{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/27/2017 5:20:20 PM
3
-
For some perspective: Destiny 1 was in development for 8 years, and you see how that ended up. So, 2+2 being 4... yes, 3 years is a rush job by comparison, especially for a game of this scope. *shrug* Whichever. Honestly, i hope you guys have fun. I'm not going to play it. If it ends up being the best game of all time, shame on me for doubting. But if it ends up being yet another stone on the string of Bungie's false hopes and flat storytelling, well... joke's on you.
-
The 8 years that D1 was in development resulted in a 'rush job' of a game, so I'm happy with 3 years. Besides, if they've only just talked bout it now, it's probably still a couple of years away. We might not see it until 2018 at the absolute earliest.
-
D2 is being released Fall 2017, no later. Age of Triumph wouldn't be released tomorrow if it weren't. Destiny has such a huge community and word of mouth that it doesn't need to spend a year and a half advertising it, that'd just be a waste of money.
-
Of course I'm sure they'd love to release it in Fall 2017, but when was the last time that a game came out during the release window predicted [i]before[/i] its official announcment?
-
8 Years with a small team since they still had Halo on their hands. Bungie needed to move away from a franchise that they had been with most of their careers and write a completely new story. Making a transition like that wouldn't be easy.
-
Yeah, but like 90% of the stuff got scraped at the last minute
-
Yes, which is why this is a rush job, so that there's less time for someone to come in and edit the crap out of it.
-
That's because they were developing a brand new engine from the ground up. Now, that engine is being carried over to D2, so 3 years is reasonable.
-
Guess so.
-
[quote]3 years is a rush job?[/quote]
