do in the long haul, but at least it is many times better than Titanfall both as a pure shooter and a story driven game.
Reviewers need to not allow their expectations color their reviews. Destiny is a better game, but it gets worse reviews because it was expected to be an even better game than it already is. I'm not sure that after everything plays out with patches and additional content in the future that Destiny won't turn out to be every bit the game they expected it to be from the start, just doled out a bit more slowly than a journalistic deadline would allow the reviewers to appreciate.
Just something to think about.
I'll agree a little. However, I'll say that the console shooter crowd is heavily focused on competitive multiplayer.
Titanfall does that just fine.
Destiny, on the other hand, doesn't get high marks for that aspect, while similarly offering a story most don't care about and coming up short on the social aspects.
On a technical level, in terms of the core shooting aspects of the game,
Destiny is better than
Titanfall, IMO. However, I honestly think that I would take the latter game because its failures are fewer and less...big, I guess. Both games fail at the story (
Titanfall for the plot,
Destiny for the delicery and plot, to an extent). Both do their stuff fine (mechs feel great in
Titanfall, shooting and abilities feel great in
Destiny). What happens after that is where
Titanfall wins.
Destiny screws up partnering with randoms. Their online multiplayer feels less-balanced (which is going to happen when you have so many more abilities and weapons to account for). That's why I'd put
Titanfall a bit above
Destiny, because the former's problems aren't as plentiful and noticeable.
Destiny's a victim of its own ambition.
You say that reviewers shouldn't let their disappointment factor into their reviews, but then you lose the point of analysis. As was said in that snippet from The Verge,
Destiny kind of bit off more than it could chew, which resulted in a bunch of OK things that are somewhat disappointing, while
Titanfall aimed for only a couple of things (story and competitive multiplayer), and while one failed spectacularly, the other was pretty good.