By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Pemalite said:
I'm personally not even interested in picking it up for PC after not being able to get the first one.
I don't exactly feel like missing out on any story elements.

The thing that irks me the wrong way, is that they expect PC players to have played the first one on consoles. Most other games out there that never touched PC, but eventually did, have had their first few games released on the platform, thus saving you having to go back to a console to play the first few games. Consoles have this happen on their end as well, but suddenly with Destiny 1, it's not going to happen with PC, so it's either I buy a console just to join a very late MMO experience in roder to gain knowledge of the story/worlds, or I spend a whole day reading the wikia page, either of which aren't my cup of tea which leaves me with zero options.

I feel like they are approaching this in a half baked way. I'd rather they toss over the first game as well, that way the community can actually form properly, rather than the community being a clear and obvious mix of those that played it on consoles and those that never played it at all and just winging it (which can be just as likely to pull out of the game entirely and become the ill fated WoW level loss of subs).


Also limiting the second game to Battle.net wasn't the smartest idea. I know full well that Blizzard has been around before Valve, but the thing is, Valve has a ton more users on their client, that also happen to use Battle.net, only Steam has more than Battle.net in general (before anyway states differently, rememebr that if they truly were bigger in user numebrs than Steam, then SCII, WoW, Heroes of the Storm would be going through the roof, yet Blizzard has denied giving out user counts for most of those games on PC, they instead go with OW style combined platform numbers).

Activision could have allowed for the game to be bought from Battle.net as well as Steam, in the same way Ubisoft sells their games both on Steam and Uplay. Hell they could even pull a Ubisoft and allow the purchase through steam, yet require the installation and launching of Battle.net in order to play and update the game. They could have tapped two clients worth of users in one go, but instead they want to force a fence the way EA has tried and failed with SWBF and BF1 on Origin (both numbers of users have dropped like flies and it's definitely not the consumer's fault either).

 

I can't say I'm happy about news on the same day as the presentation, that the PC version will be delayed, especially with no specified date of release in sight either. if this turns out to be delayed for various reasons not related to making it the definitive game, then I'll simply not pruchase it and give my money to other devs instead. The delay has to mean that they are making it the best it can possibly be, there is no stepping outside of that one reason from their end. I just hope they are being brutally honest, that they need more time to make sure it plays and looks rerally decent.

 

All those features though, they should be the default by now, especially with higher resolution monitors being sold all over, as well as higher refresh rates growing in number. 

 

Bungie hasn't really done much for PC in years, so it'll be interesting to see how well they can craft for the platform once more. 


Also peer to peer connection is a bad sign to see.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"