Does Destiny need a "campaign"? (Destiny)

by TheOmegaClown, Friday, October 20, 2017, 13:03 (2392 days ago) @ Cody Miller

This is why you segregate them. If you can visit the same patrol spaces before and after you finish the campaign… it feels like nothing changed. So, you have the patrol spaces come later, where they reflect the world post campaign. You get to feel like you did something in the main story, and you also get the open world aspect.

phased instancing is something WoW has implemented to a certain degree of success - but I dont think it requires completely segregating the two experiences. I like the idea of communicating that the player's actions have an effect on the world. Even public events acknowledge the repetition of their scripted events via the dialogue ("The Fallen are at it AGAIN? Will they ever learn?)

It would have been nice if more of the main (read: linear) storyline could have been folded into the campaign via strikes and adventures - sort of as a way to tease out the experience a little longer, and because both allow different ways to tell stories. As they exist now, having adventures and strikes layer on new stories or add tangents to existing story arcs is great, but imagine a strike where you and two other random players had to take back certain sectors of the city before you could mount an offensive against Gaul? It would require acknowledging that other Guardians obtained their light too, but I don't think that would kill the story necessarily.

I do think that D2 has set up a great way to tell new stories via adventures though. If they wanted to, they could release whole new sets of adventures in a sector or on a planet that really took players through entire side campaigns or flushed out some of the lore they've yet to really address.

But isn't that the pattern with Destiny to begin with? a game with great bones and ultimately unrealized potential? Maybe why the community has filled in the gaps as much as they have.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread