You can argue about what "competitive" is, but these folks are asking for a specific form of competition, and arguing semantics over the choice of wording doesn't make that specific thing any less the thing they want. I can tell you all about how I think tennis would be more "competitive" with a more or less strict ruleset, and I might or might not be right, but people who want to play traditional tennis would still want to play traditional tennis a vice versa.

EDIT: I do think it's silly to say this more "competitive" mode is inherently better though too. I like Destiny as it is, but I'd also like to try this new form too. They both sound like fun to me, and they obviously both serve different purposes.

Something something Sith something absolutes.

To me I feel the same as I did about MLG in Halo 3 - pared down, but mechanically familiar. It was still Halo, it felt like Halo, but by controlling variables it made the game more consistent and yes, more traditionally competitive.

Wouldn't the most competitive thing be to leave all that in? To make it so that you have to deal with everything? React? Adapt? It seems like banning the stuff you don't like and making the game more predictable is the opposite of what you would want if you want competition. Yes you want skill to shine, but part of that skill should be dealing with all the tricks the enemy can throw at you.

Like seeing a warlock about to launch a Nova Bomb and blinking out of the way. (Guilty, your honor.)

To me I feel the same as I did about MLG in Halo 3 - pared down, but mechanically familiar. It was still Halo, it felt like Halo, but by controlling variables it made the game more consistent and yes, more traditionally competitive.

Wouldn't the most competitive thing be to leave all that in? To make it so that you have to deal with everything? React? Adapt? It seems like banning the stuff you don't like and making the game more predictable is the opposite of what you would want if you want competition. Yes you want skill to shine, but part of that skill should be dealing with all the tricks the enemy can throw at you.

Blink --> Shotgun is actually really, really difficult to pull off consistently, and requires a high degree of skill to use with maximum effectiveness.

No.

Maybe if your look sensitivity is 3 you'd have trouble adjusting in time(?), but otherwise it's just "I have to be next to you. Now I'm next to you".

I rarely run Voidwalker or Bladedancer because I don't like their supers or melee abilities as much as I like Gunslingers and Sunsingers, but when I do I blink, and it makes 1v1 fights easy mode. Maybe that's because not enough people have enough "understanding" of the mechanics, and how to counter it, but a semi-invulnerable insta-teleport move is ridiculous in a game where Shotguns are so... Umm... "creatively balanced".

But how long did it take you to figure out exactly where you'd go after each blink? When to do it to make that perfect jump right next to the guy? When to blink behind him? That blinking cancels reloads and you have to think about that? That you can't blink 3 times in a row? That's all skill. When I first unlocked blink I never used it because I couldn't figure out how to jump onto any platform that was higher than ground level.

On the defensive side, there's a slight delay (it's really short, like .25 seconds, but if you're not lagging, you can hit it every time) after a blink in which you can counter-shotgun them (and it feels so good to just see a corpse pop out of mid-air). Also, the blink shotgun guys are screwed at long range, so if you see one approaching your best bet is to start backing up (or to jump into the air so when they blink they'll be below you). In my recent experience, blinking attackers tend to use it to flank more often that directly approach you, so it's a game of tracking them like ___/-___/-___ as they bounce into the air. You get used to the motion. But again, that's skill.

In the interest of full disclosure, I also use blink on my hunter, but I'm a hawkmoon / sniper / HMG blinker rather than a shotgun guy. I use it to close the distance to capture points more quickly, and occasionally to try and dodge incoming fire. It's not really an offensive tool for me as my strength when attacking is in the mid to long ranges. Though I just ran my Sunsinger to rank 5 IB without blink, and that was fine, too. I really like the burst of speed jump for warlocks in PvP.

I guess I shouldn't begrudge the option. The question in my head, though, is: is Destiny without supers Destiny?

To me I feel the same as I did about MLG in Halo 3 - pared down, but mechanically familiar. It was still Halo, it felt like Halo, but by controlling variables it made the game more consistent and yes, more traditionally competitive. Not everyone wants that, obviously, and I'm a major proponent of videogames for fun first, don't get me wrong. Rockets on Prisoner 4eva.

But I really enjoyed MLG. It was the great gunplay and movement of Halo, but with a totally different style of play. They felt different enough to be different gametypes, in the same way that Elimination is so similar but so different to ToO. If you can take the existing gametypes and double the number just by adding some constraints, I say go for it.

Not everyone will like them, but not everyone likes Control, or Rumble. Options are always good, so long as you're not oversaturated.

It definitely would fill a void felt after the Halo switch over. Having set classes and some visual predictability would, to some effect, make the game's focus on the gunplay. It'd be less of "Oh that guy had Thorn" and more of "Oh that guy was better at shooting... or knowing what I was capable of"

Imagine doing trials with these rules. It would be very boring indeed. Half of the fun is looking at the players, figuring out what they are going to try based on their weapon loadout, tracking who still has their super and when they'd likely use it, denying the enemy clutch plays all the while trying to pull off your own. If it were just straight up "who is a better shot with their pulse rifle", then it would really be less complex and enjoyable.

That being said, I think that while I disagree with their solutions, I certainly agree with the problem that they've identified: Time to Kill in Destiny is too quick.

I am okay with this, because it simply emphasizes different skills than Halo does. Since you die so quickly, knowing where you can safely move, and knowing what lines of sight will net you kills is very important. It's less your skill as a gunfighter and more your skill with tactics.

Take Supers and Heavy away from Destiny? No. Bad idea.

Let me play without Supers and Heavy every now and then if I feel like it? Cool I guess.

I guess I shouldn't begrudge the option. The question in my head, though, is: is Destiny without supers Destiny?

Let me play without Supers and Heavy every now and then if I feel like it? Cool I guess.

http://projecthawk.org

Take a look at their proposed rules for 'competitive play'. It's ridiculous! This finally confirms that hardcore competitive PvP gamers care less about the game, and more about being able to beat other people.

The short version, is that basically each class can only use a specific set of skills. No Exotics. No reforgable shotguns. No supers. No heavies. Shit man, the way heavy weapon ammo works is what makes Destiny Destiny! Essentially you'd be left with a game that's far less engaging.

This is exactly why I dislike hardcore competitive PvP games and players. They want the most boring possible version of the game instead of tweaking things slightly to keep all the possibilities open.

I personally think that a 'competitive' game going by their terms is simply far less interesting and engaging. Bungie. I beg you, please do not listen to these clowns. Keep Destiny PvP largely the way it is. Just fix exotic hand cannons and shotguns and call it a day.

Oh, and you should drop your heavy ammo if you are killed by a primary or a special.

Disclaimer: haven't read it because that kind of stuff isn't very interesting to me.

I think I agree with you. Destiny's PVP is unique, and making it more predictable wouldn't make it more interesting, IMHO.

I suspect the game is designed so that even less skilled players can feel powerful and effective a few times per game. I'm all for that, but of course I would be.

If people are going to begrudge that--if they have a problem with luck as an element, then it seems to me that Destiny inherently provides many ways to frustrate, from loot drops to spawn points. I wonder why they still play.

On the other side of the coin they're adding Mayhem, which sounds just dreadful. I got a little taste of it this IB as we had 2 teams super-chaining on Anomaly to the point where it was constant instakills. It might not be as bad on larger maps, but it was a really tiresome experience.

I assumed I was the only one that thought this when Mayhem was announced. I think it sounds terrible. It sounds like it's going to basically be "use you're super, get some kills, get killed by super, respawn, repeat."

Don't knock it 'til you try it, I guess, but I don't see a scenario where this is fun.

But I'm terribad at crucible, so if I couldn't use blink, long range shotguns, or The Last Word, I'd be screwed.

Completely fair, balanced games suck. I'd never win.

I remember once when I was good at the SWAT playlist in Halo. Then I played talented people.

Completely fair, balanced games suck. I'd never win.

Of course, they justify this all by arguing that "it encourages skill" which I think is cockamamey. The current model also encourages skill, just not to the degree that a skilled player will literally never die.

I think you just nailed down what irritates me about the "pro" FPS crowd in general. In their minds, anything less than an even draw in terms of base character and weapon stats is unacceptable. It's very tiresome, and anyway, plenty of those games already exist. What's the point of changing Destiny to fit that mold?