Also, once I really get into the meat of Dawnguard I feel like it's going to become the best ally I could have.

Have you played it before? No spoilers... but yes. Yes. Dawnbreaker all day erry day. By the end, it's Torgue-tastic.

That's true with most, if not all, games.

But with MMOs, their sheer scale demands a level of content generation not currently possible.

3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.

But if the same developers making a whole new game out of the blue is financially viable, your statement is inherently flawed.

A theoretical state doesn't really help here, I think. Evidence seems to support his statement; there's nothing empirical to disprove it, right?

You see, I was trying to argue that making new content for a game and making a brand new game are very similar in nature. In fact, it is of my opinion that making new content for an existing game is actually cheaper than making a new game most of the times.

I was arguing that, if it is financially viable for a company to continuously put out games like CoD on an yearly basis, it is not a stretch to think it would be financially viable to put out new content on an existing game (that has hooks for it, of course) on a bi-monthly basis. I am of the opinion that this argument undermines Cody's statement.

Like Cody kinda already said, CoD is a unique beast with resources unavailable to most. If an MMO could do those kind of numbers, maybe we'd get the game we want. Maybe not.

Take a page from Skyrim and the Daedric artifact quests? Dawnbreaker specifically is a perfect example. Unique elements (flying far above Skyrim to parlay with a god), one of the best dungeons, a difficult final boss, and a totally awesome reward (make the undead explode and flee in terror!).

<3 Dawnbreaker. It was actually the first Daedric artifact I happened across in Skyrim and that whole experience really drew me in. It's one of my favorite things in that game and I feel like it's under-appreciated. My character doesn't use swords, but I keep Dawnbreaker on my companion because I think it looks cool.

Also, once I really get into the meat of Dawnguard I feel like it's going to become the best ally I could have.

explored some of Kingdoms of Amalur

I REALLY want to get that one. I played the demo and enjoyed it a lot, and it was such a fantastically beautiful thing to look at. But because of what happened to the developer, i don't know if I want to play it - I'm afraid of the heartbreak when it's over and I realize the planned sequels are never going to happen.

I always enjoy playing an RPG and an FPS alternately for a few months, allowing me to go slow or fast dependent upon my mood. It also usually allows me to enjoy both fantasy and sci-fi settings without getting too much of one for too long of time.

Totally get this. I bounce between Destiny and Skyrim at the moment.

I was arguing that, if it is financially viable for a company to continuously put out games like CoD on an yearly basis, it is not a stretch to think it would be financially viable to put out new content on an existing game (that has hooks for it, of course) on a bi-monthly basis. I am of the opinion that this argument undermines Cody's statement.

CoD sells 15 million units at 60 dollars each. Do the math.

DLC sells for less and in smaller numbers.

Plus, you are overlooking the notion of 'critical mass' where you have to have a large amount of well integrated and connected content for it to be worthwhile and more than the sum of the parts. Another reason why small DLC releases aren't as good creatively.

That's true with most, if not all, games.

But with MMOs, their sheer scale demands a level of content generation not currently possible.

3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.

But if the same developers making a whole new game out of the blue is financially viable, your statement is inherently flawed.

A theoretical state doesn't really help here, I think. Evidence seems to support his statement; there's nothing empirical to disprove it, right?

You see, I was trying to argue that making new content for a game and making a brand new game are very similar in nature. In fact, it is of my opinion that making new content for an existing game is actually cheaper than making a new game most of the times.

I was arguing that, if it is financially viable for a company to continuously put out games like CoD on an yearly basis, it is not a stretch to think it would be financially viable to put out new content on an existing game (that has hooks for it, of course) on a bi-monthly basis. I am of the opinion that this argument undermines Cody's statement.

Eventually eventually eventually. Don't get me wrong, that would be awesome, but guessing we'll see a lot of crap until then.

Yeah, me too. :(
Doesn't mean I'll automatically bash at a game just because it is defined as a MMO, though.

... because the MMO genre is objectively bad.

Jeez. An arrogant and at this point tiresome statement.

It's been qualified and nobody has been able to refute it:

2. Content takes longer to make than to play.
3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.

A MMO does not have to operate soley or perhaps even mostly on content generated by the parent company. The whole point of being massively multiplayer is that you can play with and against creative, unpredictable humans. In my favorite MMOs it is player actions that drive continued player interest with pregenerated content either being a minor part of the game or being completely nonexistent.

Examples:
- In Urban Dead, a human survivor / zombie attacker web game there is no ongoing story or similar content. It is all player vs player. Despite this thousands of players group together to coordinate the assault or defense of key sectors and structures within the doomed city the game takes place in. They have done so for several years with security patrols and recon and well planned, multistage attacks and defenses keeping people coming back for. The Seige of Craiger Mall, an entirely player generated battle where new innovative strategies were employed by both sides, is still legendary many years later.

- In Cyber Nations the basic gameplay of collecting taxes to grow your nation to buy more a powerful military so you can defeat an enemy who is trying to do the same has remained largely unchanged for nearly a decade. The game has zero story and instead runs on player generated treaties, provocations, off site spying, complex economic rebuild plans, and years old grudges. There is no outpacing of the developer generated content here either.

- The spiritual precursor to Cyber Narions was a game called Nation States that had as much or more player generated intrigue but had no grind. Your nation simply grew over time but its size did not matter. There was no military to build or money to manage. Instead battles were based on coordinating the mass unrestrictable movement of players from one alliance to another in order to field enough votes to gain control of that alliance. No grind. No content to run out of.

- In EVE Online there is a thin layer of story but the real draw is the complex functioning economy, the conflicts of player alliances, and the challenge of combined arms warfare with different players playing vastly different roles within even a small fleet. The game has changed much more than the others over its life and certainly people have completed each new piece of the ongoing storylines but I doubt people keep paying for the small amount of story content. Again it's the massively multiplayer part along with the game world that are themselves the draw.

4. Therefore, content is stretched out, time gated, or padded with grind, all of which are bad things.

And if a MMO doesn't run on content updates or new raids or any of that? Also your insistence that grind itself is bad is highly suspect. It was the gameplay mechanics of money earning and resource trades and obtaining a military and rebuilding after a defeat that drew thousands of players from Nation States to Cyber Nations.

5. MMOs must be riddled with bad things, therefore the genre is bad.

No. MMOs can be nearly any shape and size. Grind can be an integral part of the game, can't have a functioning economy without limits on supply and demand for instance, or it can even simply not exist.

Therefore...?

I've never seen playing other games as somehow a slight for my love for Bungie games. :)]

That's because we're polygamerous. Yeah, that's a thing now.

It's been qualified and nobody has been able to refute it:

1. MMOs need people online all the time by definition. To be massively multiplayer.

Can't argue against the name of the genre, but there are several MMOs which can still be enjoyed solo.

2. Content takes longer to make than to play.

That's true with most, if not all, games.

But with MMOs, their sheer scale demands a level of content generation not currently possible.

3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.

But if the same developers making a whole new game out of the blue is financially viable, your statement is inherently flawed.

A theoretical state doesn't really help here, I think. Evidence seems to support his statement; there's nothing empirical to disprove it, right?

4. Therefore, content is stretched out, time gated, or padded with grind, all of which are bad things.

That is usually true in MMOs, I'll grant you that. I still hope some out-of-the-box developers will eventually do one that circumvents those.

Eventually eventually eventually. Don't get me wrong, that would be awesome, but guessing we'll see a lot of crap until then.

5. MMOs must be riddled with bad things, therefore the genre is bad.

So, in essence, my main point is that the word "must" in there might be stretching it.

We can imagine exceptions to "must" all day long, but what real examples are there? I dunno, man. MMOs are rough.

It's been qualified and nobody has been able to refute it:

1. MMOs need people online all the time by definition. To be massively multiplayer.

Can't argue against the name of the genre, but there are several MMOs which can still be enjoyed solo.

2. Content takes longer to make than to play.

That's true with most, if not all, games.

3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.

But if the same developers making a whole new game out of the blue is financially viable, your statement is inherently flawed.

4. Therefore, content is stretched out, time gated, or padded with grind, all of which are bad things.

That is usually true in MMOs, I'll grant you that. I still hope some out-of-the-box developers will eventually do one that circumvents those.

5. MMOs must be riddled with bad things, therefore the genre is bad.

So, in essence, my main point is that the word "must" in there might be stretching it.

I've never seen playing other games as somehow a slight for my love for Bungie games. :) ...

I didn't mean to imply that. My history with video games is different than that of most people here, I imagine, in that I didn't have a console or a computer growing up (the original Xbox was my first console, not counting the Pong machine I had as a kid). I played in the arcades, then moved to the early Mac games, then finally got a computer capable of running a Bungie game, and for years they were my go-to game company with few exceptions (like Deus Ex).

I have played a few games since Destiny came out. I played through Halo 2 again. Played some great Halo CE custom matches with old friends. I played some of the Walking Dead (thinking that by now surely they would have fixed the lack of inverted!). Started The Unfinished Swan, which is a nice change of pace. What I haven't felt motivated to do is play something that requires a significant time investment, like Shadow of Mordor or my long overdue playthrough of Mass Effect 2 with femshep. I'm sure that day is coming.

What I really like about Destiny at this point in its life and mine is the ability to drop in and play a few Crucible rounds, missions/patrols, or a daily/weekly and then jump back out. It's really easy to get to something fun quickly and still be able to hop out and go back to real life crap. Hopefully I'll have more time to play more regularly and with DBO brethren soon.

Yeah, it's good for that. Hope we get to play sometime soon.

... because the MMO genre is objectively bad.

Jeez. An arrogant and at this point tiresome statement.

It's been qualified and nobody has been able to refute it:

1. MMOs need people online all the time by definition. To be massively multiplayer.
2. Content takes longer to make than to play.
3. Making frequent content is not financially viable to keep players routinely playing.
4. Therefore, content is stretched out, time gated, or padded with grind, all of which are bad things.
5. MMOs must be riddled with bad things, therefore the genre is bad.

... because the MMO genre is objectively bad.

Jeez. An arrogant and at this point tiresome statement.

Since both of the things wou want are exotic, you should keep an eye on the Xûr thread.

I enjoy the Missives given by the Bounty Tracker for the exotics, so if these could be taken to the next level, woven into a story or a set of missions with some extra/alternate parameters, that would be awesome. I think it would be equally as enjoyable to have clear ways to get the gear you want, so making stepped bounties/stories for them too would be great.

Take a page from Skyrim and the Daedric artifact quests? Dawnbreaker specifically is a perfect example. Unique elements (flying far above Skyrim to parlay with a god), one of the best dungeons, a difficult final boss, and a totally awesome reward (make the undead explode and flee in terror!).

EDIT: oh god can you imagine something like Sanguine's quest in Destiny?

This is all taking Destiny from the realm of MMO into the realm of RPG, which is where it should have been in the first place because the MMO genre is objectively bad.

I enjoy the Missives given by the Bounty Tracker for the exotics, so if these could be taken to the next level, woven into a story or a set of missions with some extra/alternate parameters, that would be awesome. I think it would be equally as enjoyable to have clear ways to get the gear you want, so making stepped bounties/stories for them too would be great.

Take a page from Skyrim and the Daedric artifact quests? Dawnbreaker specifically is a perfect example. Unique elements (flying far above Skyrim to parlay with a god), one of the best dungeons, a difficult final boss, and a totally awesome reward (make the undead explode and flee in terror!).

EDIT: oh god can you imagine something like Sanguine's quest in Destiny?