Halo Developer Bungie Reveals Destiny and Its Vision of MMO Gaming 147
MojoKid writes "Bungie, the company that brought forth Halo, is embarking on development of a new MMO title called Destiny that is aimed at being unlike any gaming experience we've seen. There are few hard details available, such as a launch date or pricing, but Bungie gave a preview that teases the game and showed off concept art. It's a large-scale MMO set in a post-apocalyptic world, but the gameplay and social interaction is supposed to be far more natural and fluid than previous generation MMOs. There will apparently not be a subscription model, so gamers won't have monthly fees to deal with, either. Bungie plans to develop a complex storyline with Destiny over the course of the next decade. There will be 10 books, complete with a story arc, so it follows that the world will evolve in a manner of speaking even as people participate in activities to change things within it."
Once free of microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft. Who could have expected that?
Re:Once free of microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Except they'd already signed contracts with MS and started development prior to the split. So that was just them finishing their outstanding contracts off.
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking about interesting new ideas, though.
Re:Once free of microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft. Who could have expected that?
Yeah cause a MMO and the post apocalyitic setting is so unique and fresh isnt it?
Not to mention they claim it will be unlike any experince we have seen. Well, thats what every developer has said for the past deacade about their game. Every game that comes out pushes graphics to their limits, they all are unique experinces unlike anything we have seen before, they are all emotional experinces, all have complex stories and so on. THEY ALL SAY THAT.
Not to mention bungie is owned by activision. How exactly is that making them free? Bungie basically just transfered from one jail to another. You do know that activision is incredibly static and unimmmaginative right? They care more about games that they can exploit every year right? If it doesnt have franchise appeal they dont want it.
Re: (Score:3)
In addition, no subscription fee sounds like in-game features market. And they do all say that, it's the implementation that matters... also being bug-free helps, bugs have doomed more than one mmo. If they make the game fun, there will be a following, even if it's the same shit as yesterday, we need our graphics updated and some new characters/items to work with every once in a while right?
Re:Once free of microsoft (Score:4, Interesting)
Yup. That's the thing that kills nearly every MMO that has attempted to compete with WoW - bugs and launch performance issues.
If you have performance issues on launch, you are doomed to fail if there is any viable competition out there, the initial experience will poison people's minds. If you DO have launch problems - you HAVE to resolve them before that first free month is up. If you don't - A ton of people are going to leave and not give you a second chance.
As I understand it, WoW had some initial launch problems, but:
1) Were resolved within the first month
2) Didn't have much viable competition out there - now everyone has to compete with well established competitors.
Aion had potential - but it had LOTS of initial problems that weren't solved until after much of their playerbase quit. They refused to provision additional servers with the end result being 2-3 hour queue times... Their reasoning was they didn't want to do a merge down the line. Yes, that's right, they PLANNED TO FAIL.
Same with Warhammer Online - It had potential, but the lag and game balance issues weren't resolved in the first month. End result: dead game.
Re: (Score:2)
Glad it's not just me that's noticed that, some games seem hyped up at launch, and then when they hit, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and pays their subscription fees in advance hoping to get some of the user content that is typically dangled on a line with the collectors or pre-order editions with some other perks or something of similar nature. And that's it... limited bug fixes, no tech support, constant server lag, and a dead fan base till the next big one. At least with WOW, you know what you're ge
Re: (Score:2)
WoW was fucked in many ways for a long time with some server issues. The thing was, there was nothing else really, and despite its problems it was still good. Warhammer online just wasn't compelling enough. Age of Conan was... *promptly bursts into a fit of laughter*
Re: (Score:2)
If only they had made those weapons PvE only....
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. DAoC was the only potential viable competitor when WoW came out.
However, Mythic completely destroyed the game with the ToA expansion. By the time they fixed ToA - it was WAY too late. WoW had already killed them. If WoW had gone up against a "ToA-fixed" DAoC they would have faced FAR stiffer competition.
WAR had the potential to be a DAoC 2, but Mythic fucked it up:
1) Tons of bugs on launch
2) Massive faction imbalances - DAoC always had various faction imbalance issues that went back and forth, b
Wrong. (Score:2)
The thing that usually kills a MMO is that WOW is super entrenched and most MMO's are more less copycats in Fantasy world.
I can think of one example in that Star Wars was not. It has some launch problems initially, but not for long. However from what I have heard, it was super fun leveling up, but once you got to the end game, well there wasn't any really. If anyone looked at WOW as a model of what to do to make money and a good MMO, it would be that the leveling up is just the begining, the end game is the
I don't care what you say... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft. Who could have expected that?
Yeah cause a MMO and the post apocalyitic setting is so unique and fresh isnt it?
Not to mention they claim it will be unlike any experince we have seen. Well, thats what every developer has said for the past deacade about their game. Every game that comes out pushes graphics to their limits, they all are unique experinces unlike anything we have seen before, they are all emotional experinces, all have complex stories and so on. THEY ALL SAY THAT.
I'm a game developer. I'll admit I'm working on a game that uses a post apocalyptic setting, but our setting is so far removed from the event in time and space that your history is not just forgotten, but erased, undiscoverable, and insignificant; A new cycle of life is now underway -- with new life both flourishing and struggling to survive. I'm not pushing the graphics to it's limits, I'm actually focusing on a 90's era reduced-color-palette solid-shaded polygonal look with sparse textures for details,
Re: (Score:2)
DayZ? Pretty much a complex (and very interactive) story generator. Also, it can be emotional. The new stand-alone is a straight up MMO too.
Post Apocolypse and MMO (Score:2)
Name 3. No? Name 1.
The oft rumored Fallout Online (which would be awsome) is the only one to come to mind, and it doesn't exist yet, if ever.
Re:Once free of microsoft (Score:4, Interesting)
You mean, making a game that would be monetized to all hell and back? That's an interesting new idea.
Look at the publisher behind them - and look at what they did to Blizzard. Everything freaking thing is monetized, and Activision is also known for their nickle and diming of people.
Plus, Bungie was spun off from Microsoft sround 2008 or so - they continued with Halo because Microsoft kept paying big bucks to keep the lights on (I think Microsoft guaranteed that - though Microsoft was not exclusively using Bungie).
This game will probably be like what happened to Blizzard - you'll need a new combined battle.net/bungie.net account to play single player, you'll be asked for a name that will also permanently link you to that account (without warning you so they can ding you $10 because you used your real name). And yeah, you can play the campaign, but they'd also offer ways to upgrade yourself or buy more save slots.
Etc. etc. I bought Starcraft 2. Wanted Diablo 3, but my poor SC2 experience meant I skipped D3 and will not buy the upcoming "expansion".
Oh yeah, MMO - this will be like WoW as well. And yet another good studio circles the drain, driven that way by executive greed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Look at the publisher behind them - and look at what they did to Blizzard. Everything freaking thing is monetized, and Activision is also known for their nickle and diming of people.
That's a great theory except that Blizzard is a separate and autonomous division with its own corporate leadership. It is not run by Activision. Oh and the fact that Blizzard was nickle-and-diming long before the merger.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, as I said. Get the facts before spewing shit.
It seems you are new here...
Re: (Score:2)
Activision doesn't publish Blizzard's games. It is its own publisher just as it was before their merger. It is also run on its own separate from the parent corp. Bobby Kotick doesn't run Blizzard. That was part of their merger deal. Get some facts before spewing shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Once WOW hit, expecting anything else decent from Blizzard went out the window. They have THE MMO (hate it or love it, the numbers speak), they're set for a long time. SC2 wasn't bad... they delayed it so much it made it kinda ridiculous, a lot of vets came pack, played a while and left, it just didn't have the re playability or attention of detail of the first one. D3... showed me that I don't need the SC2 expansion, I can name a dozen games that are identical to it, some of which are more fun. Oh well
Re: (Score:2)
How is a Free to Play (AKA Pay to Win) MMO an "interesting new idea"?
Re: (Score:2)
Reading comprehension:
From TFS:
Where does that say Free to Play?
Also, this:
http://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Xbox-360/dp/B002I096Q4 [amazon.com]
They're not exactly giving it away. You buy the full-price game & get access to the MMO.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also assuming you will be paying for each of those 10 "books" or expansions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. FPS. MMO. Fresh as virgin snow melt through an untainted aquifer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was a pc game turned console game tuned pc port?
Re: (Score:3)
Look at the screenshots. This isn't fallout. Come on.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwOUi4JDC4o [youtube.com]
Oh sweet Jesus (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Consoles have USB and bluetooth for a reason.
But there's something even worse than Barrens chat (which I gather is/was similar to the way Freeport chat was in EQOA)....is local voice chat. Imagine if you will an MMORPG with built in voice chat, with no need for teamspeak/skype/whatever and not having to reveal another online identity to your guildies/group members. It is both a blessing.....great for groups and guilds...and a curse...not so good for area chat.
reminds me of rifts (Score:4, Insightful)
From http://palladiumbooks.com/ [palladiumbooks.com]
Played that game from when it first came out all through the 90s. Always loved the art and would almost think the art on this link would fit seamlessly in with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that was their weakness. They were dedicated to a one-rules system for all their RPGs; even when it made no sense. It worked great for Palladium, but it sucked for Rifts and Robotech which I played a lot. Robots and technology simply need a different system.
Re: (Score:2)
I had always wondered how well their system actually worked for the various genres...thanks for the info.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah they came up w/ an MDC system (mega damage capacity) which was roughly 100 SDC=1MDC and nothing SDC damage class could hurt anything MDC. It's like a crude armor piercing system. That works OK I guess when all youre concerned about is robots bashing each other, but when a game world gets as complex as Rifts with so many levels of players, vehicles, robots, aircraft, etc. it can cause problems. That leads to the power creeping when you've got some mage casting spells w/ enough damage to flatten a cit
Re: (Score:2)
Cute, so how's it play? (Score:1)
Guy on the street: "So... um... what's the gameplay going t-"
*sound of vicious, rabid pummeling and violent beatings*
Fanbase: "NO U SHUT TEHF UCKUP there r BOOOOOOOOOOKS and DECADE LONG PLAAAAAAAAAAAN"
Standard marketing (Score:2, Insightful)
being "aimed at being unlike any gaming experience we've seen" is what everyone one of them claimed.
Not coming to PC (Score:5, Insightful)
An MMO that is controller only.
An MMO that isn't coming to PC, because no one likes to use keyboards and mice anymore. [rockpapershotgun.com]
The shark, it has been jumped.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is the company that made halo, that should say it all. This is another game for fratboys not PC gamers. Hard to believe these people made Tribes not so long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Bungie didn't make Tribes, that was Dynamix (at least for the versions that were worth a damn). Before Halo, Bungie's big games were Marathon and Myth.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and then Microsoft bought them out to make games for the XBox.
On my list of things to hate Microsoft for this is #1. By a wide margin.
I really liked Marathon and Myth.
Re:Not coming to PC (Score:4, Interesting)
I really wanted to hate all console FPSes and then I played Halo. I am well known as a Microsoft antagonist so you know I am not just being a fanboy. Halo is different from other console FPSes. I don't know why, what it is, I don't claim to know, I'm not a game designer and frankly I'm not a hardcore gamer and never really have been, though I have spent possibly entirely too many hours gaming anyway.
I still think the best multiplayer FPS experience was LMCTF on Quake, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate something a little less twitchy.
Re:Not coming to PC (Score:4, Insightful)
I like console FPS actually. I loved GoldenEye. Halo sucks, it is an FPS dumbed down for the fratboy set.
Re: (Score:2)
I like console FPS actually. I loved GoldenEye.
I hated Goldeneye. The N64 didn't have enough cojones to provide a textured world. It looked like shit, I couldn't see anything. And that was one of the worst controllers of all time, especially for those of us with big hands.
Halo sucks, it is an FPS dumbed down for the fratboy set.
Oh please, do tell us what is dumbed down about the Halo series as compared to every other shooter ever? You can do more stuff in it than you can in most shooters, it has as many gimmicks as the average shooter, what do you want? Especially when you get up into the later games, they ad
Re: (Score:2)
It seemed to look fine to me. We sure played a lot of golden gun.
How about the regenerating health? Or the instant respawn?
Re: (Score:2)
How about the regenerating health? Or the instant respawn?
Not only did Halo not invent regenerating health, but they don't actually have regenerating health [giantbomb.com]. The instant respawn is conditional and limited, which is why it is not twinkie. You can only respawn not near enemies. You don't respawn instantly in multi. In single you respawn at the last checkpoint. None of this is nerfy.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh noes it was the shield. Whatever, same shit.
Face it, this is a game for fratboys. Deal with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh noes it was the shield. Whatever, same shit.
So, when you're wrong, you move the goalposts.
Face it, this is a game for fratboys. Deal with it.
It is because you say it is? Two logical fallacies in one comment. I have detected that you are full of shit.
Re: (Score:2)
And I detect you are a pedantic fuck.
If your statements cannot stand up to pedanticism, perhaps you should consider the fact that you're wrong.
I admit I was wrong, regenerating health was halo 2.
And yet, as per my link, the concept predates even Halo, which you are ignoring because it conflicts with your view of reality. We call this cognitive dissonance.
it was moved to Xbox and designed to dumb down FPS for that group of players. MS did this to move Xbox units. Look at the folks playing it. When is the last time you played TF2 and heard kids yelling homophobic racist crap about your mother?
I've never played TF2. But I've also never heard kids yelling homophobic racist crap about my mother, or anyone else's, while playing Halo. I've only ever heard one kid yelling, and he was mostly incoherently babbling to one of his friends who
Re: (Score:2)
I admitted the concept predates halo. It made it popular in first person shooters.
No cognitive dissonance. The amount of racist, homophobic cursing crap on Xbox live is the stuff of legends. It is that common.
Re: (Score:3)
Halo had its good points, like the beautiful outdoor settings and its use of vehicles. The multiplayer modes were passable but paled in comparison to the likes of Unreal Tournament and Quake 3. The storyline is decent if unmemorable and the ring worlds are a neat idea.
The single player campaign, though... it was like a cheap toy. The outdoor levels were fun at first but after an entire game of playing the same limited, uninspired handful of enemies using the same limited, uninspired weapons, it was a chore.
Re: (Score:2)
What I find particularly telling is that to make Halo look bad you have to compare it to so many different games.
To be fair, that's what you asked for:
Oh please, do tell us what is dumbed down about the Halo series as compared to every other shooter ever?
UT and Q3 didn't have an 'adventure mode' single-player campaign so much as just jaunts through maps against bots, but even those had more interesting levels (traps, hidden passages, sniper's nests, secret items, etc). Let's not forget about their respective predecessors which offered (read: in my opinion) more engaging gameplay from start to finish. That is to say, they never felt like a chore, although the brown-and-gray of Quake 2 gets old pretty fast. I could throw
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly, and don't get me wrong. I don't hate Halo, and I'll still bring out the third game from time to time for a round of co-op with a friend because it's easy to pick up and play. And that's a major part of its niche, right there.
Re: (Score:2)
I hated Goldeneye because of the sucky N64 controller which I absolutely loathe. (I'm short, small hands) I have a used N64 and a few games but rarely played them because of that godawful controller and that godawful stick.
Re: (Score:2)
Halo is different from other console FPSes. I don't know why, what it is...
Probably due to the sluggish and slow controls. You mention Quake, compare the movement in Quake to the movement in Halo. Halo is much slower. Even if you turn the sensitivity on Halo up to 10, it still moves slower than default Quake.
The "less twitchy" you mention is exactly what makes a FPS work on a console. Joysticks are harder to control in such small, quick movements with only a thumb. Mouse, which is being moved with your whole hand, and has a much wider range of movement (can physically move fart
Re: (Score:2)
The "less twitchy" you mention is exactly what makes a FPS work on a console.
Well, you probably have it right. Halo also just has a combination of good weapons (they're all useful, down to the very first pistol) and, perhaps related to the untwitchiness, a fluid gameplay that I find very satisfying. Sure, when you're losing it's just like any other game, but when you're winning it gives a feeling of rhythm that I never had with Quake or frankly any other game except occasionally UT multiplayer. Shoot that guy, jump over this thing, club that guy, bam bam bam.
Re: (Score:2)
Joysticks are harder to control in such small, quick movements with only a thumb.
For aiming, yes..it can be difficult...one does get better at it with practice though. It sometimes depends on the game. Timesplitters is one console FPS that deserved mouse support and didn't have it, because of the fast paced gameplay....the original entries in the SOCOM series...because of their slow paced realism...not so much, The newer SOCOM's have been COD'd a bit.
But for movement give me an analog stick or even a joypad over WASD anyday.
Re: (Score:2)
This is another game for fratboys not PC gamers.
Meanwhile, beyond the Land Of False Dichotomies...
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't what you're thinking of your typical MMO. It's basically a shooter MMO. And not really even MMO. It's more, as I understand it, like Journey. That is, you encounter other people in certain circumstances. Anyway, I see no problem with attempting this on a console. I think it's fantastic. I'm just disappointed that it's on the current generation which, by the time the game launches, will be the last generation of hardware. I just don't see this 2005 console hardware and scaffolding holding up to so
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't see this 2005 console hardware and scaffolding holding up to something this supposedly massive and complex.
If you don't regularly encounter lots of other people then it's really not a problem, all the heavy lifting is on the server side. The problem for me is that my internet connection sucks. We've all got problems, though.
Re:Not coming to PC (Score:4, Funny)
"And not really even MMO. It's more, as I understand it, like Journey. That is, you encounter other people in certain circumstances."
So it's like SWTOR then?
I look forward to Tanking as Herbie (Score:2)
And not really even MMO. It's more, as I understand it, like Journey.
I dunno, Journey [arcade-museum.com] sounds like it would extend well into the MMO playstyle, what with the Band metaphor translating directly into a party-based format.
Although there may be some job balance issues, with the "Steve Perry"-class being a little too good at soloing.
Re: (Score:2)
I think part of what made the subtle multiplayer elements of Journey successful was the anonymity and simplicity of it all.
There was very little other players could do in that game to be a complete asshole. This is important because average joes in multiplayer will often drop in an just bee-line straight for the maximum asshole threshold.
People played through Journey with strangers and bonded with them in the experience, often finding themselves surprised to find that it was with xxx420NeoYOLO420xxx. That w
Yet another WoW killer (Score:1)
Warning: Incoming "WoW really will die this time!" comments, to be followed up in six months with "Well, this didn't kill WoW, but the next new MMO will."
Yawn... (Score:3, Interesting)
Like GW2, SWTOR, TSW.
I'll wait and see, but I'm not holding my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
Books? (Score:5, Funny)
So they plan to release books with a storyline that is subsumed by the activities of the players in the game? That sounds very nice. It is a like a glorified log file of some sort.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
lol.
Well EVE and specific EVE players made the news and became somewhat famous only a few weeks ago for that gigantic battle they just had.
MIght be kind of interesting, an auther might need some creative licence to make it work I would think. (There has been some debate that the player that caused the huge EVE battle was an idiot, made a misclick mistake, or did it intentionally).
Bring back Myth! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
This!
Ummm, its already out there... (Score:2)
Secret World. Not doing so well. That part's not so secret.
Re: (Score:2)
Funcom has a long-standing reputation for horrible support period. They are a joke of a company and anything they churn out should be ignored. Age of Conan was downright criminal in every aspect, from bait-and-switch type tactics (past the newbie stage the game was garbage and undeveloped), releasing what really was almost alpha-quality (WoW's Betas had far less bugs than AoC on release) and false advertising (the main attractions of the game didn't work and did not for quite some time, if they ever did).
Linux Steam (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It'll be console-only from what I understand.
Re: (Score:3)
man destiny
sudo chmod a+x
destiny
j h k l o kill stuff
Re: (Score:2)
Not that kind of console.
Re: (Score:2)
Console-only means no keyboard and no mouse which means not a real MMORPG.
Re: (Score:2)
From the website, it's only for the Xbox360 and PS3. It's just another run-of-the-mill shooter like Halo.
The next big thing(TM) game should be Titan, from Blizzard.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I'm reading it's going to be more akin to Dust514 on the PS3, which is already out and part of the EVE Online universe.
Re: (Score:2)
Console-only means no keyboard and no mouse which means not a real MMORPG.
Since when does a game being an MMORPG absolutely require a keyboard and mouse. All a game requires to be an MMORPG are two things: being massively multiplayer online and being an RPG.
I've played 4 console games that fit that criteria, none of which "required" a keyboard or mouse. Although I did and do play them with a keyboard attached.
Everquest Online Adventures: Fantasy MMORPG set 500 years before EQ1...no this game is NOT the Diablo clone, that is Champions of Norrath. EQOA is a true MMORPG, the
The Old Republic... Again. (Score:2)
Approach is akin to the story-driven TOR. I see nothing particularly special or original about what they've expressed so far outside of the setting.
Embarking on Destiny... (Score:2)
Hopefully (Score:2)
I hope this game will not be exclusive to Microsoft platforms. There's gamers on the Mac, too. And hopefully Bungie won't use something like Cider for their Mac version and will do native OS X code instead.
Re: (Score:2)
I was about to tell you to RTFA but then I realized that the submitter used a really poor article. His bad.
It is reportedly confirmed for Xbox 360, PS3, and "others":
* http://www.gamezone.com/products/destiny/news/bungie-s-destiny-confirmed-for-xbox-360-ps3-and-future-console-platforms [gamezone.com]
The true Halo at last? (Score:2)
Remember the early Halo previews? It was supposed to be a third person shooter, set in an open persistent world, with massive team-based multiplayer. Then Microsoft bought Bungie, and they "consolized" the damn thing into a fine-looking but rather mediocre game. If they get rid of horrible ideas such as limited weaponry and auto-recharging shields, and have an option for third-person view, they could make Destiny what Halo should have been.
(And seriously, Bungie: not letting the user set the FOV should be r
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's quite obvious, Bungie was a very Mac-centric developer back then.
PR fluff at its extrem (Score:2)
At this point I would say I am about as informed as I was yesterday i.e. not at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Wasteland 2 promises to be one.
The latest showoff video was pretty good. At least they did not make it a FPS.
Re: (Score:3)
I view that as a positive.
Re: (Score:2)
What, you didn't like Fallout 3 or New Vegas? Heck even the console Diablo-clone "Brotherhood of Steel" wasn't a bad game.
Re: (Score:2)
sounds more like Dust514, which is connected to EVE, to me.