My post-debate theory... (Destiny)

by Korny , Dalton, Ga. US. Earth, Sol System, Wednesday, November 05, 2014, 01:10 (3470 days ago) @ car15

I think you're correct that making a new game allows Bungie to start fresh in a way that they never could with massive expansions.

But that's not why they're making a new game.

It's in Bungie's contract that they must deliver a full-blown sequel every two years. This has been part of the plan for Destiny from the very beginning.

Contract aside, Bungie said that they reserve the right to make a numbered sequel. I saw it in terms of something like Brood War, which was somewhat of a sequel, but still technically just an expansion to the original Starcraft. "Persistent World" was the term thrown about, IIRC, which implied that any "sequel" would be an expansion of the existing world that they created.

We were theorizing on what a sequel could be, as we have received info on numerous planets, moons, and regions that we ultimately never visited, and due to the apparent nature of DLC, we likely never will with the current iteration. If a $20 DLC pack is simply a few missions, a raid, and some exclusive content... What could come of free updates? Without an economy based on subscription or microtransactions, how expansive could free updates be? How many more $20 DLC packs can we expect to flesh out the already-lacking experience?

Like I said, a full-blown sequel would have the advantage of being current-gen only, which limits the current content, as it has to work well with last-gen consoles. While this may be a good thing, it does leave the current game in a state of uncertainty, and one starts to wonder about a myriad of implications that arise. Will our characters transfer over? Will it matter? Will we ever get to take our characters across platform like other games (Warframe) often let us do? Will this new content include the previous areas, or will we need to switch disks? Will our new equipment and levels transfer back to the first game?

Lots of questions...