With Destiny publishing rights reverting to Bungie, the developer has a change to prove that the negative stigma surrounding AAA publishers is correct and that it forces microtransactions in games.
"No matter what Bungie ultimately does, this will be a telling moment in gaming. If the developer turned publisher winds up removing or changing the microtransactions for the better, the negative stigma surrounding huge publishers will have been proven right. If it winds up not changing things and doubling down on these manipulative practices, then we will know that developers are just as prone to falling into the allure of increased profits." I don't want to be "that guy," however I see this nothing more than some sort of marketing tactic to hype the 3rd game due to the shortcomings of 1 and 2. I did play the first game; quit after the release of Dark Below (since I saw all this coming); and skipped over 2 entirely even though PlayStation Plus had a base version of 2 for free. From a customer stance, this is a good move on Bungie since now they control the fate of the 3rd game; from a business standpoint, something else is going on behind the scenes we don't know about, and I don't want to be a part of it.
Who knows what's to come for Bungie, but I think being away from Activision is a good thing.
I'll give them a chance to redeem themselves. Not holding my breath tho.
I don't think there is anything behind the scenes. The deal with Activision was always a temporary one with an end date. Activision didn't buy Bungie or Destiny. So once the deal ended they took their toy and left so they could publish on their own. Bungie has never really published their own games before, they've always been a part of a bigger company. In the past it was Microsoft. I don't know about their previous Marathon games before Microsoft. The point is that they have always really been tied down and forced to do what other companies wanted them to. Now they don't have to. So now it really is a telling time for gaming. If Bungie keeps Destiny exactly the same, with the same selling tactics then we'll have no one to blame but Bungie. But if they release Destiny 3 with more content and make the expansions cost less and get rid of MT's then we'll know that publishers really are the ones with all the control around those things.
Think they made the base game on PC free too. Just saying, don't know if it was Activisions call or Bungies call. But let's see what Bungie does with their new freedom.
This needed to be proven? That said, it can also be done by the devs as well, but for published games like this, the publisher will agree to whatever the dev may want, and usually will implement their own things as well.
I really don't think Activision makes a difference in Destiny's case. Destiny's issues aren't things you can necessarily put on Publishers. It's a developer level issue I think. In alot of cases the Publishers do create issues like the EA and Star Wars titles. But I just can't figure how this ones on Activision
Do you have any odea how much content was cut from the original game on Activision's request? Entire story arcs and cutscenes were taken out, and re released in Taken King. In an interview, it was stated that Taken King was supposed to be the end of the first game...BEFORE DLC but it was changed at the last minute. There are still concepts that were removed that we have not seen in the final product to this day. I am not saying that Bungie will be a saviour to their IP for certain, but Activision was a huge part of the problem for sure.
That isn't what happened at all. Kotaku had a very good article about what happened with Destiny 1 and all of the bad choices were solely Bungie's fault. It was Bungie that butchered the story and removed story arcs and cut-scenes, not Activison. Let us also not forget that after Bungie butchered Destiny 2 that it was Activision's studio Vicarious Visions that stepped in and fixed most of the mistakes made by Bungie. https://kotaku.com/the-mess...
Its actually quite easy to believe that Activision wanted Bungie to release the base games with little content in an effort to sell as many DLC expansions as possible, as well as adding MT's. That is most definitely something the publishers would have some control over. Maybe not entirely, but it's very possible it's part of the deal. That doesn't mean that Bungie didn't agree to it though. All I'm saying is that publishers can definitely push for those things when signing the deal or decide not to publish the game if they don't come to some agreement with the developers. I think it falls on both publishers and developers. The publishers for wanting these things to be like this, and the devs for essentially selling their souls and agreeing to it. All I'm saying is we have no way of knowing exactly what Activision wanted,nwhat Bungie wanted, and what negotiations took place to get the end result we got. For all we know Activision could have originally wanted something akin to Battlefront 2 and Bungie was able to talk them down to what we have. (Activision has never been that bad before, so I doubt it. I'm just saying making an example.)
The Eververse was added because for at least 6 months of Destinys 1st year there is no money coming in outside of the product selling to late buyers. Activision wanted bungie to produce 4 dlcs a year plus the yearly expansion and this was too much work so they cut it down to 2 and added the Eververse to sustain the rest of the profits. Activision only cares about potential returns so Bungie had to produce something to keep the flow going.
Destiny 3 will be the same DLC, micro transaction garbage its always been. NOTHING will change...They will not make story driven games or even a "Spiritual Successor" to Halo. Don't get your hopes up folks
Sorry, I don't think this will prove anything other than the fact that Bungie if they make some good decisions ....will have made some good decisions. All the previous decisions made in this game will always be a question mark as to whether it was the publisher or developer driving those decisions. Making good decisions now does not suddenly erase previously bad decisions and we will never know truly who made those previously bad decisions.
This. Exactly. We have no way of knowing who wanted what, who negotiated what, and what caused the end result we got. I will say that it could look a little bad for Activision if the first Destiny game Bungie releases without Activision is done without all the pay tactics involved. But to your point, we'll never know who was truly making those decisions in the past.
Players in Black Ops 4 complained and wanted a solo que added. 2 weeks after launch Treyarch added one. Since launch Destiny 2 players have been wanting a solo que. 1 1/2 years later Bungie still hasn't added one. But yeah, lets blame Activision for Destiny's faults...
How's that combat record coming along?
It will probably get added before matchmaking for raids. Destiny players have only been asking for that since launch 4 years ago.
The main problem with this argument is that Destiny 2 already have a very fair MT-system. Which has been unfairly mischaracterized and blown out of porportion by the knee jerk reaction to anything MT-related.
MT's aren't Destiny's problem. Those are all cosmetics that can easily be earned through gameplay. Again, no big deal. What people have complained the most about since Destiny 1 is the accusation that the game launches with bare minimum content, then players are forced to pay an extra $20 every few months or get locked behind a pay wall. It makes it look like content is being held back rather than launching with it so that they charge for it later. There's nothing wrong with releasing paid content after launch. But it needs to be worth it, and very few of the "expansions" for Destiny are worth $20, yet you need to pay for it if you want to keep playing, otherwise you can't play Strike/Nightfall/Crucible/Iron Banner playlists with your friends because you haven't spent as much money as them and don't have the newest content.
I agree the pricing scheme has always seemed off in destiny expansions and MTs both. I do however think a lot of those complaints come from people that want Destiny to be something other than what it is. That being a loot grinder.
Well yeah. That is definitely a problem. Destiny is the first really big loot grinder to come out for consoles. I'm not sure how many console gamers were familiar with that type of game before.
The reason for their seperation was not due to the publishers but the INVESTORS, yes Destiny 2 made a ton of money but it still wasn’t enough for the greedy bast*rds. Same thing with Black Ops 4 game made 575 million during launch and investors STILL wanted more.
Oh please. Bungie screwed themselves up. They lost my respect and my money when they started reusing assets in The Dark Below. Selling gamers content they hald already purchased, reskins and having you travel backwards in the levels is not good value. Locking things behind a season pass is not good business. Putting limits on weekly/daily rewards is bad business as well. Destiny 2 was absolute trash. Destiny 1 had potential but all of that potential got flushed down the toilet with Destiny 2. Fool me once...
Rule #1 Publishers are here to make money, so yeah they will find more ways to make money because that's the objective of the publisher. Now ppl are quick to throw rocks at Activision due to MT but are forgetting what they actually bring to the table. - A robust and proven distribution company. We may not like them, but Activision's titles are usually well received by media, have good exposure on websites and the marketing is usually good. - Strong support for the devs. Activision lends 2 studios for the PC port while providing the Battle.net infrastructure for the game.
No, GAMERS are the BLAME for bad business practices
In the aspect that they are supporting these business practices by continuously paying for them.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.