I Am Disappoint: Destiny Part 2

Why, hello there. Perhaps you may have noticed but, this is coming out much later than I would've liked.

That's simply terrible, because by now discussion surrounding Destiny has most likely simmered to the point of me having to toss it in the microwave before anyone is interested in taking a bite again. So, as a nice little warm-up before I delve into my more constructive breakdown of the story and universe, let's debate the very definition of the kind of story Destiny is based off the feedback I got in the original blog.

original: http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...

In part 1 of this blog, I only summarized my disappointment with Destiny's story in order to lament my frustration with how a few too many people were none to happy with any criticism directed at it. Why? a number of reasons, some of which are legitimate. One thing I saw too many times, however, was not an attempt to counter-argue, but to silence. The argument posed by Machinima's Adam Kovic just about sums up my bewilderment with this particular kind of damage control, which basically amounts to:

"keep your opinion to yourself."

This is nothing unique to Destiny, but it's something I needed to get off the proverbial chest regardless. The feedback I received in Part 1 was incredible! I was exposed to an interesting perspective: Destiny's narrative is meant to be player-driven, in that it's lacking so as to play on the player's imagination. In sum, I was told the player is meant to create their own story in Destiny (or perhaps SHOULD). Games like No Man's Sky and Ico were brought up as examples to support this claim.

I kicked that argument around for literally 3 seconds before tossing it in the bin, but in my refusal to accept Destiny's story as player-driven, I had to personally define what I felt to be a player-driven narrative experience. What exactly does a game's story need to do in order to be defined as player-driven, and can Destiny's narrative be considered as such? I broke down as many different kinds of player-driven narratives into key components as I could, coming away with three types of player-driven narratives in video games (bear in mind, two of these bleed into each other).

1. PLAYER-CONTROLLED (Walking Dead, Mass Effect, Fallout)
First off, you have games where, although there is a narrative, the player is given a number of opportunities to influence the path of said-narrative, allowing you to experience the story in a way that's unique to what choices you make/how you play the game. This can mean dynamic relationships with characters or how key moments in the plot will play out. Overall, games that allow you to effect the plot or ending in a meaningful way typically have their stories defined as player-driven (or specifically player-controlled in this case).

THE VERDICT:
Does Destiny's narrative fall under player-controlled? Nope. Honestly, the only means by which the player has to influence the plot is just window dressing: you get to insert your own character. An element of player-driven, yes, but only a small element because it doesn't necessarily mean the narrative has to change because of it. What's sad about Destiny's use of self-insert is that your perspective in this story doesn't change based on the character and class you choose. The game let's you play as three different races and classes: neither of which will affect the story in the slightest. Look, I understand that Bungie were setting out to do a lot more than just create a new epic universe and a story to tell in it, and I'm not asking for Mass Effect here, but it's pretty jarring to be playing as an Awoken... while everyone in a certain cut-scene talks about the Awoken as if we've never seen them before. At least a third of the Guardian population are Awoken: why are we treating them like this new thing? It's like if in Halo, Cortana started telling me all about the legendary Covenant, even when door-to-door, bible-selling Grunts were already commonplace:

("Excuse me, sir, do you have the time to discuss the great journey today?")

2. PLAYER-INTERPRETED (Ico, Journey, Shadow of the Colossus)
This is an odd one, but I feel as though I must include it. Although there is a narrative, a "player-interpreted" narrative is presented to the player vaguely; the player cannot help but interpret the events of the narrative in their own unique way. These are the kinds of stories that play on our imagination. However, the problem I have with including this label is simple: the argument could easily be made that all game stories (and games in general) can be personally interpreted. Such is the way with art. Then again, there are plenty of games that take it to such an extreme that the stories they tell become personal to each and every player's interpretation, regardless of how linear or scripted that story may be. Because of this, I feel it necessary to deem such a game to be player-interpreted.

(I still don't like it though, and if anyone feels the need to debate this one, please don't hold back. Please.)

THE VERDICT:
Does Destiny's narrative fall under "player-interpretive? You'd think so, based on my above argument. However, I'm not so sure. The narrative is pretty straightforward, at no point was I ever guessing what was happening, that wasn't my problem. My problem was that I didn't feel involved in what was going on to begin with (but more on that later).

3. PLAYER-CREATED (X-com, Fallout...again)
What about games that don't have a narrative at all, or allow the player to create their own narrative? These kinds of games may not tell a story, they simply task the player with completing an end-goal. In going about this, the player's experience is affected by the characters they interact with and the environments they explore (as well as unique and spontaneous events that can and may occur). We'll call this kind of experience "player-created", because there is no "bridge" connecting the beginning of the story to the end. The player creates their own. This shouldn't be confused with player-controlled, where there IS a bridge, but it branches into multiple paths instead of staying straight-on. With this type of structure, there is no bridge at all, so we have a player-driven narrative in it's purest form.

THE VERDICT:
Does Destiny's narrative fall under "player-created"? No. Destiny has a bridge, the same bridge you see in most linear AAA military FPS's, only thanfully less scripted: The narrative dictates your progression from beginning to end. You are allowed to step away from that story and go off the beaten path to create your own fun, but that's not saying much considering what little there is to create with. The game just doesn't have enough going for it to really allow the player to create their own narrative, not like Fallout or X-com anyway. You're either playing story missions, doing menial side quests, or just wandering around, killing enemies over and over. A point can be made for creating your own narrative if you play with friends or force yourself to stop and take in the sights... but you could honestly say that about any game that features co-operative play and/or big enough spaces.

CONCLUSION (TL:DR)
Destiny does not have a story that can be defined as player-driven. The only player-driven thing about it is the player's ability to insert their own character into the story, and even that was a wasted opportunity. The experience is best defined as a linear and hand-holdy affair that has the player beating missions in a way that grows stale and repetitive very quickly if you choose to play alone. The story manages to not give me enough to make me care while simultaneously holding my hand throughout the experience as if I were Master Chief or something. I don't know, I was expecting something a little less linear with the thing, especially considering the RPG-MMO-interplanetary design of the game. I was expecting something unique to each player, instead of every player being given the Master Chief treatment. Doesn't really fit the whole "become legend" tag line does it?

I could go into ways in how I would've done it better but this blog is epic enough and I feel like I'm rambling at this point. I'd like to know what you think about Destiny's story as a player-driven experience. Agree? Disagree? Think I'm a tosser? Let me know! And I promise you, the next blog is going to be much more uplifting!

[FriedGoat]

I think it's pretty straight forward. Destiny has no story.

The game had content cut out of it so much that the story didn't even really make sense anymore.

Ever wonder why the guy who wrote the story left a year ago and Marty got sacked? I have my assumptions that they disagreed with neutering the game.

That being said, I love destiny. The mechanics are solid and I've put a hell of a lot of time into it. It gets unnecessary hate from people upset with Bungies multi-plat status.

[sweetSWAGGER]

You're comment just about echoes my sentiment as well. As much as I rag on the story (because I was expecting more of a player-driven space epic), I still found the actual gameplay to be engaging enough to the point of addiction for a while.

As for the game's development, I'd heard there were shady happenings going on, indeed. Just about every reviewer I trust has pointed that out. Then again, anyone who watches all the dev diaries can see how much the game has changed.

[FriedGoat]

Yeah, I still have faith and I've bought the first expansion.

[BillytheBarbarian]

I fell asleep playing it. It feels more like work than fun.

[sweetSWAGGER]

I hope you didn't nap long enough for an image of Destiny to burn into your screen.