Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory. In my opinion Bungie hasn't been so good lately on the narrative portion, but there is imagination and fun stuff to explore in the settings.

I really get the sense that Destiny won't have a straightforward narrative because of the design of the game. As such, I think exploring the universe is going to be right at the front of things to do. And that is absolutely perfect for video games. I remember finding tons of secret terminals in Marathon, and going places I shouldn't and finding out a lot of behind the scenes stuff in Deus Ex. That kind of thing you can't really do in other mediums. It's not a narrative; it's exploration of a setting.

Maybe my sense is wrong, but if that is the direction Bungie heads, I cannot see it being anything but enjoyable.

As long as there is enough content to find in the vast system they are planning on having as their setting, I can't imagine it being anything but enjoyable.

- No text -

Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory.

I loved Halo to begin with, but my discovery of the larger universe that the games were a part of was what really turned me into a dedicated Halo and Bungie fan. I am very excited about learning about an entirely new universe, or should I say story set in a familiar universe :)

Maybe my sense is wrong, but if that is the direction Bungie heads, I cannot see it being anything but enjoyable.

Very much agreed!

Yep, it's going to be fun seeing how story is told in this new game. It can't all be finding notes and lost data pads, at least I hope it's not, but having a lot more of that is certainly not a bad thing.

- No text -

Agreed. Visual narratives are vital for video games and Bungie fill their games with so much it ends up being a sub-plot to the main story. This is shiny loot for me.

I'm already looking at concept art and building a world history because they are allowing me to ask questions. Plant the seed and grow imagination.

-Hedge.

Haha just kidding. At least I hope I'm kidding. If this shared world will let me go as far as my destiny will take me, I'll be very, very pleased. Your post was spot on.

+1 for positivity.

Great post. Completely agree. Bungie has knack for creating spaces that reward exploration.

Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory. In my opinion Bungie hasn't been so good lately on the narrative portion, but there is imagination and fun stuff to explore in the settings.

I really get the sense that Destiny won't have a straightforward narrative because of the design of the game. As such, I think exploring the universe is going to be right at the front of things to do. And that is absolutely perfect for video games. I remember finding tons of secret terminals in Marathon, and going places I shouldn't and finding out a lot of behind the scenes stuff in Deus Ex. That kind of thing you can't really do in other mediums. It's not a narrative; it's exploration of a setting.

Maybe my sense is wrong, but if that is the direction Bungie heads, I cannot see it being anything but enjoyable.

Hard to tell. What we've heard of so far smacks of player-driven, emergent narrative. If factions in Destiny work like player factions in Eve Online, that might be one source of narrative conflict.

I see where you're going with that.. but then again, I wonder what Joe and Marty would do without traditional cinematic cutscenes :)

I see where you're going with that.. but then again, I wonder what Joe and Marty would do without traditional cinematic cutscenes :)

Marty's already doing things completely differently than he's done them in decades. (He and Mike put together an hour's worth of music for the game before there was anything to score. Of course he'll go back and add more later, and tweak stuff - but he's never done that before; made music and told the designers to build around it. I'm intensely curious to see how it works out.)

Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory. In my opinion Bungie hasn't been so good lately on the narrative portion, but there is imagination and fun stuff to explore in the settings.

Agreed.

I remember finding tons of secret terminals in Marathon, and going places I shouldn't and finding out a lot of behind the scenes stuff in Deus Ex. That kind of thing you can't really do in other mediums. It's not a narrative; it's exploration of a setting.

I've missed this exploration component in modern games, particularly in the FPS genre. I think this is one reason why Marathon (and Star Wars: Dark Forces, as well) really stood out to me in the first place; you as the player weren't completely on rails, had the freedom to explore the environment beyond what was required by the mission parameters, and were duly rewarded for your exploration throughout the game.

If Destiny can capture that sense of awe and exploration, then it's going to be a huge hit!

Agreed -- I might just say a way Destiny excites me is that it's a new Bungie franchise. I like to think of the company like I think of Miles Davis -- he was someone who periodically revolutionized his art form and then set the bar for others to emulate.

Marathon had a deep story, Myth had a deep story. Both had absolutely tangible emotional content, in part because of the spectacular writing and universe creation, in part because there was true artistry with the narrative.

The real thing that excites me about Destiny is that Bungie is a company that has, in the past (I'm thinking of Myth here), never shrunk away from taking risks when it came to something the company believed in, and that's what innovation is all about.

Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory. In my opinion Bungie hasn't been so good lately on the narrative portion, but there is imagination and fun stuff to explore in the settings.

I really get the sense that Destiny won't have a straightforward narrative because of the design of the game. As such, I think exploring the universe is going to be right at the front of things to do. And that is absolutely perfect for video games. I remember finding tons of secret terminals in Marathon, and going places I shouldn't and finding out a lot of behind the scenes stuff in Deus Ex. That kind of thing you can't really do in other mediums. It's not a narrative; it's exploration of a setting.

Maybe my sense is wrong, but if that is the direction Bungie heads, I cannot see it being anything but enjoyable.

I think the less explicit story given by the devs, the better. Consider how rampant (and ridiculously creative) the story speculation was for Halo, in which we were only given the scant outlines of the greater plot. Or, the real plot.

I don't want to find a crash site with logs that explain that the ship that crashed was piloted by the royal duchess of space pirates and crashed because flop sweat - better to let the event occur and leave the pieces (literally, figuratively) to be put together by the player/community.

This is how story may flourish. Let there be debate about events, about causes of events, of motivations of beings, of the history of the struggle.

Like you, I think hope this is where they are going...just define the rules of the universe, instantiate the universe, and let it play. Boy, I hope so.

I don't want to find a crash site with logs that explain that the ship that crashed was piloted by the royal duchess of space pirates and crashed because flop sweat - better to let the event occur and leave the pieces (literally, figuratively) to be put together by the player/community.

This is how story may flourish. Let there be debate about events, about causes of events, of motivations of beings, of the history of the struggle.

Like you, I think hope this is where they are going...just define the rules of the universe, instantiate the universe, and let it play. Boy, I hope so.

I totally want a crash site with logs, just not ones that you have to read to understand the mission you are on.

I totally want a crash site with logs, just not ones that you have to read to understand the mission you are on.

We can go farther. How about logs that you just plain don't read? If you so choose, try to piece together the subtle hints to solve the mystery of the lost space logging vessel.

I see where you're going with that.. but then again, I wonder what Joe and Marty would do without traditional cinematic cutscenes :)

Marty's already doing things completely differently than he's done them in decades. (He and Mike put together an hour's worth of music for the game before there was anything to score. Of course he'll go back and add more later, and tweak stuff - but he's never done that before; made music and told the designers to build around it. I'm intensely curious to see how it works out.)

That does sound interesting.

So, no cutscenes? I guess Marty will just have to login, join the game, and tell everyone to pause dramatically for a few seconds before entering the next area.

So, no cutscenes? I guess Marty will just have to login, join the game, and tell everyone to pause dramatically for a few seconds before entering the next area.

That reminds me. I hope for destiny Marty gets over himself and lets us adjust music / vox / sfx levels with individual slider controls. Let's bring Bungie's audio feature set up to 1995 standards!

Destiny: An Evening with Marty.

'GUYS, GUYS, WAIT, STOP... are you listening... OK... WAIT FOR IT... ANNNNNNND... THERE! Wasn't that cool?'

So, no cutscenes? I guess Marty will just have to login, join the game, and tell everyone to pause dramatically for a few seconds before entering the next area.

That reminds me. I hope for destiny Marty gets over himself and lets us adjust music / vox / sfx levels with individual slider controls. Let's bring Bungie's audio feature set up to 1995 standards!

Ha! Don't hold your breath. I'm betting Marty won't think that letting people ruin his mix is "bringing the feature set up to standards". I think it's a valid point of contention, but I also think that there's a certain laziness in not bothering to try and get something right and just leaving it up to the user to set everything.

The only problems I've ever had with Halo audio-- namely, some dialogue being inaudible because of a nearby explosion or other audio-- could not have been meaningfully addressed by static sliders, as solving that temporary and unpredictable problem would have ruined the mix for all other situations.

I can easily see where for someone wishing to record the experience, this is a useful level of control to have.

Perhaps they could persuade Marty to allow mix control to unlock after the game's been beaten on Legendary with all skulls on? Assuming Destiny has skulls or some equivalent...

Perhaps they could persuade Marty to allow mix control to unlock after the game's been beaten on Legendary with all skulls on?

I'm curious as to whether or not it even has difficulty levels — for the same reasons as there potentially being no pause feature, I wonder if they won't just handle the standard difficulty levels by having areas of differing difficulty to visit. Skulls I am anticipating could be something one can unlock and enable though — maybe you can find them as ‘loot’?

- No text -

I'm curious as to whether or not it even has difficulty levels — for the same reasons as there potentially being no pause feature, I wonder if they won't just handle the standard difficulty levels by having areas of differing difficulty to visit. Skulls I am anticipating could be something one can unlock and enable though — maybe you can find them as ‘loot’?

What would be cool is if the skulls were in your "inventory" and you could actually see what skulls other people are using like hanging off of their cape or something.

I also think that there's a certain laziness in not bothering to try and get something right and just leaving it up to the user to set everything.

What the hell? Having customisable anything does not preclude or excuse getting a good default.

It just recognises that people are different, have different tastes and different purposes.

Yeah, okay.

Ha! Don't hold your breath. I'm betting Marty won't think that letting people ruin his mix is "bringing the feature set up to standards". I think it's a valid point of contention, but I also think that there's a certain laziness in not bothering to try and get something right and just leaving it up to the user to set everything.

There's no 'getting it right' when the player is in control of the game, unless you are the one playing. That's what I think you and he don't understand.

I played Marathon 1 without music. It's much better (IN MY OPINION) because it makes it creepier, and the music sucks. Miguel played with the music. That choice is up to us. Both of us had the best experience we could have had because we were given the choice.

The only problems I've ever had with Halo audio-- namely, some dialogue being inaudible because of a nearby explosion or other audio-- could not have been meaningfully addressed by static sliders, as solving that temporary and unpredictable problem would have ruined the mix for all other situations.

Widen your scope man. You're not the center of the player verse. Vox / Music / SFX sliders are of use to people like:

1. Speedrunners
2. Machinema Makers
3. People with hearing disabilities
4. Normal people who want louder / softer individual controls because of their individual setups
5. Folks who don't like the music
6. Tons of situations I can't even think of

I always always always am adjusting sliders in games that do it right, because the defaults are never to my preference.

Ha! Don't hold your breath. I'm betting Marty won't think that letting people ruin his mix is "bringing the feature set up to standards". I think it's a valid point of contention, but I also think that there's a certain laziness in not bothering to try and get something right and just leaving it up to the user to set everything.

There's no 'getting it right' when the player is in control of the game, unless you are the one playing. That's what I think you and he don't understand.

I played Marathon 1 without music. It's much better (IN MY OPINION) because it makes it creepier, and the music sucks. Miguel played with the music. That choice is up to us. Both of us had the best experience we could have had because we were given the choice.

The only problems I've ever had with Halo audio-- namely, some dialogue being inaudible because of a nearby explosion or other audio-- could not have been meaningfully addressed by static sliders, as solving that temporary and unpredictable problem would have ruined the mix for all other situations.

Widen your scope man. You're not the center of the player verse. Vox / Music / SFX sliders are of use to people like:

1. Speedrunners
2. Machinema Makers
3. People with hearing disabilities
4. Normal people who want louder / softer individual controls because of their individual setups
5. Folks who don't like the music
6. Tons of situations I can't even think of

I always always always am adjusting sliders in games that do it right, because the defaults are never to my preference.

1. edge case
2. edge case
3. legitimate
4. I can hear Marty say "fix your setup, not my mix"
5. Play another game? There are lots.
6. Think harder.

Aesthethic choices like this know no bounds, though. Where should you stop?

Maybe I like Elites, but not Jackals. Maybe a slider?

The level Halo 2 is too green on my TV. Maybe the grass should be red? Make it a slider.

Captain Keyes' voice is too high-pitched. That'd make a good slider.

Somehow, movie theaters and producers of home video content have managed to get away with allowing end users only a single volume control. I'm at a loss to describe exactly why is it a game is that different.

I'm guessing you're the kind of guy who reaches for the salt and pepper before you've tasted something. Bungie could probably put in a bunch of sliders that did nothing and you'd mess with them anyway, convinced you've just optimized your experience.

Heck, they ought to do just that.

Or maybe just a single slider that goes from "Narcogen" on one side to "Cody Miller" on the other. It doesn't have to do anything, just lets you slide it back and forth to your heart's content. :)

This is kind of a strange thing to argue against. It's not a complex feature for the developers to include, and it's the kind of thing which is standard in just about every game I can think of, but more importantly, if yu trust the developer, then you don't have to touch a thing. Granted, most of those games are in my Steam library and not on the shelf next to the XBOX, and the user tends to be more technically involved in PC games, but . . . when I play XCOM, I sometimes turn off the in-game music so I can listen to Pandora. That's not an insult to the sound designer of the game, it's a statement of my preferences, just like my ability to adjust the brightness and contrast. I turn the brightness way down in games that require a flashlight because the default is usually so bright that the extra light isn't necessary.

I get that the developer has a vision, but I don't think you can liken changing audio preferences to censoring David. Nobody wants to change their audio for moral reasons.

I get that the developer has a vision, but I don't think you can liken changing audio preferences to censoring David. Nobody wants to change their audio for moral reasons.

He didn't. You might think I did because of the picture I posted, but my point wasn't about what you say, but more along the lines of what Narc said. It's an aesthetic choice, and not one developers are obligated to leave to us.

But why exclude audio? The user is left in control of virtually every other technical detail. As I said, we have the ability to adjust brightness and contrast, which are the visual equivalent to adjusting audio levels. We can change the controller layout (I'd argue that's aesthetic. Pulling a trigger to fire a gun is waaaaay different than pressing A; that's part of why the Metroid Prime series feels different from Halo). Us PC users can change the graphical fidelity. Hell, we can even introduce content the developer never intended; I can play the original Deus Ex with extremely high-definition textures that were made by users years after the game's release. I can play missions in Half Life that have nothing to do with Gordon or the Combine. That's getting left-field, though. I can't figure out why this is a point of contention. It's no different than any other control we've had since forever. Hell, the original Doom let us independently adjust the volume of the music and the action.

This is like arguing over what kind of lighting is proper for viewing art. The curator's got one idea, the rich guy who sets it in his living room has another, and the fellow who's just looking at Google images can see all of them.

I do apologize, though, I saw the David post and did not look to the author, and so misattributed it.

But why exclude audio? The user is left in control of virtually every other technical detail.

No, there's all kinds of details users don't control.

As I said, we have the ability to adjust brightness and contrast, which are the visual equivalent to adjusting audio levels.

No, it's not the visual equivalent.

We can change the controller layout (I'd argue that's aesthetic. Pulling a trigger to fire a gun is waaaaay different than pressing A; that's part of why the Metroid Prime series feels different from Halo). Us PC users can change the graphical fidelity. Hell, we can even introduce content the developer never intended; I can play the original Deus Ex with extremely high-definition textures that were made by users years after the game's release. I can play missions in Half Life that have nothing to do with Gordon or the Combine. That's getting left-field, though. I can't figure out why this is a point of contention. It's no different than any other control we've had since forever. Hell, the original Doom let us independently adjust the volume of the music and the action.

This is like arguing over what kind of lighting is proper for viewing art. The curator's got one idea, the rich guy who sets it in his living room has another, and the fellow who's just looking at Google images can see all of them.

All the stuff you mention is fun, but we have a agree that some elements of game X have to remain static if we're still going to call it game X. I don't see why reasonable people or developers can't disagree about what should or shouldn't go into the static column. I don't happen to think it is like lighting, but more like painting over what the artist painted. The logic seems to be that because interactivity is the distinguishing characteristic of games, then interactivity is therefore a characteristic that every element of a game must have, else ceases to be a game. That seems a bizarre principle to me. Taken to its logical extreme, the game ceases to be anything that we react to, and becomes only another creative tool. There's something to be said for that, but if that's what you're after, why not become a developer yourself?

Somehow, movie theaters and producers of home video content have managed to get away with allowing end users only a single volume control. I'm at a loss to describe exactly why is it a game is that different.

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Have you ever created house rules for games you play, like Monopoly? Have you ever played football on a field that wasn't exactly 100 yards long? Have you ever played a mod? Have you ever adjusted the gamma / brightness of a game?

So why are films and games different? I just gave you the answer.

"No, it isn't" because . . . ? I'm just curious, but I don't understand how gamma differs from audio. The reason you can adjust the brightness and contrast is because not all monitors or television sets are the same, and so a game developed on one group of models won't look right on another without tweaking. Audio is no different; not everyone has a badass surround sound system. Some people don't want it. Whatever the case, the user's home setup has already changed what the developer has created. You give the user options, they can correct for that.

I'm not arguing that the music isn't part of the game, I don't really know where that came from. I just . . . I don't really know where this discussion is going. If you have the option to adjust your audio, then: people who want to do, let's say, machinema, can. People who have hearing difficulties can adjust to the point that they know what's going on. Uhm, if the game developers messed up the balancing, you can fix it. I'm positive that nobody at Bungie intended for the Master Chief's voice to be so damn quiet in the escape pod at the end of the second level, but for some reason it is.

Finally, if you have no problem with the default settings, you can leave them alone. You literally cannot suffer from the inclusion of these options, but there are people who are affected negatively by their exclusion. Halo does not stop being Halo if you mute the music. You're missing out on some great stuff, but the game is still the game. I don't play multiplayer, that doesn't mean I'm not still playing Halo just because the developers saw fit to include a feature I'm ignoring.

"No, it isn't" because . . . ?

I respond because you asked ... this is like my 12th post on the subject between here and HBO, and I grow weary...

I'm just curious, but I don't understand how gamma differs from audio. The reason you can adjust the brightness and contrast is because not all monitors or television sets are the same, and so a game developed on one group of models won't look right on another without tweaking. Audio is no different; not everyone has a badass surround sound system. Some people don't want it. Whatever the case, the user's home setup has already changed what the developer has created. You give the user options, they can correct for that.

Huh? If you could correct for not having a badass surround sound system, why would anyone need or want a badass surround system? Things like brightness, contrast, equalizer settings and so on provide a different level of control than controlling a mix. You're adjusting to account for differences in equipment and settings, as you said, with the ideal being hearing and seeing what the creators intended you to see and hear. That's why high-end audio/visual dealers have experts who come to your house with reference equipment and so on. They calibrate and adjust your setup so that it delivers something closer to this ideal that the creators intended. You like what they create, right? Else why did you buy it?

I'm not arguing that the music isn't part of the game, I don't really know where that came from. I just . . . I don't really know where this discussion is going. If you have the option to adjust your audio, then: people who want to do, let's say, machinema, can. People who have hearing difficulties can adjust to the point that they know what's going on. Uhm, if the game developers messed up the balancing, you can fix it. I'm positive that nobody at Bungie intended for the Master Chief's voice to be so damn quiet in the escape pod at the end of the second level, but for some reason it is.

Read narc's replies again. He addresses each issue you mention better than I can.

Finally, if you have no problem with the default settings, you can leave them alone. You literally cannot suffer from the inclusion of these options, but there are people who are affected negatively by their exclusion.

It's a small group that's negatively affected. These options give the impression that these things should be adjusted, and many people will adjust them just because they can, which could lead to a lot of people having a suboptimal experience of the game.

Halo does not stop being Halo if you mute the music.

Debatable. It's funny that Cody mentions the 1995 standard. Sound in games has evolved. When it was nothing but bips and boops coming out of a crappy speaker, it made more sense to let users adjust things. Less of the experience was or could be carried by the sound. I suspect Marty sees music and sound as important and necessary tools in the storyteller's arsenal, and thinks of what he does as more like creating a dynamic film soundtrack. Why wouldn't he (and Jay) choose to have their work be as inseparable from the game experience as it would be in film?

You're missing out on some great stuff, but the game is still the game.

Debatable. You said "I'm not arguing that the music isn't part of the game." Good. I think it is, too. You mentioned paintings. You paint your masterpiece, and some dude comes up and says, "I like the left corner. Just give me the left corner." You have every right to say, "No, thanks. It is what it is. It's fine if you don't like it. Others will. I painted this for them." You have no obligation to accommodate said dude.

You have excellent arguments, and I'm far from capable of refuting them. I have one last thought to add to this discussion, and that pertains to the comparison to other forms of art. More than any other medium, the videogame is a gestalt of all the other art forms. It is composed of traditional 2d art, 3d art, visual effects, music, sound design, voice recording, the motion of the human body . . . anything that falls under the umbrella of art can be found there. The experience is incomparable to purchasing or viewing a painting; a painting is only a piece of a videogame.

Beyond that, more than any other art form, the videogame is a piece of technology. That's what makes it so marvelous. It is, as folks say, more than the sum of its parts. A lot of excellent games are good because the package is more than what the developers buit. The Source engine and the Unreal engine are just two examples of games which were just as strong as platforms for others to use to create as they were as standalone products. Both of those were used originally to build games which gave the user an enormous amount of control over the content of the game; you can play Half Life 2 with every setting on default, or you can literally access the dev console and change every variable the creators had access to. When you have a game like Halo, you've been given an excellent package which is useful only for the experience the developers intended. When the user is given control, you can enjoy the developer's project, and then you can use the platform for myriad other worthwhile experiences.

I don't disagree very much at all. If we were drinking beer I'd anticipate a clink of glasses at any moment.

- No text -

I get that the developer has a vision, but I don't think you can liken changing audio preferences to censoring David. Nobody wants to change their audio for moral reasons.

Who said anything about censoring or morals?

I'm saying the cost/benefit is off on implementations like this because:

1) Most people won't use them
2) Some of the people who will use them will make things worse, whether they acknowledge it or not
3) Giving in to the vocal minority that asks for more options can be a slippery slope, because the idea that such a request is possible and reasonable can be applied to almost any aesthetic choice within the game; the substitution of soundtrack or control over audio mix does not occupy a position of privilege with regards to these other aesthetic choices.

Somehow, movie theaters and producers of home video content have managed to get away with allowing end users only a single volume control. I'm at a loss to describe exactly why is it a game is that different.

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion. It's not analogous to installing a mod, creating a custom game, or any of the other examples.

Have you ever created house rules for games you play, like Monopoly? Have you ever played football on a field that wasn't exactly 100 yards long? Have you ever played a mod? Have you ever adjusted the gamma / brightness of a game?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And yes.

It's just that none of those are relevant here.

However if you feel the sheer weight of bad argument by analogy will sway Marty and the other audio guys, hey... feel free.

Why not try some car analogies? I hear they work pretty well.

What? There is zero cost to including this. Audio control is inherently built into the game, they just don't let you change it. This is not expensive or time consuming to include.

2) That is a subjective statement. My experience with XCOM is not worse because I mute their music to listen to Pandora. It actually helps me get more into the game, because that's the kind of stuff I'd have in the background if I were sitting in an armchair ordering operatives to fight space aliens. It may be a different experience from what Firaxis intended, but so what? That's the nature of art: the intent of the creator has absolutely nothing to do with the experience had by the consumer.

And . . . "slippery slope?" Really? Y'know, Cody was exaggerating when he said that it's ridiculous the Halo games don't have this option, but you are most definitely exaggerating how serious it is. It is a fairly standard option. I guarantee you that the number of games which include such options outnumber the number which do not. I also guarantee you that the games which include the option have a variety of other features which make them more appealing to someone who's trying to get the most optimal experience. There's no slope here; it's already happened, and nothing bad came of it.

Also, while the player does not directly control the music, there are games (and this seems, to me, to be the most effective use of audio) where the music changes based on the player's movements and actions. If you enter combat, you have one type of music. If you're exploring, it will fade into another score. It's as close to interactive as you can get without the player actually creating the score (and those games exist, too).

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

- No text -

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

This is seriously bemusing. Tell me: why do people explicitly write music they call interactive for games?

If you're saying it's only reactive, that would deny the effect that audio has on the player and therefore it's emotional and artistic power, no?

Unless you've got some definition of interactivity that I am unaware of.

I seriously don't get this. I'm thinking I should just give up on this conversation...

Doesn't Marty specifically write music to flow with whatever the player is doing at the moment?

I'd call that interactive.

(Btw, I'm not siding with either side of the "should have sliders" discussion, just pointing out a possible flaw in argument)

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

This is seriously bemusing. Tell me: why do people explicitly write music they call interactive for games?

Have they? I haven't heard that. I've heard Marty call his music dynamic. That's a different word with a different meaning.

If you're saying it's only reactive, that would deny the effect that audio has on the player and therefore it's emotional and artistic power, no?

I don't think you understood what I was saying. Admittedly, my last post was lacking in explanation as much as yours was.

Unless you've got some definition of interactivity that I am unaware of.

Or maybe it's the other way around.

Marty designs the audio so that you step across a threshold (stimulus) and the music swells (response). The audio is dynamic, like thousands of other things in the game, such as lighting, shadows, animations--way too many things to list. You can't affect these things, so they aren't interactive, but they are dynamic.

If the audio had the sliders you want, it would be interactive, but it doesn't, so it's not.

I seriously don't get this. I'm thinking I should just give up on this conversation...

I get both sides. I can't explain why some don't.

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

This is seriously bemusing. Tell me: why do people explicitly write music they call interactive for games?

Have they? I haven't heard that. I've heard Marty call his music dynamic. That's a different word with a different meaning.

Something can be both dynamic and interactive. They're not mutually exclusive meanings.

Unless you've got some definition of interactivity that I am unaware of.

Or maybe it's the other way around.

Marty designs the audio so that you step across a threshold (stimulus) and the music swells (response). The audio is dynamic, like thousands of other things in the game, such as lighting, shadows, animations--way too many things to list. You can't affect these things, so they aren't interactive, but they are dynamic.

If the audio had the sliders you want, it would be interactive, but it doesn't, so it's not.

The part that makes it interactive is that it changes on YOUR stimulus. If you never hit a certain trigger, it might just loop forever (this has happened). The music does this, as well as many other elements of audio. You pull the trigger, this fires a gun, it makes a sound. You find the sound cool, you want to fire it again. The system affects you and you affect the system to produce a moving tapestry of visual and audio content and emotions unique to that moment.

Lighting and shadows can be interactive. See the phrase: playing with shadows. You don't need to 'control the response' to have an effect on the result of the system. Having a dynamic shadow for the player character is common in Halo. People can affect how that shadow looks and where it is cast, by their control inputs.

EDIT:
Something can change on it's own and get along very happily (dynamic). That same system can also change on some external input and is also interactive (and this can be to varying degrees). In Science, the simple act of trying to observe something can be enough to interact with the system and affect it's result.

Therefore, audio already is interactive in many games, and certainly is in Halo specifically, and adding more ways to interact with that system would not be a huge paradigm shift. It would most likely not make it worse, and may even make it better.

Lighting and shadows can be interactive. See the phrase: playing with shadows. You don't need to 'control the response' to have an effect on the result of the system. Having a dynamic shadow for the player character is common in Halo. People can affect how that shadow looks and where it is cast, by their control inputs.

The shadow is the result of someone else programming certain parameters. Those rules are out of your control. No offense, but you're stretching the definition of interactivity to a ridiculous point. Someone's going to mention Heisenberg soon, and that's how we'll know the horse is so dead, the maggots have gotten bored.

Having written a short book on this issue by now, I'm ready to move on.

EDIT:
Nevermind. I'm sometimes overcome by my lust to understand. But this is pointless. I don't seem to be reading in the same language, nevermind the same page.

What?

Please, someone go find a definition of interactive for us. I'm going out of my mind here.

The last Calvin and Hobbes strip should suffice.

As I have peppered through this thread... this is all I could think about.
So ... I mean here.
This.
A 1000 Times this.

/End Thread ;)

The last Calvin and Hobbes strip should suffice.

As I have peppered through this thread... this is all I could think about.
So ... I mean here.
This.
A 1000 Times this.

/End Thread ;)

Doggone it, that strip comes preloaded with a strong emotional response. No, these aren't tears, I'm chopping onions.

Calvin and Hobbes always made me feel happy and like a kid. This particular strip applies so well to Destiny. :)

I have really high hopes for the story/universe development for Destiny. Being more of an open-sandbox game that I think it will be, it will have infinitely more ways to give us background on the universe. I think that terminals/data pads could still be a fun way to give us information, especially if they expand upon it. For example, say you pick up a data pad that is in a crashed ship's wreckage (as stated above) and then maybe that initiates a secondary objective to your mission (like a side mission). This would compel the players to follow this sub-plot instead of relying on them to go to some extra menu and read the data pad like how they do in more linear games.

Some other great ideas to further the universe's story would be something like big community missions (I guess similar to raids). Pretty much have a big mission on Mars that is extremely difficult to complete and until it's complete the entire community is unable to progress the universe's story. This would require a large community effort to complete the mission for the good of everyone. This would bring the community together as a whole to work together and it would make it feel like we are all actually together in the war vs. the aliens.

For example, maybe the Cabal have a few giant forts across a stretch of Mars and we need to defeat them simultaneously in order to get past them into some ancient ruins that will tell us more of the main story.
Of course whether this could work would depend a lot on how Bungie implements different areas and people playing them. If everyone went to Fort X would they all be at the same instance of Fort X or would they all be at different instances of it?

Anyways, I love the fact that the open-sandboxness to this game has the potential for awesome.

Ha! Don't hold your breath. I'm betting Marty won't think that letting people ruin his mix is "bringing the feature set up to standards". I think it's a valid point of contention, but I also think that there's a certain laziness in not bothering to try and get something right and just leaving it up to the user to set everything.

There's no 'getting it right' when the player is in control of the game, unless you are the one playing. That's what I think you and he don't understand.

I played Marathon 1 without music. It's much better (IN MY OPINION) because it makes it creepier, and the music sucks. Miguel played with the music. That choice is up to us. Both of us had the best experience we could have had because we were given the choice.

I like this demonstration of the issue and your example.

The only problems I've ever had with Halo audio-- namely, some dialogue being inaudible because of a nearby explosion or other audio-- could not have been meaningfully addressed by static sliders, as solving that temporary and unpredictable problem would have ruined the mix for all other situations.

It's not about problems, it's about me wanting to mess with the sound.

Widen your scope man. You're not the center of the player verse. Vox / Music / SFX sliders are of use to people like:

1. Speedrunners

1. edge case

so? also they might not be as rare as you think

2. Machinema Makers

2. edge case

so? also they're not so much any more, you can just check YouTube to verify that

3. People with hearing disabilities

3. legitimate

Then they should do it.

4. Normal people who want louder / softer individual controls because of their individual setups

4. I can hear Marty say "fix your setup, not my mix"

I can't afford to change my setup, and as much as I respect Marty, I don't have to do what he says or what he wants or even agree with him, and I shouldn't have to get new stuff just to make sure a game sounds right.

5. Folks who don't like the music

5. Play another game? There are lots.

ah but Bungie wants me to play their game, don't they?

6. Tons of situations I can't even think of

6. Think harder.

OK, what about people that don't like music in games at all, or who, despite the best efforts of Marty & co., find a character's voice annoying, or who despite the best efforts of Joe Staten & co. find certain dialog annoying, or who just don't want to hear it for the fortieth time?

I always always always am adjusting sliders in games that do it right, because the defaults are never to my preference.

Aesthethic choices like this know no bounds, though. Where should you stop?

Maybe I like Elites, but not Jackals. Maybe a slider?

a slider for what?

The level Halo 2 is too green on my TV. Maybe the grass should be red? Make it a slider.

What are you talking about?

Somehow, movie theaters and producers of home video content have managed to get away with allowing end users only a single volume control. I'm at a loss to describe exactly why is it a game is that different.

They aren't different, those things should have these options too.

As I said, we have the ability to adjust brightness and contrast, which are the visual equivalent to adjusting audio levels.

No, it's not the visual equivalent.

Well, what would be then? Seriously, I'm curious what you think would be equivalent.

All the stuff you mention is fun, but we have a agree that some elements of game X have to remain static if we're still going to call it game X.

I'd argue that completely muting the sound is a more drastic change than anything you can do with a couple of volume sliders, and we've been able to do that since console gaming has existed.

I don't see why reasonable people or developers can't disagree about what should or shouldn't go into the static column. I don't happen to think it is like lighting, but more like painting over what the artist painted. The logic seems to be that because interactivity is the distinguishing characteristic of games, then interactivity is therefore a characteristic that every element of a game must have, else ceases to be a game. That seems a bizarre principle to me. Taken to its logical extreme, the game ceases to be anything that we react to, and becomes only another creative tool. There's something to be said for that, but if that's what you're after, why not become a developer yourself?

Maybe because that's a different process and experience from playing a game. You have a point though, if you go further and change out textures like Leisandir mentioned, you're getting closer to development territory... but then you should know a lot of developers got their start messing with and modifying games, and I don't see why it can't be a mix of a more passive gaming experience and what you might call fully active development, or even something between the two.

Huh? If you could correct for not having a badass surround sound system, why would anyone need or want a badass surround system?

so they could have surround sound? so they could brag about it?

Things like brightness, contrast, equalizer settings and so on provide a different level of control than controlling a mix. You're adjusting to account for differences in equipment and settings, as you said, with the ideal being hearing and seeing what the creators intended you to see and hear.

That's the same thing we're talking about here.

That's why high-end audio/visual dealers have experts who come to your house with reference equipment and so on. They calibrate and adjust your setup so that it delivers something closer to this ideal that the creators intended.

Firstly, I don't have the money for high-end audio/visual anything, let alone that and having people come out to set it up for me, and secondly, because I doubt everything is going to be working from the same reference equipment and setup, will they come out and do that every time I play a different game or watch a different movie or change the channel on the TV?

Finally, if you have no problem with the default settings, you can leave them alone. You literally cannot suffer from the inclusion of these options, but there are people who are affected negatively by their exclusion.

It's a small group that's negatively affected. These options give the impression that these things should be adjusted, and many people will adjust them just because they can, which could lead to a lot of people having a suboptimal experience of the game.

They don't give the impression they should be adjusted, at least not to me or a whole lot of other people. I thought it was common knowledge most people don't adjust things like that. So you're OK with a small group of people being negatively affected by not having these settings available, but you're not OK with a small group of people being negatively affected by having these settings be available?

You're missing out on some great stuff, but the game is still the game.

Debatable. You said "I'm not arguing that the music isn't part of the game." Good. I think it is, too. You mentioned paintings. You paint your masterpiece, and some dude comes up and says, "I like the left corner. Just give me the left corner." You have every right to say, "No, thanks. It is what it is. It's fine if you don't like it. Others will. I painted this for them." You have no obligation to accommodate said dude.

Yeah, but in the real world if the painter or painting is well-known that guy will fairly easily be able to get a copy of just that corner framed on his wall, and no one will probably try to stop him and tell him he's messing up the artist's vision. I mean heck, what about this? I doubt a lot of what you see on the first pages of results is what da Vinci had in mind, but I think if he somehow knew what people made of his work he wouldn't really mind, or at least he wouldn't be mad.

ah but Bungie wants me to play their game, don't they?

Maybe they don't want you to play it with messed up audio.

What are you talking about?

He was making a hyperbolic points that you'd probably disagree so you'd think "well, where's my limit, then?"

As I said, we have the ability to adjust brightness and contrast, which are the visual equivalent to adjusting audio levels.

No, it's not the visual equivalent.

Well, what would be then? Seriously, I'm curious what you think would be equivalent.

I've stayed out of this discussion, because it seems like the two sides are arguing about totally different things, but this seems like a pretty straightforward question.

You already HAVE the audio equivalent of brightness and contrast for any game you want - just mess with the bass or treble, or whatever. That's not what the 'Audio Mix' is talking about, though - it's talking about relative volume levels of different pieces of the total audio output. It would be like a visual 'Brighten Humans' button on your TV - which doesn't exist. (Yes, you used to have RGB controls on your TV - but that was to compensate for faulty cathode ray tubes; those controls no longer exist on LCD or plasma TVs.)

You're asking the game developer to give you control over WHICH PIECE OF AUDIO you hear - and that's not something they're required to do, and it's not something you have in other realms. (I guess there's nothing wrong with wanting it - but all of the arguments that it's just the equivalent of buttons you already have for visual adjustments are based on faulty analogies.)

As I said, we have the ability to adjust brightness and contrast, which are the visual equivalent to adjusting audio levels.

No, it's not the visual equivalent.

Well, what would be then? Seriously, I'm curious what you think would be equivalent.

I've stayed out of this discussion, because it seems like the two sides are arguing about totally different things, but this seems like a pretty straightforward question.

I think everyone in this thread understands we're talking about changing the volume of the music and possibly other audio components independently from each other and the overall volume.

You already HAVE the audio equivalent of brightness and contrast for any game you want - just mess with the bass or treble, or whatever. That's not what the 'Audio Mix' is talking about, though - it's talking about relative volume levels of different pieces of the total audio output. It would be like a visual 'Brighten Humans' button on your TV - which doesn't exist. (Yes, you used to have RGB controls on your TV - but that was to compensate for faulty cathode ray tubes; those controls no longer exist on LCD or plasma TVs.)

I just went into the options on my monitor and it turns out I can adjust red, green, and blue (which I don't remember any old TVs letting me do, actually), plus hue and saturation, and a lot of people play console games with a monitor. BTW this is a (presumably cheap since it came with the computer) Dell monitor from 2007. I'd imagine a lot of TVs now would have similar options. Also I've seen one, maybe two TVs in my entire life that let you adjust bass and treble.

You're asking the game developer to give you control over WHICH PIECE OF AUDIO you hear - and that's not something they're required to do, and it's not something you have in other realms. (I guess there's nothing wrong with wanting it - but all of the arguments that it's just the equivalent of buttons you already have for visual adjustments are based on faulty analogies.)

Can you deny it would be expected based on other games though? (if "other games" is too vague we can narrow it down, I think you'll still find at least half of them allow for this kind of adjustment)

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

Unless you're talking about that gimmicky, glitchy, useless Kinect voice command feature, no, it isn't.

Despite what the gaming industry would like people to believe, "interactive" actually means something.

When the game makes a sound, and you hear it, that's passive.

If the noises the game made depended on noises you made (see above) that'd be interactive.

Changing options in preferences does not make audio "interactive" in any meaningful sense.

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

You said it better than I did.

I just went into the options on my monitor and it turns out I can adjust red, green, and blue (which I don't remember any old TVs letting me do, actually), plus hue and saturation, and a lot of people play console games with a monitor. BTW this is a (presumably cheap since it came with the computer) Dell monitor from 2007. I'd imagine a lot of TVs now would have similar options. Also I've seen one, maybe two TVs in my entire life that let you adjust bass and treble.

Again - none of those changes affect ONE KIND OF VISUAL OBJECT. You can't brighten trees while leaving people alone, for example. That's what you're asking for in your audio mix.

Can you deny it would be expected based on other games though? (if "other games" is too vague we can narrow it down, I think you'll still find at least half of them allow for this kind of adjustment)

I wasn't TALKING about other games - I wasn't talking about what you think you should be able to expect. I addressed one small piece of this argument - the people on the "I want this" side are saying "we already have this for visual aspects, why shouldn't we have it for audio aspects?" and I'm saying you DON'T have it for visual aspects (or, really, pretty much anything else, on a consistent basis).

Nobody's saying it CAN'T be offered - not even Kermit. What they're saying is that it's not OWED to you. Some developers might choose to offer it - but that doesn't make it a requirement for ALL developers. You can certainly want it - but it's an aesthetic choice, and as such, the developer can choose to withhold it, for the overall consistency of their offering. All I was saying was this argument that "we've had it since 1995" or whatever is irrelevant; yes, the technology to split out the audio has existed for that long, but no, it's NOT a given that you, as the player, will be given that option. And no, you don't have it with other aspects of the presentation. That's all.

As Narcogen pointed out, some people don't like Jackal Snipers - but you don't expect Bungie to offer you an 'Enemy' slider to let you reduce their frequency to 0, so you can play the game without them. (That would fucking rock, by the way - but I don't hold it against them that they didn't give it to me.)

- No text -

That would fucking rock, by the way - but I don't hold it against them that they didn't give it to me.

That.

So basically it's the equivalent to the crazy customization for firefight in Reach? (Using the enemy slider example)

I can see how it might be fun to do that with audio for machinima(sp?) makers or people who really really understand audio systems. Still, seems like something I would never mess with in a campaign space (at least the first time through). I value the story that the developer is trying to tell I hope/assume that they've tested the audio on different kinds of systems so it works well. Really the only game in recent memory I had trouble with audio levels was Halo 4.

So I can see where it would be useful, but I also see how it could be overbearing. I guess I don't really care because I wouldn't use it. lol

Bungie has always been good about creating universes and backstory. In my opinion Bungie hasn't been so good lately on the narrative portion, but there is imagination and fun stuff to explore in the settings.

Agreed.

I remember finding tons of secret terminals in Marathon, and going places I shouldn't and finding out a lot of behind the scenes stuff in Deus Ex. That kind of thing you can't really do in other mediums. It's not a narrative; it's exploration of a setting.

I've missed this exploration component in modern games, particularly in the FPS genre. I think this is one reason why Marathon (and Star Wars: Dark Forces, as well) really stood out to me in the first place; you as the player weren't completely on rails, had the freedom to explore the environment beyond what was required by the mission parameters, and were duly rewarded for your exploration throughout the game.

If Destiny can capture that sense of awe and exploration, then it's going to be a huge hit!

This is one thing I enjoyed a lot in the Bioshock games. You can learn a lot of extra story wandering around listening to the audio diaries. Bioshock in my opinion brings back a lot of the classic shooter elements that I miss while still being a modern shooter. I'm hoping with how expansive a world Bioshock is that they will put in extras like that throughout the world.

Really the only game in recent memory I had trouble with audio levels was Halo 4.

Yeah I thought the mix in Halo 4 was pretty bad, especially compared to the Bungie Halos

You seriously don't see a difference between a fixed piece of art, and a game you're supposed to play / use / interact with?

Not with regard to audio mix, no. The audio is not an interactive portion.

Actually it is.

No, it's not. Don't confuse getting a response from a your stimulus with being able to control the response from your stimulus.

You said it better than I did.

Not sure about that, but at least one person besides me understood that sentence.

Nobody's saying it CAN'T be offered - not even Kermit. What they're saying is that it's not OWED to you.

Well the way some people put it makes it sound like they think it specifically shouldn't be in the game. If that's not the case

As Narcogen pointed out, some people don't like Jackal Snipers - but you don't expect Bungie to offer you an 'Enemy' slider to let you reduce their frequency to 0, so you can play the game without them. (That would fucking rock, by the way - but I don't hold it against them that they didn't give it to me.)

They gave us just that in Firefight in Reach though (well, for Jackal snipers it's just hazards on/off IIRC, but you can change groups of enemies and certain groups come at the same time, so you can do that with all the other enemies). edit: I see someone else brought this up... oh well

They gave us just that in Firefight in Reach though (well, for Jackal snipers it's just hazards on/off IIRC, but you can change groups of enemies and certain groups come at the same time, so you can do that with all the other enemies). edit: I see someone else brought this up... oh well

This thread is ridiculous and I know I'll be sorry for jumping in here, but how can you honestly even say this is equivalent. I know that Claude was using the point to illustrate how absurd this conversation is, but it looks like you and another person missed his point.

Yes, we had the ability to change enemy settings in Firefight because that was the entire purpose of the mode. That wasn't a game-wide setting that allowed you to affect the enemy encounters in every part of the game; meanwhile the request about the audio controls is

I think we all get it. You guys want to control the sound levels individually like a lot of other games offer. Great. Point taken. Just because you want it, and because many other (not all) games offer this option, doesn't mean it should be included. If you want it to be included, why don't you go get a job at Bungie and put it in the game?

/end rant

it looks like you and another person missed his point.

Is that me you are referring to? Are you just assuming that because GV mentioned I brought it up means I'm on a particular side?
I'm not on anyone's side because nobody is on my side. ;)

I think if you read my post it was more of trying to find an equivalent than stating firefight was an equivalent.

Yes, we had the ability to change enemy settings in Firefight because that was the entire purpose of the mode. That wasn't a game-wide setting that allowed you to affect the enemy encounters in every part of the game; meanwhile the request about the audio controls is

This got me thinking, maybe sliders would be a good idea is theater mode. I don't think that it would be ideal for campaign, but depending on how theater is crafted, might there be a place for it there?

If you want it to be included, why don't you go get a job at Bungie and put it in the game?

Weird to be defending GV here, but, that's not the point. I know your post is just a rant, but what the conversation is about is trying to find a place (if there is one) for audio adjustments. We don't have to work for bungie to want/comment on it. The fact that bungie reads these forums means that it's a place for us to voice our opinions, wants, ect. They certainly don't have to listen, but they might.

I guess what sets me off about this issue is that one of the things that Bungie is known for, that sets them apart from other developers is their attention to the sound mix and the high bar they set for it. (One need not look any farther than Halo 4 for a counter example.) They treat it with the same obsessive care that they treat other non-adjustable elements like character and level design, dialogue, and story--all of which are crafted to provide a sublime experience. How many times have we heard Jason mention that Marty makes everything they do that much better? To treat the sound mix as optional would betray their goal (at least for campaign), which is to create an experience that is engaging on many levels besides gameplay. They aren't making Angry Birds.

I'm kind of stunned by how many of who I assumed were hardcore Bungie fans don't seem to appreciate one of the prime ingredients in their secret sauce.

I'm kind of stunned by how many of who I assumed were hardcore Bungie fans don't seem to appreciate one of the prime ingredients in their secret sauce.

I hope I never come off as "not appreciative" towards Marty and his team. I love the audio that he's done and he's only been getting better in my opinion. Perhaps I should have gotten that out first.

But I thought since we were discussing it, would it be a nice tool to remove audio or vocals or certain sound effects in theater mode? I was just hoping to find a way to make it easier for machinima makers without dissing bungie.

I think this is a bit of hyperbole. I adore the music in Halo; for years, I've held it up as an example of top-tier music in videogames.

Agreed -- I might just say a way Destiny excites me is that it's a new Bungie franchise. I like to think of the company like I think of Miles Davis -- he was someone who periodically revolutionized his art form and then set the bar for others to emulate.

Marathon had a deep story, Myth had a deep story. Both had absolutely tangible emotional content, in part because of the spectacular writing and universe creation, in part because there was true artistry with the narrative.

The real thing that excites me about Destiny is that Bungie is a company that has, in the past (I'm thinking of Myth here), never shrunk away from taking risks when it came to something the company believed in, and that's what innovation is all about.

The Miles Davis analogy is fitting. In music there are those artists who, though I'm never quite sure what they're going to do next, you can bet your ass I'm going to be there to hear it because no matter how much they've changed or what direction they've decided to take, I know it's going to be a wild ride. All I know is that Bungie's next album is going to be fucking killer.

Probably a bit, yes. I was talking the sound mix explicitly, not the music as it's own thing.

I think we all get it. You guys want to control the sound levels individually like a lot of other games offer. Great. Point taken. Just because you want it, and because many other (not all) games offer this option, doesn't mean it should be included.

Yeah, actually, that does mean it should be included.

I guess what sets me off about this issue is that one of the things that Bungie is known for, that sets them apart from other developers is their attention to the sound mix and the high bar they set for it. (One need not look any farther than Halo 4 for a counter example.) They treat it with the same obsessive care that they treat other non-adjustable elements like character and level design, dialogue, and story--all of which are crafted to provide a sublime experience.

except there are times in the Halo games (IDK about their ones) where each of those can vary

I'm kind of stunned by how many of who I assumed were hardcore Bungie fans don't seem to appreciate one of the prime ingredients in their secret sauce.

I think we all appreciate it. That doesn't mean we wouldn't like to be able to adjust it.

I think we all get it. You guys want to control the sound levels individually like a lot of other games offer. Great. Point taken. Just because you want it, and because many other (not all) games offer this option, doesn't mean it should be included.

Yeah, actually, that does mean it should be included.

Really? A small number of gamers wanting it alone means it should be included? Since when? So if I can get a few of my friends together to decide we want a sex mini-game in Destiny does that mean Bungie should include it in Destiny, because other games do? Our desires and what other games have in them does not mean Bungie SHOULD include the feature.

I think we all get it. You guys want to control the sound levels individually like a lot of other games offer. Great. Point taken. Just because you want it, and because many other (not all) games offer this option, doesn't mean it should be included.

Yeah, actually, that does mean it should be included.

Really? A small number of gamers wanting it alone means it should be included? Since when? So if I can get a few of my friends together to decide we want a sex mini-game in Destiny does that mean Bungie should include it in Destiny, because other games do? Our desires and what other games have in them does not mean Bungie SHOULD include the feature.

Right, nothing SHOULD be included. Unless you're on the development team or they have given you power to decide how the game SHOULD be developed, they'll decide whether they feel it's something that SHOULD be included, whether it's for 1% of their community or 99%.

Now, whether it's wise to include something or not is an entirely different question.
On numbers alone, it's wiser to include something that 99% of people want than 1%. OTOH, if including it causes other problems, then it may still be wiser not to include it even if 99% want it. That's a judgement call the developers have to make.

Paying customers demanding something (that was never promised) as if they're entitled to it is wrong. Community desiring something and doing their best to convince developers to include it - that's respectable. Especially if they can trust the decision if they don't include it.

Nobody's saying it CAN'T be offered - not even Kermit. What they're saying is that it's not OWED to you.

Well the way some people put it makes it sound like they think it specifically shouldn't be in the game. If that's not the case

I'm not sure where I was going with that last part, I think I just hit post because I was falling asleep.

I think we all get it. You guys want to control the sound levels individually like a lot of other games offer. Great. Point taken. Just because you want it, and because many other (not all) games offer this option, doesn't mean it should be included.

Yeah, actually, that does mean it should be included.

Really? A small number of gamers wanting it alone means it should be included?

Did you not read all of what I responded to? Kermit said that a) people wanting it and b) many games having it don't mean a game should a given feature. For either one by itself, I'm inclined to agree, but I submit that together those factors mean that a game should have whatever common feature is requested unless there is no way to include it and not degrade the quality of the game.

Did you not read all of what I responded to? Kermit said that a) people wanting it and b) many games having it don't mean a game should a given feature. For either one by itself, I'm inclined to agree, but I submit that together those factors mean that a game should have whatever common feature is requested unless there is no way to include it and not degrade the quality of the game.

Well, you've probably just given one reason why Bungie doesn't include it. They believe it would degrade the quality of the game.

You obviously disagree. Now let's drop it.