???

It's the opposite of Halo 2 and 3... Those were purely based on skill, symmetry of powers. Destiny is the opposite, you unlock weapons and powers through the SP and then show-off in PvP. And so many of Destiny's skills feel floaty and imprecise (warlock rockets, jetpacks, etc.)

?

The detailed revenue model for Destiny is not fully known. Right now some modes at least do require the PSN/Live subscription and there is obviously a specific agreement between the platform providers and the publishers on sharing part of the sub fee and part of the control of the revenue models. Otheriwse how could a publisher financially sustain a persistent universe to keep evolving ?

My prediction about Destiny becoming free-to-play later simply means that the entry price will be non-existent at some point in 2016, meaning you can download the game and play at leat part of it for free.

This is the same "fighter" that has had a ken avatar forever, right?

To be brief, I feel sales2099 is more accurate about the market, and he would say he does have a preference.

I'm not saying your opinion isn't genuine, I'm just questioning how you got there.

There are a few things I agree with. The action doesn't look all that spectacular to me, but I've only seen that level where they fight in the cave or whatever. Secondly, you should be more careful about using the word mmo. MMO is nearly synonymous in online speak with MMORPG, and this game cannot be called that. Something only becomes repetitive when it becomes boring. You could call anything repetitive, CoD, BF, Dota, Marioparty.

As for the pvp, I'm sure it will be fine. Just because you can upgrade your equipment doesn't mean the pvp is going to suck. I can't even think of a single game that has a "level playing field" anymore. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that a 'level playing field' is a relic of the quake, UT days.

My main problem with your opinion, especially with what you said above, is that you aren't critiquing the game, you are comparing the game to other things and arbitrarily deciding that it sucks. PVP not balanced the way halo 2 balanced things, therefore imbalanced. A portion of the game is all that has been shown several times, therefore repetitive.

But of course, you reserve the right to revise your prediction? Dude. Predictions are important. You can't just revise whatever you said away. Predictions are your word. You want to be cautious? Then don't make predictions....because it's stuff like this that has massaged my perception of you.

There is no SP.

Its ALL online.

Burek said:
This just in: "Activision has read this prediction and decided to cancel the game!"

Seriously, what's with all these people wishing failure on any game. OK, I understand you don't like it. I don't like this game either, it is an FPS, which I'm not interested in, I've never been a fan of Halo, and I know with certainty that I will not buy this game.
But there will be millions of people who will, and this game will not flop even remotely. Just the opposite, I believe this game has the potential to be the biggest shooter franchise of gen8.

There are hundreds of games announced so far, and I will probably play only 10-12 of them. But never would I wish the other 88-90 to fail. It would be a horrible world and my hobby would be a horrible form of entertainment if there was no choice in games and genres for everybody willing to play.

I don't see the contradiction with online.

Campaign would also be inaccurate.

Would SP/Co-op make you happier ?

Example - "you can't even play PvP until you've unlocked a certain level in the SP/Coop".