Another possibility - this is just a consequence of an ever-changing sandbox. Halo had a static sandbox and the later games like Reach still had post-launch game balancing changes made because they didn't identify the problems in-house. Destiny takes that sandbox and puts an exponent on it making it that much less likely Bungie will pick up on problems ahead of time.

I think his point is that overpowered in PVP hurts other players, but overpowered in PvE is less of a problem because only the enemies suffer.

I think it's more complicated than that. The whole 'loot economy' can be put 'out of wack' with dominant PvE weapons, and there's the fact that some weapons you can obtain in PvE are very good in PvP (or at least this was the case when I still played). It's why they continually patch cheeses in strikes and raids for example, or tone down very damaging weapons like Jotunn.

As far as I can tell, Jotunn has never been toned down - nor does it need to be. It's my favorite gun in Destiny - but it's outclassed in every category by other guns. (There is no gun as versatile as it is - but that doesn't mean it's the best in any particular category.)

Fine sentiment, bad example.

Then which one was the fusion rifle that completely broke on high end PCs? Damage ticks were applied every frame, so high frame rate meant way too much damage.

Yes, that was Jotunn. But it was a PC exclusive bug, so if you were playing on console, you never would have experienced it.

I believe the original point that Korny was making was that Bungie has a history of very rapidly fixing bugs/exploits that benefit the player, while taking forever to fix problems that negatively impact the player.

I don’t think it’s as simple as that either. For 1, the issues that players complain about and Bungie takes forever to fix are rarely bugs. They’re usually design choices. Problems like One Eyed Mask, Nova Warp, or Hardlight being the bane of the crucible are not glitches or exploits. The problem I have is that Bungie’s response to these issues is to spend 6-9 months collecting feedback and data, rather than having a single lead designer play with (and against) One Eyed Mask for an hour and realize “yeah, this isn’t fun to play against. It feels cheap.” I don’t care if One Eyed Mask was actually no more powerful than any other exotic... it FELT horrible to play against. It sucked the fun out of the match. You don’t need months of data, you need someone in a decision making position to say “we’re going to fix this because it isn’t fun”.

I think his point is that overpowered in PVP hurts other players, but overpowered in PvE is less of a problem because only the enemies suffer.

I think it's more complicated than that. The whole 'loot economy' can be put 'out of wack' with dominant PvE weapons, and there's the fact that some weapons you can obtain in PvE are very good in PvP (or at least this was the case when I still played). It's why they continually patch cheeses in strikes and raids for example, or tone down very damaging weapons like Jotunn.

As far as I can tell, Jotunn has never been toned down - nor does it need to be. It's my favorite gun in Destiny - but it's outclassed in every category by other guns. (There is no gun as versatile as it is - but that doesn't mean it's the best in any particular category.)

Fine sentiment, bad example.

Then which one was the fusion rifle that completely broke on high end PCs? Damage ticks were applied every frame, so high frame rate meant way too much damage.

Oops, completely forgot about that (mostly because I don't pay attention to the PC environment). Yeah, as Cruel said, that was Jotunn... but it was a game-breaking bug, not a 'let's tune this down because it's overpowered' decision.