Bungie On Destiny's Always-On Internet Requirement: "This Isn't Our First Rodeo"

I smell a debacle in the making, if for no other reason than the universe wanting to spite the pompous Destiny devs.

Blizzard ain't strangers to always online either and look at how Diablo 3 went. As the phrase in wow went, "you are not prepared"

I thought it was supposed to be an 'MMOFPS' anyway - but the sound of it, it isn't.

Which means my level to care has just hit zero. I'm not bothered about another Global Agenda style 'MMO'. It can't even be called MMO. It's just another online shooter then.

They never called it that.

And yet later in the comments you make reference to MMOs.

While they may never have said that, it was implied.

"I'm not calling Destiny an MMO, it's the easiest thing to compare it to. It has a persistent online world...so obviously...you'll need to be online. Saying they should use an always online "model" for a PERSISTENT online world, is like saying MMOs should have an offline mode."

'Persistent Online World' for all intents and purposes means it's an MMO, or implies that it is.
World of Warcraft has a persistent online world. Rift has a persistent online world.

But instead their 'persistent online world' is going to be a iinstanced first person shooter, with PvP and PvE elements. And we've seen that before, many times, and it sucks.

so they either go full MMO, or they remove the always-online. None of this inbetween crap that's being sold as an MMOFPS.

So SimCity was EA's first rodeo and Diablo III was Blizzards first rodeo? You are going to weigh the cost to have enough servers at launch vs the cost of customer backlash, because you didn't get enough servers. If the past is any indication of the future, you're not going to have enough servers. Unless people aren't scrambling out at midnight to get this game.

As said above, if Blizzard can't pull off online, I don't have much faith in anyone else.

I cannot wait for the GR article about the Destiny launch debacle.

I think one of the biggest problems with SimCity is that "always online" isn't much of a feature for SimCity. It is at its core a simulation management game. No one needed that to be multiplayer. FPS on the other hand is a gameplay type which very much lends itself to online play. The persistent world of Destiny is also an interesting progression of the "instanced" play that most FPSs have now.

Why are we so damned jaded that we all predict things like this to fail? I actually agree with the lot of you but am sick to my stomach that it was my first inclination to think that way.

The advantage Bungie has is that they've seen the other companies fail, and have better perspective on what to expect. I think Blizzard got over confident and EA was just plain ignorant to the amount of traffic they should expect at lunch and afterwards. If they're expecting to sell 10 million copies at launch, I expect they'll be prepared. There will probably be hiccups, but I don't imagine it will be anything like the other debacles.

I have not really read much about this game, but honestly, I expected more from Bungie. Players really need to stop supporting this model or it will be the norm in the future.

I know broadband is WAY more widespread than it was a few years ago, but doesn't this model also alienate the people in rural areas that do not have access to broadband? I guess they are thinking the loss of sales due to piracy is worse than the loss of other legitimate sales?

So I guess MMO's should be playable offline as well.

Your logic is flawed.

That's the thing! SimCity could have been offline, but they kept it online-only for piracy issues. Destiny is an online game. They really make it seem like the persistent online world is a big part of what the game is, not just a piracy preventer. We'll see, but I trust Bungie.

Based on how douchey they've been thus far about Destiny, I'm sort of expecting them to fail.

I'm not calling Destiny an MMO, it's the easiest thing to compare it to. It has a persistent online world...so obviously...you'll need to be online. Saying they should use an always online "model" for a PERSISTENT online world, is like saying MMOs should have an offline mode.

No. I was referring to games like SimCity. If the game should not require it, do not support that model. EA and the developers of SimCity LIED to their user-base saying it could not be an offline game, all so they could shove an anti piracy measure down their paying customers throats.

Like I said in my comment, I have not followed Destiny, so I hope Bungie proves me wrong. I really do.

While I'm happy they are confident in their ability to make quality releases, they certainly could be a bit less smug about it. On another, more important topic: DON'T BUY THIS GAME, do what CliffyB said, speak with your wallet and stop the horrible trends of Always-online and Microtransactions from consuming video games. Sorry for that rant but I thought that the SimCity debacle would put on hold the Always-online DRM crap.

That's what I've been saying! Let the developers know with your wallets that things like always online DRM is unacceptable.

If its a persistent world then always being online would be necessary, some games Im okay with that idea but a game like SimCity didnt need it. If you can predownload this game and then just get some unlocked data to play on release day it would lessen the server problems many other games have had. Its unfortunate that the "bad apples" of always online games have made many gamers see red whenever they hear it now. Have enough reliable servers to handle the sold games, beta test as many problems release day is going to give you that you can imagine, and have your devs ready to fix new problems day 1.