Urk Talks To IBT (Destiny)

by Decom , Saturday, August 16, 2014, 11:12 (3549 days ago) @ Xenos

If you take it in the context in the article they basically say instead of at the end of the development cycle let's lament the thing we cut (which is what they are talking about with the flaming airplane), why don't we, at the end of the development cycle, put them on the backburner and then continue to add things after the release of the game. They don't need the flaming airplane, not because they DID add all the things they want, but because they can continue working on the things they didn't get in before the game released.

I mean, how does it even make sense in the context of the development process? You ALWAYS have the freedom to keeping building and growing the game during the development process, that's the whole point.

How does it even make sense NOT in the context of the development process? If you put something on the backburner, you're saying it's still being tracked and will be given more attention before you're done. Once you're done, it either got included or it got tossed.

With the quote in the article they're saying, "we're releasing the first installment of Destiny in the middle of our development process (which we announced will last another 10 years). So we totally aren't cutting features, guys, we're just not putting them in until we can charge you another $60/$100/$150 for it."

I understand that they have to have some sort of deadline, otherwise they'd run out of money before releasing something. But it irks me that they act like they're not cutting features because they might be added later, in a separate product, for an additional price.

Put another way, I obviously don't like the fact that some features aren't going to make it into the game but it's still understandable. However, I greatly dislike that they're trying to spin it as a good thing instead of just tolerable.