Destiny Not Coming To PC, Bungie Deny Reality

Obviously concept art, what with this not being on PC graphics.

Halo creators Bungie have announced the platforms for their next game, online shooter Destiny, and PC is not amongst them. With 360 and PS3 versions certain, and next-gen consoles hinted at, it would seem to make a certain degree of sense to release the game on the format most suited to online FPS. But no, because according to Bungie, of mouse and keyboard players, “Nobody plays shooters the way they used to… ’cause nobody wants to.”

This was the studio’s co-founder, Jason Jones, according to Destructoid. To give you the full statement, so you can make your own interpretation of his words, he said:

“We did a bunch of ambitious things on Halo deliberately to reach out to people. We limited players to two weapons, we gave them recharging health, we automatically saved and restored the game – almost heretical things to first-person shooters at the time. We made the game run without a mouse and keyboard. And now nobody plays shooters the way they used to play them before Halo ’cause nobody wants to.”

There are two possibilities. Jason Jones has never heard of Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, or any other number of hugely played online FPS games for the PC. Or this is a misunderstanding. I’m sure what he meant to say was, “We couldn’t be bothered to make a PC version,” but for some reason it came out as, “Blurble flurble flipple-flopple ploooooooo.”

Perhaps he misspoke, perhaps he’s a braggart who thinks Halo changed the face of FPS while no one else noticed, perhaps he just meant the regenerating health thing, and not PC at all? But I’m pretty sure I’d like to see him going up against some of the best online FPS players in the world, him with his joystick, them with their mice and keyboards that they haven’t been told they don’t want to use any more.


  1. GeForceFX says:

    It is really laughable when people actually think you can even compare gamepads vs mouse. It’s just silly. It’s like you’d try to change your wheel with a screwdriver. Not fit for purpose!

    • Heliocentric says:

      Except, not at all. I play Arma2, BF2(including project reality) with a pad when I’m driving tanks flying things etc, the limited rotational speed fits the pad perfectly. Oh, that’s not FPS? Well, it sort of is, once the game has a limited rotational speed as in console halo it becomes part of the balance hierarchy . Halo is built to be played with a pad, a mouse would just break it, much like playing Halflife (1&2) with a pad is like pulling teeth.

      An unfortunate is that many games completely avoid verticality because pad users cant handle it, I remember the architecture of some games like Bioshock 2 being completely wasted on pad gamers who never look up because looking back down takes too freaking long.

      Often console games get around the issue by using vertical architecture in stealth and non combat sections but generally? The games are flatter than Doom.

      • Eclipse says:

        having a limited rotational speed, is having a movement that’s not 1:1 with yours, it’s a step back not forward. Aiming with a mouse is a 1:1 thing, you don’t rotate towards a point, you just aim there.
        So yeah, mouse aiming wins for both precision and quickness. As you said, playing with a pad feels like driving something

        • Heliocentric says:

          I don’t disagree with you, it does feel like driving the moon rover or something, but its wrong to say “it the wrong tool for the job”, its also a skill leveller, even super pro console shooter players actually moment to moment twitch ability is limited by the control method, easing balance.

          I cant stand to play FPS with a pad either.

          • mutopia says:

            You should really try the mouse+keyboard for flying helicopters in Arma2, it’s impossible to pull off some of the more fanciful manoeuvring with a joystick, let alone a gamepad. I make it a point not to get into choppers with gamepad pilots because they usually can’t do emergency landings and evade fast enough.

            PS. That gamepads “act as a balancing agent” is ridiculous. That’s like saying we’d all perform more similarly shit when we all rotate our monitors 90 degrees.

          • Syra says:

            I rotate my monitor in salute to you sir.

          • chopsnsauce says:

            @mutopia surely that’s bollocks?

            If mouse and keyboard are so great, why do real helicopters use joysticks? Why do cars have steering wheels?

            Think in might have something to do with analog input giving a much finer degree of control over a keyboard.

          • Alexrose says:

            @chopsnsauce When you are playing a video game and you point your mouse 90° left and then the helicopter slerps to that angle, it is a better control scheme. You cannot compare that to real life, when you’re inside the vehicle. They don’t have a flying camera behind their ship to show which direction the mouse is pointing to, and hence where the plane is slerping to, and that would also require planes to have some sort of interpolation PID controllers build in just for turning, instead of the pilot being able to hold down the joystick to turn.

          • JabbleWok says:

            A regular joystick is far from the ideal control system for a helicopter, but it’s still prefereable to a mouse or anything else I’ve tried. There are collective/cyclic controls out there, but they’re not particularly common or standardised.

            I think Bungie have just demonstrated, though, that using a console controller you’re more likely to shoot yourself in the foot.

          • mutopia says:

            @chopsnsauce; I was referring to Arma2 helicopters specifically. It’s one of the few simulation games where you’re better off with mouse+keyboard than with joystick. Obviously a good joystick is better suited for most simulation and flying games. Gamepads are not, however, unless it’s a very arcade-y game with all sorts of training wheels.

            It’s funny how easy Bungie play the media like this; they’ve never been PC developers in the first place, but they sure know how to kick up a fuss and draw attention among the PC crowd. All for a bloody dime-a-dozen MMOFPS from a company which in many ways pushed for the multi-platform nightmare that big publishers now find themselves in, releasing dreadful ports of console games to PC and subsequently blaming piracy for poor sales. Halo was nowhere near the first game to limit the gear you could carry, and both checkpoints and regenerative health are neither innovative nor desirable in most games, except where it makes sense. In a Bungie game however, it’s just the developer’s excuse to throw waves of enemies at the player(s) which is hardly innovative to be perfectly honest.

          • mickygor says:

            Alexrose, I sure as hell hope planes have PID controllers in them. Pilots might be better at dealing with the unexpected, but for an eventless flight I’d much rather rely on a controller than a sluggish human.

      • ShineyBlueShoes says:

        I think developers have come a long way in making shooters work on an analog stick because they didn’t have any other choice but to improve after Halo was light years ahead of it’s peers. On the PC though I think developers are actually largely neglecting the advantages of the mouse. It seems like so many titles now don’t even have basic mouse options beyond a simple sensitivity slider and often force mouse smoothing on. It works fine so they stop there.

      • djbriandamage says:

        Mice use absolute aiming, i.e., you can tilt 27 degrees up.

        Gamepads use relative aiming, i.e., you can rotate upward 16 degrees per second.

        That’s why I prefer gamepads for vehicles and mice for on-footing.

      • WoundedBum says:

        The verticality thing doesn’t seem right.

        I mean stuff like Dishonored is fine on a pad.

        • Heliocentric says:

          I covered that with stealth. You can have verticality all you like on a pad when you have no rush.

          • WoundedBum says:

            But Dishonored can be played as a balls out action game. With lots of speed etc. It works completely fine.

      • Xzi says:

        You realize that Halo and Halo 2 had PC releases, right? And whatever your opinions of those games might be, they certainly weren’t “broken.” They were better than the Xbox releases.

        There’s really no argument here, you can’t get a true measure of someone’s skill in certain genres on a gamepad. They are too slow and too imprecise. Thus the reason certain genres aren’t even playable on consoles. RTS comes to mind, and those games are arguably far more difficult to master than FPS games.

        • 2helix4u says:

          Halo was great on PC, so much so that I can’t get into Halo3+ because I miss the controls I fell in love with.
          Halo 2 was a goddamn mess. It was tied to Vista and pitifully optimised, requiring a high end PC despite being an original Xbox game and was laggy as hell.
          Bungie have been neglecting the PC audience for a long time that still would love them if they just threw us a goddamn Halo or two.

          • Phantoon says:

            In other words: suckers.

          • wazups2x says:

            Halo 2 PC was a terrible port. It horrible mouse acceleration which made it pretty much impossible to play accurately with a mouse.

          • Devan says:

            Just logged in to say I also loved the original Halo on PC. Gearbox added a lot of content (weapons, maps, vehicles) that the Xbox version didn’t have, and even though the promised editing tools were quite late it had a pretty active modding scene. Also, the physics were really fun to play around with especially with a trainer :P
            I still get urges to reinstall and play that game from time to time.

          • harveydanger says:

            That’s Microsoft’s call, not Bungie’s. Microsoft owns Halo. That is why they can keep making Halo games after Bungie has moved on.

        • wazups2x says:

          Halo 2 PC was a terrible port. It horrible mouse acceleration which pretty much made it impossible to play accurately with a mouse.

        • Ysellian says:

          Halo wasn’t that good of a game to be honest. First half was near perfection, but then the designers seemingly ran out of time for good ideas and bring in the headcrabs from Half Life, let you play through the worst level in history and then replay the first half part of the game again. If it wasn’t for the MS’s hype train (and probably one of the best sountracks ever). People would have seen the game for what it really was: A rushed game to meet the Xbox launch date.

          • Nesetalis says:

            I’m still waiting for Bungie to remember their best games. Which certainly wasn’t any in the Halo series.
            Marathon and Myth 1 and 2 were both fucking brilliant.. and both were PC.

            Obviously they spent too much time producing crap under microsoft to know what a good game is.. :<
            Halo wasn't bad by any stretch of the term, but it was not their best game, and is VERY far from my favorite.

          • Stan Lee Cube Rick says:

            @Nesetalis I have been hoping for another Myth game ever since I heard Halo was supposedly finished with 3.

      • Neurotic says:

        “Halo is built to be played with a pad, a mouse would just break it,”

        The sequels maybe, not the original. The original had enemy placement specifically for PC gamers. PC Gamer (UK) did a preview of it before it came out, and Bungie were mouthing off about how intelligently they’d designed the PC mob placement to accommodate the faster movements of the mouse.

      • SuicideKing says:

        I loved playing halo ce with a mouse and kb, in fact i still do.

        One of the tightest controls on any fps, imo.

        I’m pretty bad with first person shooters with the pad, even in halo sequels.

        BTW: with the pad, games almost always have aim assist on, unlike with the mouse.

    • HeavyStorm says:

      I don’t think this is about mouse vs. pad. After all, it’s a matter of taste, and this is a business decision. It’s about numbers, ROI, budget, etc. My feeling is, either Bungie can’t read the numbers (since I believe shooters sell pretty well on PC) or they are incapable (as in, incompetent) to develop for Windows. Those are the most plausible explanations I can think of.

    • Lagwolf says:

      Exactly playing an FPS with a console just sucks. It lacks precision and quality of play. Besides the fact I want to sit in front of my machine not half way across the bloody room playing it on the TV. This Bungie guy is a fool or a liar or both.

  2. Fallward says:

    Wow. Just wow.

    • Wild_Marker says:

      Wait what just happened? On Eurogamer they say:

      “On the possibility of a PC version, Parsons said: “We would absolutely love to be on the PC. If you talk to the people upstairs, we play it on all platforms. So, stay tuned.” No mention was made of a Wii U version.”

      So… I think this might have been a bit out of contect perhaps?

      • frightlever says:

        It’s just more adorable Walker link-bait to stir up the comments section. He has to do at least one a week. You learn to roll your eyes and move on. I merely comment to point out the obvious to the clamouring masses who haven’t figured this out yet. It’s a service.

        And you’re welcome.

        • Nick says:

          pretty much.

          • cowardly says:

            I wouldn’t say so, given that the official Destiny website itself doesn’t seem to consider that there is a PC version (link to It sounds very much like they’ve given up on the PC, at least for the moment.

        • ThinkAndGrowWitcher says:

          Very much. He’s actually one of the Giana sisters: you know, the one with infinitely twisted knickers.

      • Narzhul says:

        Pretty sure these are two different quotes from two different people. No idea if the COO is just making a PR non-answer, but the other guy clearly dislikes M/KB

    • innociv says:

      I can’t even say I’m mad.

      Sure he made the stupidest comment I’ve ever heard from a developer. Even stupider than the things Kotick says, yes.

      But you know what? The game doesn’t look fun. It sounds very ambitious, lots of buzz words and technical things, but it doesn’t sound fun. It sounds somewhere between Firefall, Skyrim, SWTOR, Mass Effect, so on; games that aren’t fun when you strip away the huge worlds. No one plays ME for the third-person-shooter gameplay mechanics. And really, Halo isn’t good compared to a good PC FPS, it was just good compared to console ones.

      I want a good FPS, a PC FPS, and it’s really hard to make a good FPS into a huge persistant world thing. Just look at Planetside and Borderlands. Those are bigger/longer games, but the mechanics are massive steps back compared to “tighter” fps.

      • bleeters says:

        If Mass Effect 3’s multiplayer is any indication, a whole lot of people play it for the third person shooting.

      • tyren says:

        Unless you’re talking specifically about ME1 and not the series as a whole, I’d strongly disagree with “no one plays Mass Effect for the shooting mechanics.”

      • SuicideKing says:

        still feel to this day that halo ce had the tightest fps control set of any post 2000 shooter, maybe except CS and Quake.

  3. rockman29 says:

    Resting on their laurels, kind of.

    Really bad of them. Cutting out a market like that.

    Overconfident methinks?

    • Fierce says:

      Don’t confuse blatant galaxy-spanning ignorance for overconfidence.

      Especially from a console game developer executive. Truly. Don’t.

      • dgz says:

        It’s naive to assume even for a second that his statement has anything to do with ignorance, rather than him bullshitting people for some reason like moneyz or something.

    • ShineyBlueShoes says:

      It’s probably because after they largely botched the PC version of Halo 2 (way late, required Vista, etc.) and it didn’t compare to the XBox version they assumed that was because of the market and not them.

      • harveydanger says:

        Halo 2 for PC was ported by a completely different developer, Hired Gun. Cool assumptions though.

    • mutopia says:

      Just plain idiotic. I’m not even part of the target audience but anyone can see the massive “flaw” in their thinking (put it in quotes because of course it’s actually just a lie).

  4. flashman says:

    Bungie is good at console games, so I understand if that’s where they want to focus. But it’s madness to contend that mouse and keyboard is out – and I won’t forget that Jason Jones thinks of us as second-class citizens, if and when Bungie decides to dip its toe back in the PC pool.

    • mckertis says:

      “Bungie is good at console games”

      Bungie is goot at HYPING console games. Seriously, did anyone really think Halo 3 was deserving of all the insanity that surrounded it ?

      • Steven Hutton says:

        Of course it didn’t. Halo 4 is a much better game as is Reach.

        The jizz-soaked 10/10 reviews that Halo 3 received were laughable. It was the six page love letter in Edge that finally put the nail in the coffin of my subscription.

        • ScubaMonster says:

          I personally thought Halo 3 was great with many cool moments. Reach was a snoozefest with hardly anything that stood out. It was basic Halo by the numbers with no memorable encounters. Nothing like climbing aboard that huge mechanical walker in Halo 3 to detonate it, no Flood, just a bunch of other stuff that made it far superior to Reach in every way (campaign that is). I’m enjoying Halo 4 quite a bit, it’s far better than Reach, but I wouldn’t say it outclasses 3’s campaign (but I’m not finished with it yet). I’d say it’s on par.

          And I’m sure someone will chime in with the space battles in Reach. An interesting change of pace, but not really anything too amazing. And a very short part of the overall game.

          • drewski says:

            And yet I found 3 to be largely tedious, the most formulaic Halo. Reach > 4 > 2 > Halo > 3.

            Opinions, eh.

          • innociv says:

            I agree. It had some really cool part, amazing maps/enviroments. I liked it a lot more than Halo2. I never played ODST or Reach, though. It’s basically Halo == Halo 3 > Halo2 for me.

            I agree with the other reply that Halo3 felt very “formulaic” though. Very well put together, but more mechanically designed and less passionate.

          • Henke says:

            For me it’s: 1>ODST>Reach>3. Haven’t played 2 or 4.

            Part 3 was the only one I couldn’t even bring myself to finish. Can’t quite put my finger on what was wrong with it either… just didn’t feel right.

      • Godwhacker says:

        Well, it played well enough, but it wasn’t exactly the most riveting storyline. They got rather caught up in their own pompous fiction, was was mostly second-hand ideas endlessly repeated.

        • PopeJamal says:

          “Well, it played well enough, but it wasn’t exactly the most riveting storyline. They got rather caught up in their own pompous fiction, was was mostly second-hand ideas endlessly repeated.”

          So much butt-hurt in this thread *sigh*

          -Why you no make for PC!!11!!! – Seriously? If YOU founded a company selling raspberry tarts, sold yourself to the devil, and then proceeded to made enough money from your tarts to buy your soul back from “Old Scratch”, why in the HELL would you even consider going into the apple pie business?

          Bungie does not need the PC market. Period. They are probably the most famous/successful console devhouse on the entire planet. They can do anything they wont for this next title and still pull in a shitload of money. And they actually deserve it because they made some damn good games. You don’t have to be a technical genius to make a good game and be ridiculously successful. The Beatles proved that “good enough” is a money maker as long as you do it the right way. Same with Bungie.

          -“Pompous Fiction” – Seriously? Do you even read modern science fiction? I’ll concede that the Halo story line isn’t very original, but neither is the bulk of what’s being printed. And let’s not even get into comparisons of other game fiction. The Halo story is light years ahead of 98% of everything else in the shooter market. If you want better story, you’ll need to go into RPGs, and most of those stories aren’t even as good as what Bungie has going on.

          -Second hand ideas endlessly repeated, huh? You mean like, literally everything else on the entire media market? We’ve been telling stories and making games for more than a few years now, so it’s a little ridiculous to imply that “Your game has to have completely new and unique ideas in it, or it’s shit.”

          If you don’t like Halo, then that’s fine, to each his own. But it’s painfully obvious that anyone who tries to say that any of the Halo shooters are complete shit has an axe to grind. Go pick on a shooter series that actually deserves the ridicule.

          Sure you’re entitled to your opinion, but don’t be a hater.

          • Phantoon says:

            They’re not shit.

            They’re just not great.

          • crizzyeyes says:

            I hate to start off with something disrespectful like this, but I sincerely hope your post is an utter troll.

            Your PC market to pie analogy is utterly ridiculous for a few reasons. First of all, once upon a time Bungie developed exclusively for computers, namely Macs. There was even a Mac port for Halo in the works (I can’t remember if this was actually released or not). If I’m not mistaken, Oni was their first venture into the console market, and it included a PC version as well. If Bungie laid off their entire Mac/PC development staff during their successful Halo years, well, that’s a poor decision on their part, but let’s presume that they did for the rest of the argument seeing as they haven’t ported or made a PC game in quite some time.

            Next, you state that there’s no reason for Bungie to venture into the PC market. I’m not entirely sure if you’re aware of even the most basic business practices, but I’ll give you a hint: more money is usually better, especially when it doesn’t come at the cost of the integrity of your company or product. If Bungie has the money, there’s absolutely no reason why they shouldn’t expand into the PC market. I wish I could throw up actual figures for Halo PC’s sales, but I can’t seem to find them anywhere (VGChartz’s “.01m” figure is quite obviously incorrect). Despite the fact that Halo’s PC port was outsourced to Gearbox, it was a solid port, and was soon expanded upon with its Custom Edition patch that added full map editing and mod support, basically making it a full-fledged PC game. I personally believe it’s the best PC port ever made. On the flipside, Halo 2’s port suffered because it was available only on an OS that was unpopular as soon as it was released, and it was poorly optimized. I assumed that Microsoft was dumb enough to think that this made no other Halo game worth porting and thus barred Bungie from doing so, but maybe that idiotic opinion has rubbed off on Parsons. To be honest, your opinion regarding this matter really makes me wonder why you are on RPS in the first place.

            Regarding that same paragraph about Bungie and the PC market, you seemingly contradict yourself, although I find it hard to determine: “And they actually deserve it because they made some damn good games. You don’t have to be a technical genius to make a good game and be ridiculously successful. The Beatles proved that “good enough” is a money maker as long as you do it the right way. Same with Bungie.”
            So first you state that Bungie deserves a “shitload of money” because they “made some damn good games.” Okay, fair enough. Next, you state that “The Beatles proved that ‘good enough’ is a money maker as long as you do it the right way. Same with Bungie.” Maybe I’m misinterpreting your statement here, but are you not saying that Bungie is just barely scraping by with “good enough” and making generous profits despite that? I’d also like to point out this statement: “You don’t have to be a technical genius to make a good game and be ridiculously successful.” I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to say here, but you certainly made yourself look like a fool saying it.

            The next part about story is entirely subjective, so I don’t think it’s particularly worth arguing over. I will say, however, that Bungie loses originality points for lifting so much inspiration from their previous shooter franchise, Marathon. In many ways, Halo is a reboot of that franchise.

            “Sure you’re entitled to your opinion, but don’t make it too different from mine, or I’ll throw a label at you.”

          • Lowbrow says:

            Crizzyeyes has nailed it, but I’d like to add that people aren’t actually entitled to their own opinions. That’s just something people say when they don’t want to admit they’re wrong.

          • Harlander says:

            It’s quite hard to stop people from having their own opinion though, short of serious head trauma

          • Xardas Kane says:

            Your comment is laughable, incorrect and a wonderful example of blind fanboyism, I honestly don’t know where to start.

            Bungie made computer games throughout the 90s, including the Marathon trilogy and the two Myth games. All those were on PC by the way. Originally when Halo was unveiled it was supposed to be on Macs, but was later bought by Microsoft.

            So let’s count – Bungie has made 12 games for Macs, 9 for PCs, Destiny is going to be their sixth console game. Yeah, some raspberry tarts they got there… And most well-known and successful console developers? Oh? Their last game, Reach, sold two times less than, say, GTA 4, but that’s OK, they got so many GOTY awards like… ummm, yeah, nevermind. In fact they haven’t made a game that was really among the very best in that respective year (arguably) since Halo. And it’s not like they haven’t been making games since then, you know. But as you yourself said (contradicting your pathetic statement that they are the most respected console dev out there) their games are just “good enough”. Off-topic, that isn’t the Beatles way. They weren’t good enough, they were the best.

            So what are we left with? Their “amazing story”? Ain’t that sweet, even you admit it’s bad, trying to justify its blandness with the assumption that everyone else sucks too. What a stellar argument, a rotten apple is good because there are other rotten apples as well. You should win an award for that one. And for ignoring, I don’t know, Half Life, BioShock, Deus Ex or Stalker

            But hey, since Bungie’s games are just “good enough” and their story is as bad as everyone else’s, they have every right to ignore a possible target market. o.O The Eternal Sunshine of the Fanboy Mind, ladies and gents.

      • Archipelagos says:

        Halo 3 was trash. I think the entire series is overrated nonsense but that’s neither here nor there.

        • PopeRatzo says:

          What he said.

        • grenadeh says:

          Halo 3 was garbage. I enjoyed none of it at all, and the only half decent story moment was when you rescued Cortana. Game sucks monkey balls, multiplayer included.

    • Teovald says:

      This game puts a lot of focus on multiplayer. Each time there is cross-platform multiplayer, pc gamers stomp console gamers (the gamepad simply can’t compete against keyboard + mouse in a fps).
      MeThink that maybe they are simply focusing on the platforms where they think they will make the more money and are just giving a shitty excuse (that will attract some free publicity).

      • gmcleod says:

        A gamepad in FPS is easily balanced against m+kb in games that have capped rotational speeds. A perfect example of this is Halo 2 PC, but also every other terrible console port fps we’ve had in the last few years. LANing halo 2 on pc with mates, I would constantly dominate with my 360 controller while they all had mouse and keyboard.

        This has all been said, but I’m sick of people white washing the entire debate with ‘mouse wins, always’.

        • wazups2x says:

          Of course when you completely handicap the keyboard and mouse players and then give the controller players auto-aim the controller players will win.

          However, when they are both on an equal playing field a mouse and keyboard player will dominate.

          • Deadly Sinner says:

            You don’t even have to handicap the k&m players to tilt the scales in the other direction. The Crysis 2 beta gave anyone who used a controller auto aim, which gave them the advantage. They took it out for the full game.

        • ChromeBallz says:

          Capped rotationsl speeds for m+kb is like having to drive blindfolded without arms or legs.

          Citing Halo 2 is one of the worst things you can do here too… Horrible game, horrible PC port, horrible in every single way.

          Also nice that you’re dominating PC players where they have to play with a ridiculous handicap, plus gamepads in Halo 2 have auto-aim turned on *which cannot be turned off*. Good job, winning with auto-aim. It’s like aimbots are suddenly okay.

        • Milky1985 says:

          Microsoft themselves have said that they did tests and M+KB won every time, the only way to balance with gamepads and M+KB is to basically hamstring the mouse users with limits etc to maintain the balance ala shadowrun, and that just annoys everyone as its crap.

          Its whitewashed with mouse always wins because people who are paid to do this sort of thing have actually done the research, and it does, its not a “master race” thing, its a fact backed up by evidence from a company that actually favors the console market at the current time (Microsoft)

          • Malibu Stacey says:

            Microsoft had a project where they pitted mediocre PC players using mouse+keyboard against elite console players using gamepads & the console players got destroyed -> link to

            Obviously it got dropped pretty fast because the bad publicity from this had it gone live would have impacted the XBOX team quite dramatically & since there is no PC gaming team at Microsoft worth mentioning…

      • welverin says:

        Exactly what I was thinking, just like Remedy trying to explain why Alan Wake was no longer coming out for PC, way back when (real reason, Microsoft keeping it exclusive to drive 360 sales).

  5. jellydonut says:




    Is this for real.

  6. Citrus says:

    That statement pretty much lists some of the worst things that have happened to FPS genre since it left PC platform and became consolyfied. What I am trying to say is that I seriously want to punch Jason Jones for doing these “ambitious things”.

    • pierow says:

      His statement reminded me of all the reasons I don’t want to play this game.

      • Fenix says:

        The fact that he mentions regenerating health as if it’s a good thing is kind of revolting, really.

        • Sinkytown says:

          I think regenerating health is a solid design decision in many cases. I’d like to see an argument against Halo’s energy shields.

          • lijenstina says:

            The reason why is popular because it is easier to implement; do it once – and it’s done.

            An engine or script function that has a timer attached to it and overlays the screen with some post processing effect is called if the health drops bellow a threshold – it works all the time. When the timer runs out if there is no further damage health goes back to full.

            With medkits you have a big balancing issue – where to place them – locations, how many so the game doesn’t have spikes of difficulty or becomes too easy, managing the inventory space/weight, making the meshes, and most importantly not bragging around how you did revolutionize gaming by making things simpler to do. :)

          • PsychoWedge says:

            Maybe it is easier to implement but the main reason for it are basically the enormously simplified level, combat and encounter designs. You just don’t have to plan anything, pace anything, structure anything if the player can infinitely reset the situation to starting conditions at every given moment in an encounter. It’s the same as the autosave thing. At this point I am honestly surprised that nobody jumped on the no ammo train that Bioware started in ME1 (maybe they did do it solely because they realized the shooter mechanics were horrible and didn’t want to force players do torture themselves more then necessary). Or maybe that is the next step. If there are no resources there and failure leads to a setback of a couple of seconds ago before the combat was entered you don’t have to design anything remotely more complex than dropping shitloads of dudes with guns in front of the player.

    • Alien426 says:

      Bungie has a history of weird platform choices.
      “Let’s make games for Macintosh, because there are no games on that. We’ll be the only ones there. Monopoly!”
      “Let’s not make Halo for PC. Let’s instead go to Xbox, because that’s the hot new shit. We’ll beat everyone else!”

      • Hmm-Hmm. says:

        Eh, the second one if a bit off the mark. Not only did they make their later games both for mac and pc (not sure if they ported them or not). Secondly, not making games for PCs was all Microsoft (at the start, at least). In case you weren’t aware, Microsoft bought them and used Halo to lure people to the X-box.

        • lijenstina says:

          Yeah. It’s like the Elop Effect. But with reverse cash flow. :)

  7. aDemandingPersona says:

    All I can think is he meant “nobody plays shooters that way *on the console toys* anymore”… Because.. well… they never have..

    • Nathan says:

      I disagree with the quote as much as you do, but to say that FPS games aren’t popular on console is pretty ridiculous. COD, Battlefield, Halo and MoH all sell ridiculous numbers of copies on consoles, and it wouldn’t surprise me at all to find that each console supports a larger FPS market than the PC.

  8. amateurviking says:

    I’m not sure from the quote that he’s referring to KB+M playing rather the nature of console FPS in general – in that context he has a point. Although the statement as a whole suggests his head has disappeared rather far up his own bottom however you look at it.

    Edit: Eurogamer quoted a chap call Pete Parsons (Bungie COO apparently) saying this: “We would absolutely love to be on the PC. If you talk to the people upstairs, we play it on all platforms. So, stay tuned.”

    So it may not be time for pitchforks quite yet :)

    Edit Edit: Just watched the ‘ViDoc’ and can indeed confirm that heads are very much lodged in bottoms.

    • Dances to Podcasts says:

      Too late. The rage cannot be stopped.

      • amateurviking says:

        I just hope history remembers that I tried to stem the tide.

        • Brigand says:

          It was an effort worthy of the heroes of old..

        • Tyrone Slothrop. says:

          Maybe the article above could be update with this quote as well, or would that mitigate this sumptuously aggravating click-bait?

        • Shivoa says:

          When the dust finally settles there will only be the victors and the fallen. Trying to prevent the war just ensures you will be listed as a traitor by both sides and eventually become one of the fallen.

  9. tehfish says:

    “Nobody plays shooters the way they used to… ’cause nobody wants to.”

    Or, because of the efforts of such developers:
    “Nobody plays shooters the way they used to… ’cause nobody codes these games for the PC anymore, so less people can play them..”

    You can’t purposely exclude PC players from the market, then blame PC players for not buying the PC games that no longer exist as an excuse for then not making PC games…

    f**k you, at least have the decency to admit the real reasons… *fuming*

  10. Tiax says:

    “perhaps he’s a braggart who thinks Halo changed the face of FPS while no one else noticed”

    Perhaps he’s simply dumb enough to think Halo was something else than a above-average console FPS.

    • Phantoon says:

      Timesplitters was better.

      It had less marketing, though.

      • Mattressi says:

        Yes, Timesplitters was significantly better. I honestly disliked Halo. It was just so boring and repetitive, with absolutely no interesting game mechanics – it brought regenerative health (woo…so much more fun than boring old regular health…), less weapons (without “realism” as the reason) which was already done in many other games, and largish (boring, repeating hallway) levels.

        As for the quote, I don’t think he was specifically saying “no one plays shooters with M&KB any more” – more just that he was saying “no one plays shooters which aren’t like Halo any more”. While both are equally wrong and reprehensible, the latter seems less hateful towards PC than the former; though both make me dislike him.

  11. AraxisHT says:

    Developing for a platform because it’s your personal favorite or easier for you or more profitable or more marketable is one thing (actually 4), but lying about it is entirely unacceptable.

  12. PitfireX says:

    it’s tough being a gamer these days and having to deal with so many ignorant statements and biased neglect from the industry. Calm down bungie… you made one game (That wasn’t even innovative, it was just solid) and remade it 4 times. Also the small amount of gameplay they showed looked EXTREMELY like Halo… they’re obviously a one trick pony.

  13. Flukie says:

    I played Crysis 3 on the PS3 the other day during a preview, it ran at less than 20 fps, it barely controlled properly and looked awful.

    I can’t believe this game is still developed for older consoles rather than pushing it to new hardware.

    • harveydanger says:

      It’s very likely going to be on current and next gen hardware.

  14. Wetworks says:

    Activision-Bungie might not be releasing it for PC since Activision-Blizzard is rumored to be working on a real mmofps with Titan. Activision might not want to compete with itself when Blizz drops it’s next mmo after World of Warcraft.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Could be. From what we know about Titan, it seems to have a remarkably similar feature list to Destiny.

      • Azradesh says:

        I’m sorry, but when did we *know* anything more then, it’s an MMO, not not the same type of MMO as WoW and it’s a new IP? Because as far as I know that’s is all Blizzard have ever said about it.

      • Xytal says:

        Something just hit me, but what if Blizzard is working on the PC version of Destiny?

        *mind explosion*

        • Hoaxfish says:

          Destiny is Bungie’s IP… I don’t think they’d share, and I don’t think Blizzard would regress to “ports” for another big company.

    • Mario Figueiredo says:

      Their PR leaves a lot to be desired though and hints at the fact it’s just not about hiding a perfectly understandable business decision.

      The statement is too aggressive to be considered otherwise. That man really means what he is saying.

  15. Fox89 says:

    I see what’s happened here.

    1) Release a series of FPS games for Xbox.
    2) Notice that nobody played these games with mouse and keyboard.
    3) Conclude that nobody plays FPS games with mouse and keyboard any more.

    Poor sod. That probably looks like actual logic to him.

    • NothingFunny says:

      I think you nailed it. Halos were utter flops on PC (for many reasons – ported too late, looking poo compared to other FPS, MS vista-only antics and no more huge pr/ad support) Thus comes his conclusion that people don’t play FPS on PCs anymore.
      And USA market specifics with consoles domination.
      I bet if he lived in Japan he’d say “No one plays FPS at all!”

      OTOH Bungie COO Pete Parsons said that there is a high chance that Destiny will be coming to the PC.” We would absolutely love to be on the PC. If you talk to the people upstairs, we play it on all platforms. So, stay tuned.”

      • Hoaxfish says:

        It’s not just Halo, but Bungie themselves have long been exclusive to the XBox-space (since the only thing they’ve really done recently is put out Halo)… I can’t help but think they haven’t been keeping up with the industry as a whole.

    • reggiep says:

      Of course that’s not what he said at all is it. You’re focusing on one aspect of the comment, but when you look at the entire comment, he’s pretty much right. The most popular shooters are played without a keyboard and mouse. They all have some form of regenerating health mechanic. They all have single player checkpoints. Prior to Halo, none of those things were true.

      Does that mean nobody wants to play shooters on the PC? Of course not. You really need to take the comment out of context to see it that way. Most gamers seem to prefer the console for its price, accessibility, popularity and ease of use.

      • harveydanger says:

        Call of Duty and Battlefield have also moved to a “two-weapon” system (created specifically for consoles to circumvent control limitations), and those games are both pretty huge on PC (the latter moreso than the former), complaints by the most vocal PC gamers aside.

        Even Far Cry 3 for PC has a clearly D-Pad-centric weapon switching system by default, all they did to get around it for PC players was add the usual number key assignments and next/previous/last weapon key assignments.

        Combined with the things you mentioned and the way a lot of modern FPS missions are designed, I would say Walker’s statement that “perhaps he’s a braggart who thinks Halo changed the face of FPS while no one else noticed” is actually pretty ass-backwards. You can’t rightfully complain about the “consolization” of FPS games, which really started with the first Halo, in one breath while saying the opposite in the next.

        • Grape Flavor says:

          I know this post is way late and no one’s going to read this, but I just can’t let that stand. 2 weapon limit is specifically because “dumbed down consoles”? Come on.

          CoD never “moved” to two weapons, it was a major pioneer of that design from the start. Call of Duty 1 had a two weapon limit. It was a PC exclusive. Your statement is invalid.

  16. Ansob says:

    There are two possibilities. Jason Jones has never heard of Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, or any other number of hugely played online FPS games for the PC. Or Bungie just don’t give a toss about reality any more.

    Actually, the third possibility is that he meant no one makes FPSes without checkpoints or regenerating health or limited weapons anymore. Which is, you know, nearly true.

    (Nearly, since People Can Fly and Croteam still exist.)

    But hey, let’s not let that stop the next 200 comments of “OMG TEH BUNGIES R TEH DUMS CONSOLETOYS SUXX.”

    • PancreaticDefect says:

      Its unfortunate. I still prefer a health bar/number and save-anywhere feature.

    • DK says:

      Even if what he was saying had any basis in reality, taking credit for the dumbing down of an entire genre like it’s a badge of honor is quite something.

      • harveydanger says:

        “Dumbing down the entire genre” is also what has caused FPS games to be so prevalent to the point where the market is saturated and studios and publishers are making buckets of money. So yes, some would call that a badge of honor. I don’t agree even close to entirely, but there are certainly good things that have come of it, and to deny this would be disingenuous.

    • Azradesh says:

      That’s what I got from that as well. I do hope it comes to PC though, as it does sound interesting and there’s no chance of me playing an FPS on a console again, I just can not be arsed.

  17. Muffel says:

    This guy has to be sarcastic? Please tell me he’s not serious.

  18. GameCat says:

    We’re* all mad here.


  19. Squishpoke says:

    Who cares? Whatever Bungie makes will be a watered down mess with sluggish combat, infected with Consolitus in every step of game design.

  20. Smarag says:

    “Bungie Deny Reality” is spot on. Just wow.

  21. Scumbag says:

    And now nobody designs levels like they used to, ’cause nobody wants to.

  22. SuperSN says:

    Alright. That’s it. Goodbye world.

  23. kuangmk11 says:

    Bungie won’t make it for PC because they know they can’t compete in that market with the style of game they make. PC gamers are not missing out on anything. They would seriously have to up the ante to not be ignored and that would alienate their base.

    • harveydanger says:

      Pete Parsons said PC is not out of the question. They would have no trouble at all competing. Look at the list of Steam’s top-sellers and how popular BF3 and Bad Company 2 were.

  24. DK says:

    Yeah, because Halo invented regenrating health. Right before they invented a time machine, travelled back and told Remedy how to have regenerating health in Max Payne before Halo came out.

    Fuck you Bungie, maybe stop claiming features PC shooters have had before Halo as “yours”. Or maybe just keep ignoring reality and pretending you’re living in a world where consoles are the gameplay frontier (instead of the gameplay backwater)

    • malkav11 says:

      Was this the Max Payne where I was constantly popping pills to restore my health?

      • lucky jim says:

        Yeah I haven’t played that game since its release, but I do recall popping pills like a drug addict just to stay alive.

      • PoulWrist says:

        Guess not.

      • DK says:

        That’s because Max Payne had sensible health regen. The bottom of your health regenerated, which meant they could assume a baseline of health at the start of every fight for even the worst player, while still incentivising skillful play by letting people that avoid taking damage have a bigger buffer.

    • WoundedBum says:

      Only 2 of Bungie’s 5 Halo games have health regen so I don’t think they’d count it among something they’d invented. But of course if we want to hate on them why not use that point?

      • subedii says:

        You do realise, that this is the item that Jason Jones was choosing to emphasise?

        • WoundedBum says:

          Of course, but my point is Jason Jones isn’t Bungie and he also isn’t claiming they invented anything.

  25. mehteh says:

    One less console focus game/shooter. not a loss

    • Caiman says:

      Seriously. I mean, who really cares about this? Bungie have a reputation for the Marathon series which were fine games two decades ago, Halo was pretty good because it showed that you could make a decent FPS on a console, Halo 2 was more of the same, Halo 3 was more of the same. And now we’re all crying over Destiny? Who really gives a crap! Oh yeah, I forgot about Myth, but that kind of thing is well behind them anyway. There are too many great games coming out on the PC to be remotely concerned about yet another McShooty game Bungie wouldn’t know how to bring to the platform anyway.

      • mouton says:

        I didn’t even realize Halo 4 was out before I read this comments section. I probably heard about it a while ago, but I don’t think my brain cared enough to allocate any resources to this particular data node.

      • harveydanger says:

        “now we’re all crying over Destiny”

        This is pretty typical for RPS commenters and PC-gaming-exclusive netizens in general. This should be something nobody cares about but everyone feels like getting outraged anyways,

    • vandinz says:

      But that’s not the point, it’s the reason they’re not bringing it to the PC that’s at issue here. OK, it’s sounds shit and I probably really don’t want the game either but to say people don’t play with mouse and keyboard is fuckin’ stupid.

  26. misterT0AST says:

    It seems like a reasonable choice to me, despite all the indignation and horror it seems to inspire to you.
    -They are making a simplified shooter, with only two weapons, a bit of auto aim, and gamepad controls in mind.
    -If I know Bungie, they will be DESIGNING THE ENTIRE GAME around those controls, those choices.

    Do you really want a pc port, so you can whine about how the port is “bad”, you can’t have 10 weapons, the game seems clunky and awful, with narrow FOV, small corridors, despawning corpses?

    Sometimes it seems that you’re complaining because they don’t want to give you more reasons to complain.

    I usually think that a bad port is better than no port at all, but everyone here seems to think that ports of games not optimized for PCs are a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. So you know what? They’re not even giving you one.
    They will keep their new-school shooter far away from you, who wouldn’t even like it anyway. It’s not designed for PCs, it’s not designed for the kind of people who enjoy old school shooters.

    Or are they supposed to design 2 games at once, one for the console market, and one especially for you, with more weapons, more difficulty, better graphics, different servers for the multiplayer, and different level design entirely?

    • Maniac says:

      They could always… You know, not make bad games. They’re very much a one-trick pony having made a bunch of ‘different’ games that werent different from eachother whatsoever, and now they’re making a totally new, unique MMOFPS which is…
      Well, Halo. With a new name.

    • Sugoi says:

      Maybe I would like it. (potential FOV issues aside)

      I was actually incredibly excited for Destiny, because I might finally be able to enjoy a halo-like experience on PC with my friends. No suffering to aim with a controller, no having to deal with small children who curse like sailors… Just me and my friends playing a FPS the way it was meant to be played.

      The point is that he is arrogantly stating that we wouldn’t like it when he does not know that. I’m not the only person in PC land who was really looking forward to Destiny, and who will be enormously bummed if we don’t get it.

    • Mario Figueiredo says:

      I’m doubtful.

      I’ve seen before the codebases of a couple of ported PS3, Xbox and PC games. The work that goes into porting a full 3D game isn’t exactly difficult. It’s menial work, I’ll give you that. But it’s not something that greatly adds to production costs. Moreover, you’ll be selling to two platform as the cost of developing a game for just one and maybe a quarter of the other. The game is already designed and developed when you move on to porting it.

      There can be an argument that, when we need to take porting into consideration, this may impose barriers or difficulties on the things we can do (and how we go about doing them) on the main platform. But this is frankly more true of a PC game being ported to a console than the other way around.

      Meanwhile you are right that control mapping is a bugger. It’s hard to get right and one of the things can really piss off players. I won’t never forget how frustrated I was driving on Just Cause 2 on the PC with a keyboard and mouse. But here’s the thing, many development studios don’t really want to take the extra steps in making a game that becomes a defining statement of the art of computer programming. Game programming is today a canned activity. It’s much like doing Lego. And few care about going the extra mile. Just Cause 2 could very well detect the input device being used and adjust driving modes between progressive vehicle acceleration (keyboard) and control-sensitive acceleration (controller). They just didn’t give a fuck, despite the fact that keyboard mapping was otherwise very well implemented (and if you remember that game, it wasn’t an exactly easy task to bring the rich controller-based action into a keyboard).

      • Sparkasaurusmex says:

        heck they can just do a straight up port (like that one game that just came out) but also open the code just a tad to allow modders to truly port it to the PC experience.

    • Phantoon says:

      The title should’ve been “Destiny not coming to PC, and Bungie denies reality” because the second part is what we care about. Basically he just shot the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of PC gaming. You don’t make mediocre games for consoles and then say PC gaming has poor controls for FPS. He’s incredibly deluded.

    • harveydanger says:

      Common sense on the internet? Wat?

  27. Eclipse says:

    If those stupid statements are actually believed inside Bungie, it was probably going to be a shitty port anyway

  28. ResonanceCascade says:

    Bungie’s massive overconfidence about this whole project has been pretty grating. “We are just so awesome that we wanted bring the awesome to the next level of awesomeness. So we, Bungie, invented the MMO. We’re awesome, right? No, I don’t need to ask because we already know how awesome we are.”

  29. Zabinatrix says:

    “We limited players to two weapons, we gave them recharging health, we automatically saved and restored the game – almost heretical things to first-person shooters at the time”

    Haha, at the time?

    I’ll admit that the ability to carry just a very limited amount of weapons, checkpoints and regenerating health is fine for some games. Even fun – in some games. But for most FPS-games, and for most people who have been playing first person shooters for a long time, these are still very much heretical ideas.

    Being able to carry just two weapons leads to so different design choices for single player campaigns. I don’t know of many “oldschool” FPS-players who like being given the right weapon and ammo right when you need it, instead of having to be a bit strategic and save up on the right ammo for the right situation. But that’s the way things have to be in the typical two-weapon system.

    Regenerating health certainly takes away a whole lot of tension. Not being able to save when you want might add back some tension, but mostly adds annoyance. If he thinks every gamer is totally ok with those “ambitious things” I think he’ll find that he’s very much mistaken.

    I do think he knows it though, I just don’t think he cares much. They sell to the biggest market, even if they don’t make the best kind of product.

  30. rocketman71 says:

    And it’s always online, even for single player.

    This game seems to have about everything I hate about modern games, so I can’t really give a shit that it isn’t coming to PC.

  31. Daichin says:

    Allow me to paraphrase what Jason Jones said with less punctuation and fluff. “No one plays FPSes that aren’t exact replicas of our slightly above average one anymore and definitely not for those computer machines that people used to use back in the 1890s thank god for us pushing the industry to the next generation of watered down and dumb amazing. Now excuse me whilst I go back to coding on my futurephone I got free with my time machine I used to SEE THE FUTURE”

  32. Kinch says:

    Honestly, the whole gamepad vs keyboard/mouse issue is not as important as people think. Your proficiency with one tool or another is just a matter of training. Sure there are less buttons on the gamepad etc. but this is a shooter, not an actionbar MMO. We, as PC gamers, prefer the keyboard & mouse combo and have a pretty hard time using gamepads (I’m currently really struggling with Red Dead Redemption, lol). Console gamers prefer pads, there you have it (do people really use the PS3 keyboard?)

    With that in mind, I think it’s still a stupid idea not to release a game on the platform that’s superior in terms of performance, and provide such a silly justification (“gamepad > keyboard/mouse, GTFO”). Maybe there’s more to the story than meets the eye. They’re apparently very full of themselves (I guess I missed it there had been a pre- and post-Halo era :D).

    • Runs With Foxes says:

      Your proficiency with one tool or another is just a matter of training.

      Look at some Quake competition videos on YouTube and you might change your tune. (Players don’t need to be at the level, of course, but the point is the mouse is simply faster and more precise. There’s no way around that.)

    • Shiri says:

      Yeah, it’s really not like that. I play games on consoles and PC, but moving a reticule with a stick that controls only direction and velocity is not the same as the fine control a mouse gives you. I like my PS3 pad, but it’s designed as a general purpose tool, it’s just not good enough for precision of that nature. Same reason almost all competitive fighting game players play with sticks rather than pads, and why you don’t see (good) RTS games on console.

    • Sparkasaurusmex says:

      I’m pretty damn proficient with a controller or kb/m. I’m better at driving games with a controller, better at FPS games with a mouse. It’s not about proficiency with the peripheral, it’s about which to use for which game, and for FPS the kb/m is far superior.

      Remember- most PC gamers are familiar with controllers and how to use them. Many PC only titles are optimized and best played with controllers… just not any FPS game on PC.

      • Grygus says:

        You’re good with a controller because the game is helping you aim. You’re good with a mouse because it’s the better tool for aiming.

        • Emeraude says:

          Which in the end doesn’t really matter as much as people seem to think. It’s the context for which the game is designed that makes an optimum or sub-optimum solution actually fitting or not.

          To take a classic example, jumping is more reactive/controlled in Castlevania IV than in the original game. That’s not a problem in itself because the levels have been designed around the respectively available verbs in both cases.

          Football would be a much more efficient game if all players could use hands to grab the ball. It would not necessarily be a more interesting one, especially if that is the only rule changed.

          A game is by definition a series of constraints. Either the constraint is interesting and fitting, in which case it should stay, or it’s not and then it should be excised – or the context revised.

  33. crinkles esq. says:

    Remember when Bungie used to just make cool Mac games? What arrogance and blind self-aggrandizement they’ve aspired to.

    “No. No, you can’t get away. From Hell’s heart, I stab at thee.”

    • Brigand says:

      Yeah.. then Microsoft came and ate them and chewed up Halo and spat it out all deformed.

      • Reapy says:

        Wanted to say this, where were the people that gave me myth and myth II? I miss them much. Still can’t deny that halo proved the fps can work on the console, and has been all downhill since ;)

        • Hoaxfish says:

          I like Oni as well, as a game about kung fu fighting with some anime nonsense on top. They lost a lot of diversity when they got stuck with Halo series… and I was actually hoping they’d break free a little with Destiny, rather than just change their rider to Activision.

        • Sparkasaurusmex says:

          This “no one plays FPS like they used to” guy is who made you Myth

    • Rufust Firefly says:

      I remember the days when Halo was going to be Mac-only, and looked like it could be a spiritual successor to Marathon. (A game so dense that the Marathon story page was active for years longer than the game was for sale.)

      Myth was also fun–I used to work in an office where we spent as much time watching replays of our matches as we did playing them.

  34. foda500 says:

    “We ruined shooters, aren’t we awesome?”

  35. Runs With Foxes says:

    We limited players to two weapons, we gave them recharging health, we automatically saved and restored the game

    We fucked up the genre and made tons of cash, you’re welcome.

  36. MuscleHorse says:

    With that kind of attitude, would we want this game on this format? No, we won’t. It’s going to be terrible. Nothing to lose sleep over.

  37. Greggh says:

    “Blurble flurble flipple-flopple ploooooooo.”

    Let it be known that men uttered no smarterer words than these in its entire history.

  38. nasenbluten says:

    They can keep it for the DRM-boxes, their Halos bored me quite terribly.

  39. WoundedBum says:

    While I’m sure this will be ignored, I don’t think his silly views reflect on Bungie. They are good developers who are communicate with their fanbase more than most. I hope they carry that spirit on and this is just a brain fart from one member of their team.

    Though I think everyone will take this as Bungie as a whole’s view.

    • Squishpoke says:

      Fair point.

      • WoundedBum says:

        Yay! I didn’t get eaten.

        Anyway it’s worth pointing out the leaked design documents point to this coming to PC too.

    • vandinz says:

      Well, if nobody comes out and says anything to the contrary, then we can take it as Bungie policy. Until then I’ll hold judgement but I can’t see it happening.

      • WoundedBum says:

        Bungie COO Pete Parsons said that there is a high chance that Destiny will be coming to the PC and that we should stay tuned for more.

        As PEte Parsons said:

        “We would absolutely love to be on the PC. If you talk to the people upstairs, we play it on all platforms. So, stay tuned.”

      • zachforrest says:

        the company policy is ‘no one plays with M&K’?

        there is a difference between anything the company says and company policy.

  40. secuda says:

    Well umm not that i want it nor expecting it coming to PC, but sux for those who are intressted.

  41. Tim Ward says:

    It’s too bad a developer with such a track record of top notch titles won’t be developing for the PC. I mean, with games like Halo 1 and, uh, Halo 1… um, wasn’t Marathon supposed to be good? Anyway, I’m sure Destiny will be totally awesome and we’ll definitely miss it on the PC. Definitely.

  42. F3ck says:

    Every one of the milquetoast console apologists with claims of “consoles haven’t hurt gaming” and “you PC gamers and your m/kb” can officially suck on it.

    90% of the time making games for consoles means making shitty games; dumbed down controls, overly simple stratagems…

    …maybe now that there’s confirmation from the big developers (not that we needed it) you’ll understand why we often rant about this shit…and keep your erroneous notions to the contrary to yourselves.

    • JD Ogre says:

      “90% of the time making games for consoles means making shitty games; dumbed down controls, overly simple stratagems…”

      Not to mention FOVs down at 60 or lower with giant weapons in your hand (for FPSes) and/or the camera kept close in on your back so that you take up at least 1/4th of the screen (for third person), and/or your subcompact cars having Hummer proportions so that they can draw as little on the screen as possible so that the inadequate hardware they’re running on doesn’t blow itself up.

      Really, it’s unfortunate that developers keep writing games of types that are NOT suited for certain platforms, and therefore cut as many corners as they can to try and get it to work, dragging down entire genres when those games get ported to platforms they ARE suited for…

  43. Eddard_Stark says:

    Jason Jones about modern gamers (courtesy of Penny Arcade):

    They don’t want to work hard, they don’t want to read, they don’t want to go to their Internet to figure out our bullshit. They want to be entertained, they want to become heroes, and they want to feel things they don’t feel in their everyday lives. Our core experience has to be delivered as simply and directly as possible.

    Welcome to the brave new world my friends, where humanity apparently devolved into giant retarded amoebas.

    • Lemming says:

      Fuck me, that is depressing. :(

      • subedii says:

        No kidding. I think he just negated a lot of my favourite games.

    • SominiTheCommenter says:

      Halo is worse than soma

      • Shinwaka says:

        “You do look glum! What you need is a gramme of soma.” – Brave New World

        I concur , soma is definitely better than Halo. It would be a sad future indeed if people gave out doses of Halo.

    • Phantoon says:

      No, he’s just hoping people are as stupid as he is.

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      (Bad) Lessons learned from WoW 101. Seems to me they want to make money hand over fist in the MMO genre by catering to the lowest common denominator. At least WoW is not available on consoles, so they have got that going for them.


    • Azhrarn says:

      Ouch, they actually said that? I love reading up on stuff on the net, I love reading things in games, complexity makes gameplay more rewarding, rather than frustrating if balanced correctly.
      Do people really have such a short attention span that this is needed?

  44. zachforrest says:

    If I hear someone say it’s just a fact that mouse and keyboard is superior I’m going to press my eyes. It’s a fact, yes. But it’s not an interesting fact. And it’s a fact everyone knows. You just end up sounding like a teat recycling tidbits you memorised off QI from seeing it on Dave so many times.

    Edit: meant to say test, not teat. But I spose teat is fine too.

    Edit. Meant to say twat, not test. I should go to bed now.

  45. mrmalodor says:

    Wow, what a fucking retard.

  46. JD Ogre says:

    “We did a bunch of ambitious things on Halo deliberately to reach out to people. We limited players to two weapons, we gave them recharging health, we automatically saved and restored the game”

    Eh? Simplifying the UI to try and make an FPS play on consoles (and it doesn’t work, really, which is why few dare to allow console & desktop players mix in FPSes – the former can’t be allowed proof positive of how inferior their controls actually are for the game type) hardly counts as “ambitious” in my book…

  47. Buemba says:

    That this isn’t coming to PCs doesn’t bother me too much. It’s a console FPS, designed to be played with a controller while sitting on a couch and thinking 65 is as much FOV as you could ever need, so if I decide to play it I’ll gladly do it on a console. What does annoy me is that too many people employed by developers and publishers think like that.

    It’s been far too long since we last saw a big budget FPS designed for PCs outside of simulation games like ARMA.

  48. derella says:

    They called their 4 minute promo a video documentary. Pretentious twats.

  49. Jerakal says:

    What a goddamn moron. It’s painful when game developers are this unaware of the state of gaming outside of their own little world.

  50. Goliathvv says:

    I could spend hours saying what I think, but I’ll summarize everything with just an image:

    link to