But do three bad analogies make a right? (Destiny)

by Ragashingo , Official DBO Cryptarch, Monday, October 13, 2014, 15:47 (3500 days ago) @ scarab

I fully expect you to disagree in some nitpick-y way, but here's the easy two:

1. Having to read previous books to read a new book doesn't make sense as you didn't have to play previous games to play Destiny.

You are the one who is nit picking. It is not possible to read parts of the Deathly Hallows book before you are allowed to read it so, of course, I have to give tasks that use the previous books. DUH!

I don't understand. Why is it ok for you to make up a secnario that is completely unlike reality? Nobody was prevented from playing Destiny. Your analogy would work better if you let them buy the book but said they couldn't read the end until they did things.

2. Having to read certain parts over and over doesn't make sense because one could play each Story Mission and Strike exactly once, in their proper order, and still reach the required level to play all of Destiny by earning experience in the Crucible.

You get all the ascendant shards, coins, motes? In what time interval?

It'll take longer, probably. But, a big part of your analogy was about rereading parts and reading parts out of order, which you do not have to do in the Destiny equivalent of Missions and Strikes. That you're falling back to "In what time interval" is very telling. Certainly, your analogy had more problems than leaving me nothing to respond to. :)

Should I change the analogy to say: read all the previous books once then read your favorite book 200 times?

Nah, doesn't quite work. A crucible match isn't long enough to really equal a whole book. Favorite chapter maybe?