It's particularly odd given how strongly "in" MS is with GamePass. What is the value of Gamepass in a world of FTP games? Or vice versus.

I'm not sure if it applies to all F2P games or if there's some other condition involved, but there is a discount on DLC and game-specific currencies with Game Pass. For example, back when Destiny was in Game Pass, you could get a discount on purchasing Silver.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

Stories where the story is something that you make/happens vs. story is provided by the creator may align well with the success/failure dividing line for this strategy.

But "boomer" isn't neutral, else we'd say baby boomer, right?

That's now how I read it. Excluding the "baby" is a common abbreviation. It's fair to say that most usage excluding the "baby" is as insult, but that feels contextual to me.

Yeah, I said in my last response context matters. I wasn't offended--more like amused at the idea of acting offended. Really, though, the juice of my joke isn't worth all this squeeze.

But "boomer" isn't neutral, else we'd say baby boomer, right?

That's now how I read it. Excluding the "baby" is a common abbreviation. It's fair to say that most usage excluding the "baby" is as insult, but that feels contextual to me.

Haha, I think we're mostly on the same page, and I couldn't really tell entirely if you were having fun or were angry with a lot of what's been said in the thread (by myself and others), so I figured I'd see if there was something deeper there. As for people sharing bad news in general about Destiny or other games, there's absolutely merit to that. Over the past few years, I've tried to abstain from posting if I didn't have anything positive or worth while to contribute (I'm not perfect with it), but I definitely still lurk.

If you detect barbs in my responses, assume they're aimed at Cody, not you. (Love ya, Cody!)

Although I haven't been posting frequently for a while now, I have noticed a lot of the same arguments and things occur in cycles here with Destiny. In my opinion, I'm sure some of it has to do with what you mentioned about wanting to share bad news, and a bunch of it is unrelated to that and appears to me like it's out of frustration at what Bungie is or isn't doing (potentially with no other motive than that beyond needing to vent, even if for the hundredth time). For what it's worth, while I don't find Destiny enjoyable to play, Bungie will always hold a special place in my heart, and I want nothing but the best for them. I still keep up with news about them because they are one of my favorite game studios of all time.

I think another big disconnect is that I'm having more fun this season than I have in a while, so I'm not psychologically inclined to take in an anonymously sourced article as iron-clad evidence that the ship is sinking, even if turns out that every word of it is true.

Oh and hey, it was my pleasure! Those were really good times, and I still think back on them. In our collective group of Bungie.org peoples (speaking beyond just you and me), we've had a ton of great and fun experiences and gaming, nifty conversations and debates, and while we may not always get along and might be unnecessarily mean to one another from time to time, as a whole, I think a lot of people have made awesome friendships and memories over the years.

I have. The LANs I attended were great (which I acknowledge were long after the regular HBO LANs our proprietor used to host). Halofest was a seminal event for the community. 343 had not yet stumbled. Never before or since had so many of us gotten together. It was truly special.

I'd like to add that perhaps Boomer might not be quite a pejorative here as pointing out that slot machines were of that generation, and the modern generation simply has its equivalent. Interesting, it bridges any divide that might be perceived, by (whether intentional or not) demonstrating that this newfangled way of hitting the happy button in our brains is not unique to our time or the presently young, just a new way of doing what has long been done.

Yeah, context matters and I got Rev's point. That's why I said he didn't intend it as too derogatory. But "boomer" isn't neutral, else we'd say baby boomer, right? I've had it used against me as a malicious insult, but Rev has nothing to do with that. I playacted as the uptight language police when I noticed two 30-somethings using it on the same thread. It was a weak joke not worth this much discussion.

Plenty of things can be stretched over time and be fulfilling (if not, life would be completely unfulfilling. You're forced to experience that over time).

Never denied this.

That said, the analogy you just made has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of outlook I'd started this thread with. The kind of person I talked about with my first observation is the antithesis of you. They do not want to have a profound experience or be transformed; they simply want their time to matter toward something tangible other than the moment itself.

That's the point. What they are asking for is paradoxical. "Mattering toward something tangible other than the moment itself" in the context of video games precludes something that actually matters. The 'tangible' thing has no inherent meaning, while chasing it devalues the thing that actually does have inherent meaning. The moment itself is the thing that actually matters!

The way I see it.

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release.

Critical Mass.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

The original point of this post was that the person preferred the Destiny approach. You're looking at what I'm describing and saying it shares the same flaws when I'm speaking about the kind of person who finds a clear preference for one over the other. You say, "it doesn't work like that," but it does for the person in question. So...what are you even trying to get at here?

All I can say is that it is the only service based game, from the classic MMOs to the modern looter shooter, to make me continually log in every day, even if only for a few minutes, and to continuously satisfy me in both amounts of gameplay and amounts of story delivered.

For me, at this stage in my life, I do not want to be 'satisfied'. I want to be in awe. I want to be changed and challenged. I want to have a profound experience. I want my imagination to blow up.

I don't want gaming comfort food. I want a meal I'll remember forever.

Also, on a specific note, there are absolutely many moments in this game I will remember forever. Leitmotifs that will make me cry in remembrance. Characters I will forever love.

You have some very good insights sometimes, Cody, but this is one of those times where I think you think you know something when you've got no clue. I think you've made a lot of assumptions that have no founding. Plenty of things can be stretched over time and be fulfilling (if not, life would be completely unfulfilling. You're forced to experience that over time). Maybe not to you, but that doesn't make the thing flawed.

All I can say is that it is the only service based game, from the classic MMOs to the modern looter shooter, to make me continually log in every day, even if only for a few minutes, and to continuously satisfy me in both amounts of gameplay and amounts of story delivered.

For me, at this stage in my life, I do not want to be 'satisfied'. I want to be in awe. I want to be changed and challenged. I want to have a profound experience. I want my imagination to blow up.

I don't want gaming comfort food. I want a meal I'll remember forever.

The overall experience I've had and will have had by the time this game is over is one no game will ever beat. It can not be compared to a meal because it is a "diet." No one will ever be able to replicate the effect that diet will have on you with a single meal or even an entire series of meals once every few years. It is an entirely different kind of experience.

That said, the analogy you just made has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of outlook I'd started this thread with. The kind of person I talked about with my first observation is the antithesis of you. They do not want to have a profound experience or be transformed; they simply want their time to matter toward something tangible other than the moment itself. The experience itself is not enough, nor is its personal impact. It needs to have a material impact, one that will manifest itself in the game at a later point in time.

All I can say is that it is the only service based game, from the classic MMOs to the modern looter shooter, to make me continually log in every day, even if only for a few minutes, and to continuously satisfy me in both amounts of gameplay and amounts of story delivered.

For me, at this stage in my life, I do not want to be 'satisfied'. I want to be in awe. I want to be changed and challenged. I want to have a profound experience. I want my imagination to blow up.

I don't want gaming comfort food. I want a meal I'll remember forever.

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release.

Critical Mass.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

Does this argument also apply to television? It's not like they've chunked out one episode across multiple updates. Each release tells a relatively self-contained part of the story, with a "to be continued" to varying degrees depending on where in the major patch cycle you are.

Yes, but that's the key. Each episode is supposed to stand on its own. You're given a complete story, that is part of a larger one.

You see this fail with lots of streaming shows. They drop all episodes at once, and it's pretty insufferable because it's expected to be binged, and each episode is just full of filler and not really a complete experience on its own.

But what's required for critical mass in 22 or 44 minutes of TV is vastly different than in a video game, because video games contain what TV does and more.

Okay but each patch has hours of story. I think it clears the bar, for the most part. Additionally, it's not like the game is asking you (like Destiny) to play repetitive content in order to keep your account "relevant." If you walk away for a patch or two and come back to play a larger mass of content, difficulty does not constantly raise, so your account state has not changed relative to the rest of the game. So it's essentially just like television.

Honestly, Cody, it's very hard to explain all of the elements of the game necessary to convey how it sums up to be different than many of its peers. All I can say is that it is the only service based game, from the classic MMOs to the modern looter shooter, to make me continually log in every day, even if only for a few minutes, and to continuously satisfy me in both amounts of gameplay and amounts of story delivered. And all of it for free. Yes, the game will underserve anyone looking for a game that can provide continuous play like Destiny, Warframe, or a classic MMO, because it releases finite content. A world that can only be explored once, stories than can only be played once. Then it says, "hey if you want, you can log on for 15 minutes a day tops to keep building new characters, improving old ones, and getting some daily free currency, but otherwise, go play something else or touch some grass."

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release.

Critical Mass.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

Does this argument also apply to television? It's not like they've chunked out one episode across multiple updates. Each release tells a relatively self-contained part of the story, with a "to be continued" to varying degrees depending on where in the major patch cycle you are.

Yes, but that's the key. Each episode is supposed to stand on its own. You're given a complete story, that is part of a larger one.

You see this fail with lots of streaming shows. They drop all episodes at once, and it's pretty insufferable because it's expected to be binged, and each episode is just full of filler and not really a complete experience on its own.

But what's required for critical mass in 22 or 44 minutes of TV is vastly different than in a video game, because video games contain what TV does and more.

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release.

Critical Mass.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

Does this argument also apply to television? It's not like they've chunked out one episode across multiple updates. Each release tells a relatively self-contained part of the story, with a "to be continued" to varying degrees depending on where in the major patch cycle you are.

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release.

Critical Mass.

I think we've seen in general how frequent 'bite sized' releases are lacking. Look at Destiny. What are the most highly praised parts of the game? The big expansions. Taken King. Forsaken. Witch Queen.

It's because when you drop little pieces at once, there isn't that critical mass for that cohesive experience. If I'm telling you a joke, and that joke requires 60 seconds of setup for the punchline, then I can't tell you the joke in 6 separate ten second chunks. It doesn't work like that.

Grinding repetitive content, ala Diablo, Destiny, or many other games of their nature, are appealing to folks even if they do nothing "new" for months at a time, because any amount of boredom that might set in is offset by the investment value of that playtime. Even if you're running a Strike for the 1,000th time, you're getting loot that you can use in future new content, you're gaining BP levels that gain you materials and loot you can use to strengthen yourself for future new content, etc. You're always investing in the future, so it's not time wasted, even if it's not always time 100% enjoyed.

How is that any different than playing a single player game with a definite end? I play level one to invest in my future of seeing the ending, and enjoying all the future levels while getting there!

I somewhat agree with your point, but there is still a difference, in that the game is set up to sustain long-term play through continuous updates. That means there are still some of these types of incentive systems, daily login/quests (very minimal though), and so on that underpin a long-term game. And, regardless of whether or not these systems exist to further strengthen this implication, the implication is that the game will continue on a regular basis. Depending on your outlook, you're not just playing to the end of the present story, you're playing with the expectation that you're going to have more to play. When more does not come quickly enough, or what comes does not satisfy you, you could turn to other games that are more fulfilling more regularly.

But you're right, if one were to approach the game with as much of a classic, single-player, one-time game attitude and just look at updates as much faster, bite-sized releases than sequels tend to be, it's suddenly the best shit ever, IMO. As I've said before, it feels like the fulfillment of the promise of episodic narrative; the ability to partake in an on-going story that updates several times a year rather than having to wait years for a chunked release. But, the implementation of such a concept blurs the line with the current live service model, and so players' expectations have been set by the live service status quo, where in that regard it fails. I think that failure is its strength, because the status quo live service model sucks, but to those who have been conditioned to expect its trappings, and even like them, this idea falls short.