Bungie Aiming Absurdly High With Destiny In New Trailer

Possibly the best-looking game of E3, the next-gen epic from the makers of Halo now also has a new trailer/developer-diary thing. In it, Bungie boasts: “This game has an activity for every mood.” Raise that bar, Bungie!

Destiny is slated for release on PS4, Xbox One, PS3 and Xbox 360 next year.


  • I so wish this was a next-gen launch title. Don’t want to have to wait until next year for it 🙁
    Do we know what time of the year it’s coming out yet? I’m hoping March, April or May.

  • What’s exciting me the absolute most about this… Bungie have decided hyper-realistic graphics are not required, it looks like they’ve opted for a very smooth experience… Which is very important to immersion.

    Based on this trailer, they’ve got anti-aliasing pumped way up… every edge was smooth! There was no crappy jagged lines everywhere (take a look at some of the edges in this screenshot from Halo 3 http://image.gamespotcdn.com/gamespot/images/2007/261/reviews/926632_20070919_screen005.jpg)

    Now if only they could guarantee the game would run at a consistent 60FPS I would be ecstatic! I’m sick of games being locked at 30FPS and dipping to 15 during heavy upclose combat (I’m looking at you Gears of War/ The Last of Us and Halo Reach!)

    • I’m just hoping they didn’t make too many concessions to the game by allowing it to be on current-gen as well as next gen. I feel like the graphics aren’t astounding me like I thought they would, like something like The Division has, and I can’t help but feel, with both this, and Assassin’s Creed 4, current-gen is to blame.

      I know graphics aren’t everything, but damn it, this is next-gen time, and I want to be blown away the way I was went I first booted up Oblivion or Fight Night on 360.

      • I know it’s about the money but yeah seems like a wasted opportunity to me… I don’t find that any of the release games for the next-gen consoles really ‘blow me away’ unfortunately.

        Same as PC gaming, they always sort of cater to the lowest common denominator.

        • Yeah, it’s like, every single innovation that ever occurred happened in the face of great risk. This risk-averse executive driven industry is all about playing it safe. I’m getting really bored with games overall because of it.

          The Last Of Us was the first game in a long time that made me say to everyone, you have to play this, even my mother, who hates games, sat down and watched my brother play through the entire thing, start to finish. You can only imagine the story and gameplay concessions that would have been made if they weren’t allowed to take those risks. I also feel like that game should have been a release title for PS4 instead, it felt next gen in so many ways. And they wouldn’t have to change anything except boosting the graphics and physics.

  • Love how it is always reported as an Xbox game yet all the way through there is Sony stuff… Including the ps4 controller 😉
    But who cares? This game is looking awesome, maybe it can transcend the console war and bring love and enlightenment to the gaming nation. 🙂

    • Ol’ Sage. He worries me though. He was brought in to take over lead sandbox design for Halo Reach, which most people consider the weakest Halo multiplayer experience, adding in loadouts, armour abilities, the much hated bloom and the even more hated armour lock. And the first thing he talks about in the vidoc is ‘specials’. I hope they remember why they were the once the creators of the greatest competitive console shooter and it wasn’t because of super powers.

        • In don’t know anyone who feels that way, not a soul. All my mates loves reach and played a lot of it tho, but go to any forum or some place similar and the consensus is Reach wasn’t the best multiplayer.

          But it had great Forge and theatre and all kinda of other improvements you can’t deny though. It was a top experience despite bloom, AL and AAs.

        • Reach was the turning point for me. Halo 2&3 was the peak of halo mp. Reach was terrible and 343 difnt redeem themselves with 4.

          • I’m can’t give an informed opinion on the quality of Halo 4’s multiplayer cause I can’t get a good connection game.

      • i understand that what he introduced to halo wasn’t that popular because people didn’t feel that the changes suited what Halo MP was meant to be. Personally I don’t think there was anything wrong with the elements he introduced (I loved Reach), but i can understand how people would not feel great about the experience being changed too much.

        One thing we’ll have to keep in mind though is that despite it being made by Bungie, this game is not Halo. They can implement whatever powers, elements, specials or whatever they want, because they aren’t restricted to the Halo legacy. This an entirely new game, so they have the freedom to make it however they see fit.

        • Yeah, if they’re gonna make some big changes to their formula it makes sense to do it with an entirely new franchise.

          And let me say, I loved Reach a lot, I played days and days of it, and I’m not against change big change, big or small. I didn’t want Reach to be Halo 3.5

          The problem for me wasn’t the nature of the things they added, rather the way these changes went against the core values of Halo. Bungie talked about the golden tripod of gameplay, guns, melee, grenade. And they also talked about a competitive playing field, free of randomness. I loved equipment from Halo 3, it was fair, you had to obtain it like anyone else on the map. When a person just spawns with invincibility or invisibility, the competitive nature evaporates. If you earn your advantage, there’s conflict and improvement, if you spawn with your advantage, your tripod of gameplay becomes not a tripod.

          Bungie also talked about randomness diluting gameplay and how skill should determine your success, Luke Smith even said “two men enter, the better man lives” but with bloom, two men enter, the man who’s bloom grants him a headshot lives. Or perhaps one man waits for his bloom to retract while the other man takes a takes with full bloom. It’s a dice roll, it comes down to chance if he wins or loses.

          Reach was had elements that diluted the pure competitive nature of the game.

          Halo 4 took that to a whole new level though.

  • Still want more details on how the multiplayer can be filtered… and how invasive those public events will be… I’d love to run around this world and see a person every so often, going about their business, but I don’t want to see them often…

    • I would assume something along the lines of Guild Wars 2, they are just there, you either participate or not.

      Like GW2 though, there would be major incentives to joining public events

      • Yea, it looked like it’d be that way. Haven’t touched GW2 since about a month after launch, but it just seemed like more of the same (as far as MMOs go, at least), sacrificing quality for scale. This looked like it would be able to avoid the MMO pitfalls that have plagued the genre since everyone started aping WoW.
        The other thing that concerns me with this (and some other “more connected” titles next gen) – business model. Bungie are talking about Destiny with a ten year plan – how are they going to fund this? Microtransactions? Ugh. Subs? Ugh.
        I’m optimistic, but there’s just not enough information available yet to push it into “must buy” territory.

        • I’m not against subs… the micro-transactions though uggh.

          They are slowly ruining the game, rather than deliver quality goods, its all about the incentive , keep you in the game longer so we can nickle and dime you more.

          At least with a sub, you have paid, they take that money and make new content and that’s it…

  • i dont like how it goes to 3rd person when you use your abilities. but everything else is sweeeet. now im just gona wait for the PC version.

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!