What Bungie is saying is BS, if they wanted they could have developed the game at 900p and 60fps and let the pro version run in 1080p 60fps like Nier Automata. Destiny 1 was pretty much a last gen game (also on PS3) and it didnt hit 60fps, Bungie makes just excuses here for their flaws as devoloper.

Its not a debate man. Its a developer fact. Openworld games  (or big land scape games) draw alot more power than your arena/corridor shooter. Draw distance, being able to travel long distances, physics and AI all have to be endered with more effort in Open world games.

I couldnt care less what diehard fans think. I play many open world games on my PC and many FPS games aswell. Guess which games eat up my PC specs? Openworld games all the time. Destiny is a mix between the two. Destiny 2 could be increasing the world size again.

Look at the difference in visuals between Halo 4 and Halo Reach. Reach offered massive landscapes to explore and Halo 4 was more linear. Guess which one killed the other on visuals and which one suffered? Halo 4 was considered one of the best looking games last gen and Reach suffered with low resolution and big framerate dips.

Well, it definitely could run at 60FPS, but it would be at the cost of other factors which they don't want to risk.

Well, that image certainly hasn't stopped their games from selling! But I'd personally probably always choose a higher FPS over better graphics.

Bad example. We can do the complete reversal of your analogy.

For example, take Halo 3 and Reach for instance, Reach offered massive landscapes over Halo 3 and massively improved visuals overall.

The only common denominator between the improvement between Halo 3 > Reach > Halo 4 is that it goes from oldest to newest.

Halo 4 achieved the bulk of what it did due to baked/precalculated details and great art.

***

I mean you aren't wrong, open world games tend to be more difficult on the hardware, but smarter game engines and design can work around that.
Plus developer resources and budgets help significantly as well.

If you're that hung up on size while ignoring other games' superior technical merits (not like Destiny is even that big), try these examples:

Battlefield 4 - huge maps big enough to fly jets around, player counts much higher than Destiny, graphics much better, with lots of destructibility - solid 60fps on Pro

MGSV - actually open world, AI miles better than anything in Destiny - solid 60fps on base PS4

Mirrors Edge: Catalyst - actually open world, much better graphics, solid 60fps on Pro

As I said before, there's already more technically impressive games running at 60fps right now on console. Pro is doing it without even bespoke versions of those games. A 60fps Destiny 2 would absolutely be possible if they cared to put in the effort, but instead of using any number of better excuses they blame the hardware. Don't get me wrong, I recognized from the start that the Pro was designed much more to bump resolutions than frame rates, but for a technically mediocre game like Destiny to say it can't be done when there's already several superior examples to the contrary is laughable.

MMOs is all about CPU power. But one does have to wonder how SE can get a massive mmo like FF14 up to 60fps with 100s of different characters on the screen with the PS4.

My 4 year old i5-4570 blows any console out of the syrup

Well that means joining the PC gaming master race and accepting Gabe as your true lorf and saviour.

You really think that the Architecture of the Switch makes up for PS4 having twice the cores and a 60% higher clock-rate?

4 cores @ 1ghz   VS   8 cores @ 1.6ghz

it's an even bigger gap if you're talking game performance due to it being:

3 cores @ 1ghz   VS  7 cores @ 1.6ghz

Both are terrible compared to a marginally decent PC CPU, but the Switch is using a mobile chip, don't kid yourself.