What's your opinion on Bungie removing content?

  • 76 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for panfoot
Panfoot

661

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

So along side all the new expansions Bungie announced, they also announced they will be rotating content in and out of the game, of which you can read the full details here. The short version is in September when the new expansion comes out, Europa (New) and the Cosmodrome (Destiny 1) will be added into the game and Io, Titan, Mercury, Mars, Leviathan will be removed(that includes not only the destinations but also strikes, campaign missions, and raids, exotic quests will be given alternatives). As someone who approaches the game as just a FPS guy who likes to jump on, play some strikes and explore for a bit after long breaks in playing, this makes me want to permanently delete the game and forget it ever existed. I'm wondering what everyone else thinks about this, especially coming from a more MMO perspective(which I'm completely ignorant on, my MMO history starts and ends with Guild Wars 1).

Avatar image for sweep
sweep

10883

Forum Posts

3660

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 14

#2 sweep  Moderator

I think if you click through to their website they spell it out pretty clearly with their first bullet point:

Destiny 2 is too large to efficiently update and maintain.

Which 100% makes sense. If you have a team working on an amount of content which grows consistently over a long period of time, while player base and developer team size remain consistent, at some point it's not going to be economically viable to continually keep everything up to date. You're going to spread your developers too thin and the entire game will suffer as a result.

I appreciate that it sounds extremely upsetting to have paid for content which is no longer permanently available, but rather than just having access to the same stale content forever, cycling out each batch of planets and missions with different ideas and setups will firstly keep the playerbase focused and secondly allow them to experiment with new content in small concise batches rather than broad vague ones. I also think they're pretty much doing this already with strike playlists and that a lot of the content that's going to get cycled out won't be missed as much as you think it will.

Avatar image for oursin_360
OurSin_360

6673

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By OurSin_360

I think it's garbage and might kill the game(or at least cut the playerbase in half) as 100% of the content is what you get as a f2p game. I have no desire to play any destiny 1 stuff as that game was bad lol. They are taking out 4 destinations and replacing them with 2 (one you have to buy for 40$).

Also, if you have any interest in the story you pretty much lose all context as to wtf is going on in the game. So any new players won't know wtf is going on even more so than they did when they went f2p.

They should have just made destiny 3, the season content is 90% bad anyway and they could just kill destiny 1 and use those servers for 3. Or they could just kill destiny 1 and use those to hold the new content or whatever.

Bungie just makes extremely, extremely bad decisions. But maybe I am way off and this will bring destiny 2 back to the for front. The darkness stuff seems real cool, but honestly, how long will we have it before they just delete it to add in some other shit?

Avatar image for panfoot
Panfoot

661

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By Panfoot

@sweep: I can see their reasoning for it, but I think it's just piling on more issues onto a system that's already kinda of a behind the seasons mess to begin with from the sounds of it, though then again given the position they are in maybe there just isn't really a good solution(I suppose making a clean break with a new game that is easier to work on technically for a game of this scale just isn't something they can do as an independent studio). Just kinda seems like the antithesis to their F2P move of trying to get new players in and will end up appealing to only the most hardcore Destiny fans, but how long is that hardcore playerbase sustainable?

I totally get it on the hard drive size perspective though, I've got Hitman 2 with all the Hitman 1 levels taking up 152 gigs on my PC and can't really decide am I really done yet, just that could be so many other installed games...

Avatar image for efesell
Efesell

7191

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This sounds completely understandable and also like a load of hot garbage. I do not envy those making the decisions.

Avatar image for navster15
navster15

431

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I have to think that the sunsetting of weapons and locations is part of the larger push in the free-to-play direction. And I’m ok with that, so long as it means that expansions are now free. It’s so cool that I can get my casual friends to play Destiny with me now, but it sucks that they can’t join me in certain content due to a paywall. I’d like Destiny to go down the pay for cosmetics only model, which seems like the path they’re going down given transmog is now in the pipeline.

Avatar image for facelessvixen
FacelessVixen

4008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#7  Edited By FacelessVixen

Ah, well, that's a, hmm... I mean, I guess, ah... So maybe I should, ah...

...Fuck.

Avatar image for conmulligan
conmulligan

2289

Forum Posts

11722

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#8  Edited By conmulligan

The more I think about it the more I hate it. I understand the rationale behind rotating content in and out, but if this is the path they want to take then it's completely unacceptable for them to also charge $40 for an expansion that's on a ticking clock, especially when they're already pulling in cash from season passes and micro-transactions. This whole thing just seems like a way to draw more and more money out of a shrinking player base that they know is starved for content. I think Beyond Light sounds cool, but there's absolutely no way I'm paying $40 for something that may be inaccessible within a year or two.

Avatar image for sparky_buzzsaw
sparky_buzzsaw

9652

Forum Posts

3772

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 39

User Lists: 39

#9  Edited By sparky_buzzsaw

I want Bungie to do whatever the hell they want. Desiny 2 isn't really my thing, but I've gotta imagine if any developer knows long-term what they need to do with an online shooter(ish), it'd be Bungie, and given that all reports seem to say Activision wanted more and more of the same, I want to see what they can do without their chains. I say give them the benefit of the doubt.

Avatar image for hayt
Hayt

1837

Forum Posts

548

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

As someone that only very casually plays free to play that seems like 70% of the content I have access to haha.

Avatar image for deactivated-61665c8292280
deactivated-61665c8292280

7702

Forum Posts

2136

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

It has the potential to set an extremely disquieting precedent and for that reason alone it's difficult to be comforted even by Bungie's justification.

Avatar image for onemanarmyy