Avatar

Compare to ME3, CoD, WoW, etc.. (Destiny)

by Kermit @, Raleigh, NC, Friday, March 27, 2015, 17:09 (3288 days ago) @ Kahzgul

If you look at the patch updates of games that focus on PvP like Call of Duty, Destiny is slow to deliver both weapon balances and content. Granted, CoD's content costs money.

if you look at the patch updates of games that focus on multiplayer PvE, like Mass Effect 3, Destiny is *really* slow to deliver both weapon balances and content (this content is free).

I feel like the play of Destiny is a hybrid of those two game elements more than any other thing I can point a finger at, which is why they come to mind when I think about updates and balance changes.

Moving on, though,
If you look at the patch updates of games that focus on MMO reward systems, raids, and loot such as WoW, Destiny is slow to deliver both content and updates (In WoW, you get several tiers of raid with each expansion, rather than just 1, so technically Destiny is delivering *less content* rather than delivering it more slowly, but you get my point).

Then look at that whole article someone else wrote about how Warframe is just smoking Destiny for content and dynamic world events. I can't really speak to it because I only just downloaded Warframe last night (I'm curious as a result of that article), but the case has been made.

My point is that Destiny is patching like a game that requires physical copies of the disc to be printed for each patch instead of like a game that knows it's always online and can make tweaks and balance changes around the clock.

If anything, it should be easier to patch Destiny than a PC game because you're only doing it for 4 very specific hardware layouts instead of the nearly infinite possibilities of PC configurations that exist in the wild.

The only excuse I can think of for the slower rate of both patches and content delivery is that Destiny was not designed from the beginning to be particularly nimble or fluid. Which are two things that the pre-launch press releases claimed it would be.

I can think of other possibilities. Maybe it was designed to be more nimble and fluid but given the way the game works they simply can't make changes as quickly as some other games have in practice, and there's a lot to be said for not treating us like like lab rats and maintaining stability from week to week.

What I really don't get is the quick adoption of the worst explanation for anything that happens or doesn't happen. Their pre-release talk of flexibility doesn't live up to what you imagined it would, and that makes them liars. Their reasons are "excuses."

I'd be hesitant to say anything at all about the future, with that kind of rhetoric floating around, but I guess then they wouldn't be transparent. They can't win.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread