Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Halo Developer Bungie Reveals Destiny and Its Vision of MMO Gaming

Posted by samzenpus on from the future-is-now dept.

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."

147 comments

  1. Once free of microsoft by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft. Who could have expected that?

    1. Re:Once free of microsoft by The+Moof · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bungie made two more Halo games after breaking away from Microsoft (back in 2007), so I wouldn't say they immediately jumped on new ideas.

    2. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    3. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft.

      What's the "interesting new idea"? Fallout but "far more fluid and natural"? The implementation may or may not be good, let's see when it exists, but I don't see how anyone could see a new idea there.

    4. Re:Once free of microsoft by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Bungie seems to have immediately taken to making interesting new ideas once free of Microsoft. Who could have expected that?

      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.

    5. Re:Once free of microsoft by Hatta · · Score: 1

      How is a Free to Play (AKA Pay to Win) MMO an "interesting new idea"?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    7. Re:Once free of microsoft by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension:
      From TFS:

      There will apparently not be a subscription model, so gamers won't have monthly fees to deal with, either.

      Where does that say Free to Play?

      Also, this:
      http://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Xbox-360/dp/B002I096Q4

      They're not exactly giving it away. You buy the full-price game & get access to the MMO.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    8. Re:Once free of microsoft by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      Look at the screenshots. This isn't fallout. Come on.

    9. Re:Once free of microsoft by Desler · · 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.

    10. Re:Once free of microsoft by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Yeah. FPS. MMO. Fresh as virgin snow melt through an untainted aquifer.

    11. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a separate and autonomous division does NOT guarantee that Blizzard is free to do as it pleases. I work in a completely different industry but it happens that the company for which I work is the most profitable entity within a large and diverse family of companies. We're "a separate and autonomous division" but there is enormous pressure from the parent company for us to deliver high profits. Every year, there's a meeting of the various division heads where they report to the parent company what their plans are for the year and how much money they expect to make. The parent company expect that profit projection to be bigger every year and, in fact, are pretty disappointed in us if we don't beat the projection. So no, they're not telling us what to do. They don't really care what we do or how we do it, as long as we achieve the expected results (which are measured in dollars, no exceptions.)

    12. Re:Once free of microsoft by B33rNinj4 · · Score: 1

      Ah, but those games didn't have Halo Fanboys. That makes all the difference.

    13. Re:Once free of microsoft by Titan1080 · · Score: 1

      I would just like to say that, i love the concrete and fact riddled sources you've linked for us.

    14. Re:Once free of microsoft by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      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?

    15. Re:Once free of microsoft by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      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, I suppose I could do productive things or something.

    16. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as I read this, a thunderous voice called to me from upon high, saying, "HEED YE, FOR THE GOD OF GAMING HAS SPOKEN!"

    17. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    18. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every game that comes out pushes graphics to their limits

      Minecraft.

      Sure most do, but not every one does (or needs to^).

    19. Re:Once free of microsoft by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      They made Marathon before Halo, and got bought by MS after Halo was already well along in development. Halo is very similar to Marathon. There were three Marathon games. One would have to expect that bungie would have made three halo games even were they not part of MS. I think Bungie's course would have been pretty similar had they not been part of MS, except the games might not have been so polished, and may have been on more than just the xbox.

    20. Re:Once free of microsoft by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      This one won't either. The people you seem to have disdain for have moved onto modern warfare or battlefield. And I'm not sure how they could be worse than the people who already play MMOs anyway.

    21. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like an awfully odd "deal" to be forced to adopt the name of the "parent" company and them not being able to have at least some say in how you operate.

    22. Re:Once free of microsoft by nschubach · · Score: 1

      I'm also assuming you will be paying for each of those 10 "books" or expansions.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    23. Re:Once free of microsoft by Desler · · Score: 1

      Their name is still Blizzard Entertainment. Their name is not different. Also, their autonomy was part of the merger deal which they vubtarily agreed to. There was no forcing of anything.

    24. Re:Once free of microsoft by Desler · · Score: 1

      You can believe me or not. I couldn't care less. Everything I've said is easily found in public information about both the merger deal and Blizzard's autonomous status and the fact that it is its own publisher.

    25. Re:Once free of microsoft by Desler · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes, the way the merger went down does guarantee that for Blizzard. They were not bought by Activision as they turned down Activision when they attempted that.

      One of the intriguing things about the old Vivendi structure was that, even when Martin Tremblay joined to run Vivendi's publishing, it was specified: "World Of Warcraft creator Blizzard Entertainment has been designated a stand-alone division reporting to VU Games' CEO, and is not part of Tremblay's product development mandate."

      And it's the same deal, more or less, in the new system - Mike Morhaime will continue to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer of Blizzard Entertainment, and no explicit reporting structure is even discussed in the release. Blizzard will continue to plough its own furrow, then.

      http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=16458#.USJ704e9LCQ

      Emphasis added by me.

      Again, as I said. Get the facts before spewing shit.

    26. Re:Once free of microsoft by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    27. Re:Once free of microsoft by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      We're talking about interesting new ideas, though.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    28. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Rumors inside MS at the time is that those additional Halo titles were part of the deal that Bungie had to take to get their freedom. Remember, at the time the Xbox wasn't nearly as dominant in the market as it is today, and the Halo franchise was a large part of what was keeping it afloat.

    29. Re:Once free of microsoft by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      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 getting, shame its childish (compared to a lot of other MMO (the crowd doesn't help)) and repetitive as hell.

    30. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bungie is also an independent company. They have just signed a publishing agreement with Activision.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bungie#Independent_company

    31. Re:Once free of microsoft by _4rp4n3t · · Score: 1

      Those aren't screen shots, they're concept art. World of difference.

    32. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bungie isn't owned by Activision. Activision's their publisher for this game - there's a big difference. That means Activision puts down money to fund, promote, and pay for material costs associated with the game in exchange for a cut of the profits. The relationship is most similar to that of an investor.

    33. Re:Once free of microsoft by xhrit · · Score: 2

      Look at the video trailer. There are in-game screen shots that you can clearly see.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwOUi4JDC4o

      --
      Dungeon Tactics : Free Open Source SRPG
    34. Re:Once free of microsoft by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      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*

    35. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bungie is not owned by Activision, they have a publishing deal with Activision.

    36. Re:Once free of microsoft by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Again, as I said. Get the facts before spewing shit.

      It seems you are new here...

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    37. Re:Once free of microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, basically you have to be prepared to eat a sizeable portion of your investment if you want to succeed.

    38. Re:Once free of microsoft by Ocker3 · · Score: 1

      Bungie was making Halo for AppleOS, MS came along with a Bucket of money and said "you're now making that for the X-Box as our lead game."

    39. Re:Once free of microsoft by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      DAoC would have kicked all their asses were it not for that PvE add-on that required tons of play time, luck, and leveling.
      If only they had made those weapons PvE only....

    40. Re:Once free of microsoft by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      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, almost an embellishment of early 3D graphics -- far removed from the bump-mapped uber realisism of many of today's games (shaders can do so much more than just this). We aim to deliver an experience that hearkens back to the frenetic days of yore where movement was more powerful than shields -- before crappy round trip latency times made online gameplay, in everything from shooters to battle-mechanoids to Space MMOs, into little more than manipulation of lethargic bullet sponges with necessarily rechargeable health. In other words, we're attempting a mixture of our favorite experiences from times gone by, with less of the pitfalls and limitations that long-sense-past games had. In fact, my personal goal is to have at least some folks think, "Wait, I think I remember this, isn't this that one game I can't quite remember the name of but that I really liked?" Our story does have some feeling, (for that is the point of stories), but it is not too complex nor linear in nature: It's told only through world crafting, not some restrictive control-freakish narrative arc. We've taken our writing and embedded it into the settings, actions, and noises of the wordless characters & enemies. We tell our story via evidence of what once happened, and let you decide the meaning of the changes your journey causes.

      So, no, we don't "ALL SAY THAT", there are many of us who say nothing like "THAT". It's just that many folks only play multi-million dollar AAA blockbuster games then complain about stagnation in the game industry like a bunch of philistines.

      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.

      It's true they're not indie anymore, but at least they're not bound to their Halo / Marathon Universe anymore (protip: 343 Guilty Spark had the Marathon logo it his eye, and Marathon begins the same way as Halo: Being woken from cryostasis to take care of an alien threat -- There are other obvious nods for fans of both series).

      OK, take a step back. If you don't like Bungie, then who cares, right? Why even post? If you do like the team then consider that they were working under Microsoft when they released Halo. It's not like working under a publisher must prevent game devs from making a good game.

      IMO, there's a place for the slowly changing low-risk overproduced gratuitous graphic fest, and there's also a place for smaller differently minded game devs to fill -- A vacuum created by the abandonment of entire styles of gameplay and visuals. If you ask me, in the pursuit of ever more "stunning" and realistic graphics, and more massively networked "always-online" gameplay we left behind many quiet pixel mines that still have much to yield to anyone who stops and reflects therein.

    41. Re:Once free of microsoft by tibman · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    42. Re:Once free of microsoft by tibman · · Score: 1

      I thought it was a pc game turned console game tuned pc port?

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    43. Re:Once free of microsoft by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      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, but overall, the three-realm RvR system was well executed AND the three-realm system meant that if balance favored one realm too much, the other two realms would usually cooperate against them. Imbalances with just two factions in a "RvR-oriented" game = bad news.

      Aion had potential but, again, was a total fucking disaster on launch. Brutal level-delta rules for grouping made levelling hell if you fell even a level or two behind friends - which happened easily if you logged in at the wrong time for just one day at launch.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  2. Oh sweet Jesus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you thought Barrens chat was bad, you haven't seen anything yet.

    1. Re:Oh sweet Jesus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you thought Barrens chat was bad, you haven't seen anything yet.

      On the plus side, no keyboard makes trolling at least a little harder. Of course, this might be a game that I do a 360 and walk right away from.

    2. Re:Oh sweet Jesus by jandrese · · Score: 1

      On the plus side, no keyboard makes trolling at least a little harder. Of course, this might be a game that I do a 360 and moonwalk right away from.

      Fixed that for you.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re:Oh sweet Jesus by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      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.

  3. reminds me of rifts by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From http://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.

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    1. Re:reminds me of rifts by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      you mean this Rift MMO?

    2. Re:reminds me of rifts by Alphadecay27 · · Score: 1

      No. Rift (MMO) seems to be strictly a fantasy game where you fight off forces coming though rifts to the elemental planes. Rifts (RPG) is a multi-genre roleplaying game where rifts between the universes allowed various beings (elves, dwarves, aliens, lovecraftian horrors etc.) to cross over.

    3. Re:reminds me of rifts by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Nice to see Palladium Books still around I recently just found my collection of TMNT and Heros Unlimited stuff from high school. I wonder if they jumped on the D&D bandwagon of rule changes every few years so people have to buy all new stuff or if I bought some newer books my existing stuff would still be compatible.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    4. Re:reminds me of rifts by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    5. Re:reminds me of rifts by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Ah, interesting, thanks!

    6. Re:reminds me of rifts by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I had always wondered how well their system actually worked for the various genres...thanks for the info.

    7. Re:reminds me of rifts by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I never played Rifts or Robotech, but their rules system seemed to work well for TMNT and Heros. One of my buddies ran a number of good Palladium campaigns so I do have experience with the rules system in that environment as well. Then again the company is primarily driven by one person so there is a singular vision of how things should work. One of the complaints I heard about Rifts was the power creep but I guess that it is kind of inevitable.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    8. Re:reminds me of rifts by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      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 city.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    9. Re:reminds me of rifts by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I was aware of the MDC system and the group I played with never really latched on to it so we stuck with Palladium, Heros, After The Bomb/TMNT, Ninjas and Super Spies, etc series. The nice thing with those was that since they all used the same system characters, equipment, abilities etc. could be brought in from any of the source books and would work even if they seemed a bit out of place. All of us had a various books as it made of a neat collection, especially the compendiums. With a good GM you could have some really interesting and diverse adventures and it is always fun to bring a thompson machine gun to a battle against magical monsters with massive SDC only to run out of ammo and then have to figure out now what do I do. I found out early on that I was a bad GM but others in the group were excellent at it although there was one guy who was really bad but never really figured it out.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  4. Cute, so how's it play? by Anonymous Coward · · 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"

  5. Standard marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    being "aimed at being unlike any gaming experience we've seen" is what everyone one of them claimed.

  6. Not coming to PC by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    The shark, it has been jumped.

    1. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 1, 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.

    2. Re:Not coming to PC by Seumas · · 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 something this supposedly massive and complex.

    3. Re:Not coming to PC by Ravensfire · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "But we decide which is right, and which is an illusion"
    4. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Not coming to PC by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      This is another game for fratboys not PC gamers.

      Meanwhile, beyond the Land Of False Dichotomies...

    7. Re:Not coming to PC by FyRE666 · · Score: 3, 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?

      --
      Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
    8. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I like console FPS actually. I loved GoldenEye. Halo sucks, it is an FPS dumbed down for the fratboy set.

    9. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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 added more and more functionality. Halo Multiplayer is fantastic, too bad about Xbox Live sucking so bad or I'd probably be playing it right now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Not coming to PC by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      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.

    11. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      It seemed to look fine to me. We sure played a lot of golden gun.

      How about the regenerating health? Or the instant respawn?

    12. Re:Not coming to PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not going to be any more of an MMO than Diablo 3, Hellgate: London, or Guild Wars 1 were "MMOs." It's going to be a lobby-based FPS coop dungeon crawler with a little bit of random cross zone player pollination to make things more interesting. And some kind of standard FPS combat PvP in its own, separate area (aka standard FPS deathmatch, team deathmatch, and CTF, but with RPG stats to make it unfair/unfun).

    13. Re:Not coming to PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Halo was different from other console FPS games in 2001. Now it's a throwback to a nostalgic era where simply not having the worst controls possible was enough to make you the best console FPS ever, and you could have really boring/repetitive level and enemy design and get away with it. Even by the time Halo 3 came out, it was already basically an also-ran console FPS. The people who really liked Halo 3 were just highly invested in the story or deathmatch community from Halo 1 and 2. Nothing about Halo beyond the first has been revolutionary.

    14. Re:Not coming to PC by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 1

      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 farther) so it can be further customized and tweaked to interpret twitches better.

      At least, that's my take on it all.

    15. Re:Not coming to PC by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      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 was kinda brilliant on the part of the Journey devs, and it's tremendously harder in an FPS framework. Sweeping dramatic campaign experiences are a little tough with all of your teammates bunny-hopping like idiots, shooting off into the sky, and teabagging the fallen during an NPC's exposition.

      Heck, if they even sayanything it'll break immersion for me. I like to lose myself in a story and embrace the drama as best I can (obviously easier in some games than others). But there is no chance I'm gong to be able to overlook a bratty 15-yr screaming racial slurs in his mike while drinking in one of those admittedly breathtaking vistas in the concept video.

      As an adult with a young child, I actually prefer single player experiences. I think more and more gamers are following into this category as we all grow older. I don't know if this game is going to cater to my interests (and it's ok if it doesn't, I guess I'm just no longer part of the target audience).

    16. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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. 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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Oh noes it was the shield. Whatever, same shit.

      Face it, this is a game for fratboys. Deal with it.

    19. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 0

      And I detect you are a pedantic fuck.

      I admit I was wrong, regenerating health was halo 2. Halo 1 only had regenerating shields which is not the same just similar. I never stated they invented it. Halo is pretty much the generic FPS, it probably invented nothing yet gets rave reviews because it targets no nothings that never played the games that invented all these things.

      No, because 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?

    21. Re:Not coming to PC by Tarlus · · Score: 2

      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. The repetitive and palette-swapped levels were a cop-out and the lack of boss fights made it feel incomplete. I didn't have much fun with the latter half of the game and I forced myself to complete it because I was determined to find out what made it so popular.

      Halo is certainly polished and well-presented, but aside from its status as the kegger's go-to party game, it's overrated.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    22. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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 was playing. Perhaps the issue is that while I was playing Halo, I marked a number of good players as friends, and then focused on playing in games with those people.

      You're still making unfounded statements based on your world view and then making more things up to support those statements. Why don't you just admit that you hate Halo because Microsoft bought Bungie and the game isn't precisely how you imagined it? Then you won't be lying, you won't be making shit up, you won't be spouting ignorance, and I won't feel a need to call you on your bullshit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Your points about the uninspired level design of the original Halo game are definitely true, and have been remarked upon by everyone and their mom. However, I never got bored of the outdoor stuff, it was the indoor stuff that bored me. And as the series progressed (when we talk about Halo today, we rarely talk solely about the original game) all of the level design improved to the point where it is actually quite good, there's even variety.

      Halo wasn't all things to all men, but we tend to forget that it compares well to most of the games of its day. I have played the original on the PC, where you get to use the mouse. The levels are just as bad, of course. And I did do better with the mouse, shock amazement. But it really wasn't as much better as I thought it would be.

      What I find particularly telling is that to make Halo look bad you have to compare it to so many different games. Oh yeah, the multi is not as good at UT or Q3, but hey, if you're going to complain about the single player in Halo being a cheap toy, what's the single player in UT or Q3? A rubberband? A sheet of bubble wrap? And hey, the single isn't as good as some other games, but those games have weak multi. In short, I think history will recognize the Halo series as more than merely popular.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Not coming to PC by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      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 Half Life or Duke Nukem 3D into the mix, but I'd be harping.

      Not many games can be great as both single-player and multi-player experiences, as their developers typically emphasize one or the other. But in either case, I've sloughed through a fair share of FPS titles and the Halo games have never stood out to me beyond their mainstream status.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    25. Re:Not coming to PC by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Well, I should have said any other shooter ever, I guess. Still, it makes my point for me. Halo is a good game. It might not be the best in any category, but that doesn't make it a bad game. It compares well to other individual games.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:Not coming to PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard plenty of kids yelling homophobic racist crap, and it really ruined my day. So I gave up with playing online, since I hadn't already established a group of reliable friends to play with. Keep looking back, but I can't figure out how to make it better =/

      Glad to hear that you had decent experiences in both games; I guess my friends were right when they said I "must have played on the wrong server." Eh.

    27. Re:Not coming to PC by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      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.

    28. Re:Not coming to PC by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      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.

    29. Re:Not coming to PC by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      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.

    30. Re:Not coming to PC by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      /* No Comment */
  7. Yet another WoW killer by Anonymous Coward · · 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."

  8. Yawn... by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... aimed at being unlike any gaming experience we've seen.

    Like GW2, SWTOR, TSW.

    I'll wait and see, but I'm not holding my breath.

    1. Re:Yawn... by servognome · · Score: 1

      How about rereleasing SWG. It along with Eve are the most unique experiences, everything else is boss farming

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  9. It's incredible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the amount of "post-apoc" titles being planned/developed/whatever and we can't still have a decent Fallout game.

    1. Re:It's incredible... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Wasteland 2 promises to be one.
      The latest showoff video was pretty good. At least they did not make it a FPS.

    2. Re:It's incredible... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasteland 2 is also not an MMO.

    3. Re:It's incredible... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      I view that as a positive.

    4. Re:It's incredible... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      What, you didn't like Fallout 3 or New Vegas? Heck even the console Diablo-clone "Brotherhood of Steel" wasn't a bad game.

  10. Books? by Extremus · · Score: 4, 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.

    1. Re:Books? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yep, 24 chapters of XxXBung1eFan420XxX teabagging opponents.

    2. Re:Books? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's right out of REAMDE, actually. The creator of the MMO in the book hired authors to write a backstory and continuing story arc as part of the game.

    3. Re:Books? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing that they're using the word "books" like LOTRO does. The main storylines are divided into quests, with each quest being a "chapter." A major plot point occurs during the last quest of the book*. The way they designed it is very elegant, and considering that LOTR is a book-based story, written by a professor of linguistics, it also makes sense to incorporate the format of those books into the game.

    4. Re:Books? by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      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).

    5. Re:Books? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What went down is that a Capital Ship was intended to create a warp point for his fleet. He instead warped himself into an enemy fleet. Queue panic as the enemy fleet sees a multi-kilometer long target appear in their midst and the capital ship pilot calls for help.

      I suppose that's good thinking that he might have done it intentionally, but from what I understand (having never piloted a capital ship), the two options are right next to each other.

      On the other nerd-side of that fight, CCP's reaction to that fight was to move the other solar systems on that server to adjacent nodes so that they wouldn't experience slowdowns. EVE will dilate time so that the processing queue for pilot commands can be processed at a reasonable speed. They figure everyone would rather play the game at 50% speed with buttons responding instantly to 100% speed and buttons taking tens of seconds to respond.

  11. Bring back Myth! by asylumx · · Score: 2

    They did a great job with the game Myth: The Fallen Lords several years ago. It was a great game with a decent story and very interesting multiplayer. I'd love to see it come back!

    1. Re:Bring back Myth! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      This!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    2. Re:Bring back Myth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can still play the Myth games and Marathon on Mariusnet.com.

      Unfortunately, Bungie sold their Myth rights to Take2 which isn't doing anything with them so there won't be any more Myth games.

      Bungie still has the rights to Marathon and is supposedly working on Marathon IV.

  12. Ummm, its already out there... by sherpajohn · · Score: 1

    Secret World. Not doing so well. That part's not so secret.

    --

    Going on means going far
    Going far means returning
    1. Re:Ummm, its already out there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's full of great ideas, but FunCom has a long-standing rep for horrible post-release support. Sadly TSW was no different.

    2. Re:Ummm, its already out there... by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      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).

  13. Linux Steam by RedHackTea · · Score: 1

    Will it be?

    --
    The G
    1. Re:Linux Steam by Narishma · · Score: 2

      It'll be console-only from what I understand.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    2. Re:Linux Steam by RedHackTea · · Score: 2

      echo 'Awesome!'
      man destiny
      sudo chmod a+x /usr/bin/destiny
      destiny
      j h k l o kill stuff :w

      --
      The G
    3. Re:Linux Steam by Narishma · · Score: 1

      Not that kind of console.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    4. Re:Linux Steam by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Console-only means no keyboard and no mouse which means not a real MMORPG.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    5. Re:Linux Steam by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    6. Re:Linux Steam by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      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 servers only shut down just last year. The world is absolutely seamless unless you direct teleport between coaches or zones (Or die and get returned to your last bind point), you will NEVER see a load screen. I walked/swam from Fayspires to Qeynos, no load screen. The game did support USB keyboard for game control and chat, but also had an on-screen keyboard and quick chat commands.

      Final Fantasy XI: Fantasy cross-platform MMORPG, PS2/PS3, PC and Xbox players all play on the same servers. The game supports all keyboard + Mouse + controller control schemes on PS2/PS3 and PC at least. Though nobody, not even the PC players used mice, and even they bought dualshocks for movement. Also have an onscreen keyboard available and if I remember some quick chat functionality.

      FreeRealms: Family friendly MMORPG with lots of varying gameplay. Any game that uses text input on the PS3 automatically supports any supported bluetooth/USB keyboard device, including USB keyboards, the official chatpad(and any other bluetooth keyboard). There's also quick chat and on-screen keyboards. The game also has built in voice chat, but only for groups.

      DC Universe Online: Superhero MMORPG, though the game is cross-platform, PC and PS3 owners play on different servers as far as I can tell. As with FreeRealms has the same support for keyboards, quick-chat and on-screen keyboard. It also has built in voice chat with Local, group and guild voice chat channels.

      In other words, it's not 1999 anymore and consoles like the old PS2 had USB and consoles like the PS3 have USB and Bluetooth for a reason.

    7. Re:Linux Steam by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      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.

  14. "more natural and fluid" by Dunge · · Score: 1

    This is why I never played MMOs. I can't stand a playing turning on itself and going through other players where the actual physical position is useless and only the "locked" target is used. Where attacks are not real physical attacks but only timed progress bars. I'm intrigued if they can manage to create a real game maybe I'll be able to do some multiplayer gaming at last.

    1. Re:"more natural and fluid" by Iceykitsune · · Score: 1

      http://www.firefallthegame.com/

      --
      GENERATION 24: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
    2. Re:"more natural and fluid" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Face of mankind, or perhaps planetside 2 will fit, maybe even WW2 online, and plenty of others really.

      Now, what I am personally waiting for is a game that takes the social part above anything else. I find that in most MMORPGs, I don't really want to play with the other players, at the very least, I don't want to spend a lot of time with them. And frankly, nearly no MMO actually encourages you to talk to others for a moment, to get to know the people in your group. WoW went from needing a drink for 30 seconds after most pulls in a dungeon to possibly needing a drink after a boss fight, to regen mana. So while it is possible to communicate between fights, its often not done and certainly not encouraged.

      Much of your time will be spent with people who could be replaced with bots, and probably the whole game would be more enjoyable because you wouldn't feel any pressure and as if you should never be allowed to fail. I don't think its wrong for a game to do that, but I think it should really be designed around making it a social experience. Why else make it an MMO? Now, face of mankind as I mentioned did this very well, but due to dificulties monetizing a game where most of the content is playing with other players, something you can't really sell, they are moving in another direction.

  15. Move along... nothing new to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An MMO FPS this hasn't been done before...

    Actibbungielizzardvision is choking on guns apparently...

  16. The Old Republic... Again. by virgnarus · · Score: 1

    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.

  17. NO PC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On an MMO, I want PC. Shooters are good on Xbox360(720) and PS3(PS4), but for long-gevity, I want to customize my character and I want to customize my controls. Without that, it is just a long long game.

  18. bad editorial form by statsone · · Score: 1

    so post a story from a site - hotwardware.com - that has an article about Bungie and their future plans and nowhere on hothardware.com or this site is there a link to Bungie or any posts by bungie. And Bungie gave details about the new MMO

    very poor form

    1. Re:bad editorial form by statsone · · Score: 1

      www.destinythegame.com

  19. Embarking on Destiny... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ...didn't work out so well for the SGU team. Hope this platform is in better shape...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  20. Hopefully by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    1. Re:Hopefully by zachdms · · Score: 1

      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

  21. "Innovation" has been around since at least 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The MMO "A Tale in the Desert" has been structured with interactive story arcs affected by PC interaction since 2003 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tale_in_the_desert.

    I am not sure if it is the first such example.

    This is not an innovation - although it will be cool to see in a large mainstream MMO.

  22. The true Halo at last? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    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 regarded as a showstopper bug.)

    --
    Circumcision is child abuse.
    1. Re:The true Halo at last? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And for Mac at that! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eZ2yvWl9nQ

    2. Re:The true Halo at last? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Well, that's quite obvious, Bungie was a very Mac-centric developer back then.

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
  23. PR fluff at its extrem by aepervius · · Score: 1

    There was no detail given, only concept art and CGI, no detail on gameplay at all. In fact it was pure 100% unadultered PR hype without basis. About the only things they announced is 1) it is not a MMO but use of its trapping (hu?) 2) probably not coming from PC

    At this point I would say I am about as informed as I was yesterday i.e. not at all.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  24. You can already pre-order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zero info about the actual game and you can already pre-order it from various outlets. It's listed at normal game prices for XBox and PS3, $59.99. What a crappy marketing piece of trash thing to do. See how I narrowly avoided cursing there? This ain't Kickstarter. Talk to me after you've done some work and it isn't in Alpha. You aren't Bioware, I don't buy your garbage on spec.

  25. Basic coordination only, dev says by majorme · · Score: 1

    "If you have the basic coordination to play a shooter, you can experience all Destiny has to offer," Bungie co-founder Jason Jones explained.

    Pretty much says it all - not going to be much of a game, unless you regard interactive movies as gaming experience. And books? Hah.. give a brake. No doubt this bs is going to make them a lot of coin, though. Good for them.

  26. finally by destiny · · Score: 1

    my time has come.

    --

    We are one people. With one will. One resolve. One cause. We shall prevail!
  27. sounds like eve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sounds like eve

    1. Re:sounds like eve by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      sounds more like Dust514, which is connected to EVE, to me.

  28. I don't care what you say... by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I cried at the end of Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  29. More free to play crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only we'll get another case of nickel and dimed in the cash shop, but again its gonna be one of those "streamlined" games (for morons).

  30. I look forward to Tanking as Herbie by Guppy · · Score: 1

    And not really even MMO. It's more, as I understand it, like Journey.

    I dunno, Journey 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.

  31. We still know nothing about this "MMO"/ Not an MMO by Gel214th · · Score: 1

    They released a lot of hype, but have said nothing about this "MMO".
    Bungie is saying that they will bring the first MMO to the Xbox platform (720?), except it will be like nothing we've ever seen before. in my view that means it's not going to be an MMO, rather it will be Bungie redefining the term MMO to suit what's possible in the console environment.

    Champions Online, Marvel Universe Online and a few others tried to go the MMO route on the Xbox 360 and all backed off it for numerous reasons including scalability, Xbox Live support, and others ( http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/03/24/champions-online-no-longer-coming-to-the-360 ) .

    We've seen the shooter MMO before: Firefall, and the ill fated Tabula Rasa and Dust 514 come to mind. Let's not forget DC Universe on the PS3. So what's revolutionary?

    Until we see much more, I don't think anyone can opine that the game looks great or the concept is radically different. What we do know, though, is that cash shop purchases over Xbox Live is most probably a gold mine waiting to be tapped :)

    --
    -Gel214th
  32. Not an MMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bungie explicitly said that the game is NOT an MMO. It is a "shared world shooter"

  33. Post Apocolypse and MMO by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    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.

  34. Wrong. by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    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 game. That is how you keep people forever.

    Another example that doesn't apply is EVE. Not fantasy clone. Very different. So far as I know a healthy (more less depending on outlook:) community of players.

    I know I would love this idea. When I heard about a possible Fallout Online I SQUEE! a bit. That said, with the history, I would give the edge to Fallout, however Bungie doesn't seem to be going about this half assed, by saying they are going to spend 10 years on the project and 10 books for a story line, etc... they are building history and fans that want to play the game.