For reference (Destiny)

by Claude Errera , Thursday, August 18, 2016, 14:05 (3022 days ago) @ unoudid

TTK Exclusive Info

It very well could simply be something that was overlooked. But this shows it as at least Fall 2016. Wonder if Playstation just paid for another year?

This page, still online on the Playstation.com website, continues to show 'at least Fall of 2016' - probably just overlooked.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/destiny-ps4/exclusive-content/

This really disappoints me, actually. Xenos pointed out an IGN interview in which DeeJ suggests that the fine print on the box does a good job of setting expectations... but really, that's a terrible argument, since that fine print, until last week, suggested 'Fall 2016', and now suggests 'Fall 2017'. (Yes, it says "at least." All that tells me is that they are covered moving the goalposts whenever they feel like it - so there are NO reasonable expectations we can have any more.)

I guess I'd like something more concrete than "at least a year from now" - and while I grudgingly accepted that my Grimoire would be a year behind PS4 players', I find it more discouraging that it'll now be *2* years behind, with zero confidence that it won't be pushed again next year.

It's a minor detail - but it's affecting my outlook on the whole process, in a way that's surprising to me. I thought I was okay with the exclusive stuff; it was annoying, but what's a year, really? But now it's 2 years, and not really 2 years, but AT LEAST 2 years. And even though it's not a lot of stuff, we have last year's exclusive stuff to judge by - 12 months was enough to seriously reduce the relevance of the exclusive guns (mostly because the online team had had several passes at adjusting them), 24 months will be even worse. Will I ever use the Jade Rabbit? If not, would I be less offended if they were more honest, and took out the word 'timed'?

I don't know - I haven't fully thought this through. I'm simply passing along my current feelings - and they're disproportionately negative, for the amount of content we're discussing. I think it's a major PR mistake to extend the exclusivity period this way, in terms of what they could possibly gain from it. I certainly won't trust any 'at least' wording, going forward.