You Will Fail in Destiny, According to Bungie

Bungie's Tyson Green stresses that Destiny won't really hand prizes and loot to players, who should expect to fail from time to time.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
XiSasukeUchiha1772d ago

Good making players work for it like men

jimbobwahey1772d ago

Yeah, playing games for fun sucks.

_QQ_1772d ago

Challenge is fun. At least for me a game has to reach a really heavy amount of bullshit before i don't consider it a fun challenge.

OrangePowerz1772d ago

Just because something is hard doesn't mean it's not fun. Take raids in MMOs as example, they can be very hard, but a huge amount of fun and satisfaction when you kill a boss and get the loot.

Alexious1772d ago

If steamrolling stuff while blindfolded is fun to you, well, don't speak for everyone else.

Most games need some decent challenge to be truly compelling.

Destrania1771d ago

Challenge adds to the fun for me. Overcoming obstacles in video games is exciting. That's one of the many reasons I love the 'Souls' games so much.

tagan8tr1771d ago

Come on that was funny lightn up wow

frostypants1771d ago

A game without challenge isn't a game.

Harmy6661771d ago

Some people just don't get sarcasm…

crxss1771d ago

probably not gonna fail in Destiny, just saying.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1771d ago
Alexious1772d ago

Yeah, I've had enough of games spoonfeeding stuff. It's time for challenging gameplay to come back, once and for all.

Prime1571771d ago

Until your build sucks... then people quit, like many games before it. Month long then skydive.

Don't get me wrong, I miss the hardcore days where you had to create a new character to make a different build, or even if you screwed up.

H0RSE1772d ago


Challenge "can be" fun - it isn't for everyone. There are those who feel games are pointless without challenge, and others who don't want to have to deal with it in a medium where people are supposed to be able to relax and just play it. This helps explain that despite it's popularity, Dark Souls is a niche title, and why the competitive scene in virtually every shooter, will be outnumbered by those not in it.


Challenge in games is fine, but unless the game design is built around it, it should come with options. A good example of this is the new Thief game being developed. It allows for a really difficult experience for those who want it, but it isn't forced and, the settings can be adjusted to meet virtually anyone's playstyle.


levian1771d ago

Content without difficulty is essentially no more than an interactive movie. Why not just have a cutscene that stops playing periodically and says "Press X to continue"? You are progressing, interacting with it, relaxing and enjoying the story.

H0RSE1771d ago (Edited 1771d ago )

Like typical opponents against games without challenge, you go straight for the extreme low on the challenge meter, and use it for your example. Think of easy, medium, hard difficulty levels. You, and others in your train of thought, seem to think that a game the lacks challenge is essentially always on easy, and this simply is not the case. Games can be played at the skill level of the player. In this case, it isn't really challenging because the game isn't more difficult than the player can handle. It isn't really non-challenging, because it isn't below the skill level of the player - it is a balance.

"Challenge junkies" seem to think that if the game isn't hard all the time, whats the point? The point is, not everyone enjoys having to overcome difficulty. It's a game, not a job or task, and thus it should be fun. Do you play board games for the challenge? Why should video games be any different? I couldn't image being a person who "needs" challenge in a game in order to have fun - seems like more of a handicap than something something to boast about. Trying to dictate that their way is right and everything is wrong, just adds to this.

Your "interactive movie" scenario, is a blatant generalization that misses the point. If a player is moving through the game, killing enemies or whatever with ease, they are still manually interacting and performing actions. Some players like the "god feeling" this can produce, others just like the notion that they can control the flow of the game without having to worry about dying or needing to restart, etc.

More importantly, it completely ignores the whole reason for playing a game vs watching a movie - interactivity. Pressing a button to continue is hardly interacting. It's the same concept as multi-disk DVD's back in the day that would say "insert disk 2 to continue," and even still, there are people who wouldn't mind this option, although it wouldn't really be playing a game, and more of an optional feature.

That being said, similar options like the "interactive movie" scenario you described, have already been done in Mass Effect 3, with the "Action," "Story," and "Roleplaying" campaign options.

There is no right or or wrong way to play. If a player has a fun playing a game devoid of challenge, who is anyone to tell them they are doing it wrong?

Festano1771d ago

I find it a satisfaction to finish the level or the boss of a game like Dark Soul, I repeat this is the right way.

Alexious1771d ago

I agree, although Dark Souls is a bit extreme with the fact that it resets you to the beginning of the level. At least for me.

Tetsujin1771d ago

As long as there's something for those who are only able to play limited times I'll be fine with it. I'm not talking micro transactions, but something that at least makes people come back to play when they can, for however long they can without extensive grinding.

The one thing a lot of people forget is those who can only play maybe 1-2 hours at a time, sometimes per week; then fall way behind of someone who plays 18+ hours a night.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1771d ago
SG1_dapunisherX1772d ago

This is what Im taking no micro transactions bs.... learn the game the hard way

Visiblemarc1771d ago

How do you even have a disagree vote?

The only way I could possibly disagree is I don't even like to give money, at all, to games with a pay-to-win model built in, in the first place.

But people who are in favour of buying a game for $60 and the an additional $30 for the "privilege" of beating it in less than 200 hours of grinding, baffle me. A game should be "complete" when sold at a full retail price. The exception being DLC (that genuinely extends the experience) and I couldn't care less if people want to pay real money for extra outfits and crap like that.

SG1_dapunisherX1771d ago

maybe they like micro transaction lol... making the game very easy take the fun outta the game just to bring casual gamer over

Festano1772d ago

I agree there must be stages of games where the difficulty increases. This is the way that they should take all.

Angerfist1772d ago

You can bookmark this, since its published by Activision there will be a way to make it easier that will be called Microtransactions. You can bet on it.

Ratty1772d ago

Haha! I agree I wouldn't be surprised but I hope you're wrong.

HighResHero1771d ago

Maybe they will find a different way to milk the franchise.

ELCUCO1771d ago

Could you point us in a direction that Activision has ever used microtransactions for something other than cosmetics? I think the first time they've used it was for Blops2 and it was just for weapon skins. It didn't affect gameplay what so ever.

You might be confused with EA...

LackTrue4K1771d ago

wait wait wait, I'm a reading you right?!???

"there are micotransactions, INSIDE DLC's?!?!?!"

Alexious1771d ago

Oh god, let's hope Destiny isn't riddled with microtransactions.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1771d ago
Ratty1772d ago

If challenge is approached well enough then yeah I'm all for it. Demon's Souls and especially Dark Souls IMO managed it.

Show all comments (49)
The story is too old to be commented.