There's so little RPG element to the game, and there isn't chat, group tools, trading, or any other social interaction available in the game (for the most part). It's a long shot to think that can all just be tacked on, no matter what they want to call themselves. Sounds like the well has dried up on their current player base and the FPS space is crowded, so they're trying to rope in some fresh blood as they go F2P and hitch themselves to Stadia.
Now I see some misinformation here.
There is a lot of RPG element in the game.
There is Chat.
There are Group tools
There are Guilds.
Plenty of people are still playing, I don't know where the "it's dead" thing came from. If you login right now, you won't have an issue finding a group for any of the content.
Truth, there is no trading of items which is the only thing It doesn't have. I personally don't mind, because the game is so full of loot... there's no need to fight over gear, if you see it, it's yours.
You don't sound like a person who has played very much Destiny, if any at all, I def suggest you pick it up when it goes F2P you may be very surprised.
"Beliefs don't change facts. Facts, if you're reasonable, should change your beliefs."
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
It's not a bad game and I enjoyed a lot of the content it offered. It just wasn't that consistent in keeping up with a storyline. Had a ton of grinding for gear and weapons between story updates to give people something to do until the next update. TD2 is doing the same thing. All their dailies is redoing content for blueprints, god-role RNG gear and weapons, and fluff drops.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Please tell me how it’s an “MMO”. You don’t play with a ton of players, you don’t see a ton of players. Where does it fall into the “MMO” part? If you played with tons of people and saw tons of people than I could personally call it an mmo.
Why do you want to play with huge people so desperately?
I play games I like for what they are, I don't play those I don't like. I don't get hung up on terminology.
One of the things that made games like UO, EQ1, AC and AO was that they gave you the ability to connect with other people, build communities (guilds etc.) and do things together. And of course RG marketed UO by pushing this difference calling UO a "massively multiplayer online game".
Things were starting to change by the time DAoC came out. I can remember going on 200+ raids that were put together with as put secrecy and need to know as possible because "external communication" had started to creep in. "Spies" using fledgling internet chat protocols to communicate with the enemy.
And then there was the big "is GW1 an mmo or not" debate. Yep this is not new. Tech continued to evolve.
Ignoring GW1 though I gave Stronghold Kingdoms a try years back. One of many 2D browser PvP games. I doubt anyone has called this an mmo right? Yet in a very real sense a key elements of what made the early games enjoyable is present. People "band together" in alliances to overcome challenges. And they do this using external communication.
And since then VOIP is now common. The ability to communicate with others has exploded. A key features that made those early games "different" is now available in any game; any game - you could play a single player whilst chatting and sharing the same screen!
So whilst a Big Mac is indeed the same as a Big Mac 30 years ago the definition of an mmo - always a tricky thing to try and pin down - has changed. The group together and play with others bit is universal. Which means its harder than ever to define the term mmo.
Fax machines have been and gone. iTunes has been and gone. Tech - and the availability of tech - is still changing.
Something else though that hasn't changed is my approach. I still play games I like for what they are; I still don't play games that I don't like.
Cross save isn't enough for me to purchase again for PC. Now, Cross PLAY would be totally different.
Clearly cross-platform play is not unobtainable, as Dauntless has done it recently.
cross plat destiny would be a game changer...something tells me that this cross save idea is a precursor of sorts to a form of cross play in the next installment. maybe xbox/PC ?
That's my hope. Cross-play for PvE, but NOT for Crucible. That would be a shitshow.
Comments
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
There is a lot of RPG element in the game.
There is Chat.
There are Group tools
There are Guilds.
Plenty of people are still playing, I don't know where the "it's dead" thing came from. If you login right now, you won't have an issue finding a group for any of the content.
Truth, there is no trading of items which is the only thing It doesn't have. I personally don't mind, because the game is so full of loot... there's no need to fight over gear, if you see it, it's yours.
You don't sound like a person who has played very much Destiny, if any at all, I def suggest you pick it up when it goes F2P you may be very surprised.
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Why do you want to play with huge people so desperately?
One of the things that made games like UO, EQ1, AC and AO was that they gave you the ability to connect with other people, build communities (guilds etc.) and do things together. And of course RG marketed UO by pushing this difference calling UO a "massively multiplayer online game".
Things were starting to change by the time DAoC came out. I can remember going on 200+ raids that were put together with as put secrecy and need to know as possible because "external communication" had started to creep in. "Spies" using fledgling internet chat protocols to communicate with the enemy.
And then there was the big "is GW1 an mmo or not" debate. Yep this is not new. Tech continued to evolve.
Ignoring GW1 though I gave Stronghold Kingdoms a try years back. One of many 2D browser PvP games. I doubt anyone has called this an mmo right? Yet in a very real sense a key elements of what made the early games enjoyable is present. People "band together" in alliances to overcome challenges. And they do this using external communication.
And since then VOIP is now common. The ability to communicate with others has exploded. A key features that made those early games "different" is now available in any game; any game - you could play a single player whilst chatting and sharing the same screen!
So whilst a Big Mac is indeed the same as a Big Mac 30 years ago the definition of an mmo - always a tricky thing to try and pin down - has changed. The group together and play with others bit is universal. Which means its harder than ever to define the term mmo.
Fax machines have been and gone. iTunes has been and gone. Tech - and the availability of tech - is still changing.
Something else though that hasn't changed is my approach. I still play games I like for what they are; I still don't play games that I don't like.