The Instigator
LittleWindstar
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
happycman
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

DESTINY is better than Assassin's Creed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
happycman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/24/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 886 times Debate No: 62222
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

LittleWindstar

Pro

I think Bungie's DESTINY is better than Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed because not only is it developed by Bungie, but Microsoft as well! DESTINY is a somewhat interesting mixture of Activision's Call of Duty franchise, Bungie's HALO, and Gearbox's Borderlands. If you have played the game yourself, you would know what the FPS MMO is like, and how much of a great mixture of multiplayer, action, and story it has. The overall game was amazing due to good graphics, story, online, and setting. Peter Dinklage's voice-acting is a little weak, but it was okay after a few updates. The game itself consists of three classes. The stealth and agile Hunter, the strong and powerful Titan, and the in-between master of void energy Warlock. With a wide variety of weapons and and gear, the characters are fully customizable. One of the few reasons players like the game. Anyway, that is why I think DESTINY is better than Assassin's Creed
happycman

Con

Hello, boys and girls. I’m short on time right now, so for my R1 argument, I’m going to simply dissect Pro’s argument and point out the flaws.

“I think Bungie's DESTINY is better than Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed because not only is it developed by Bungie, but Microsoft as well!”
What this is suggesting is that Destiny is better either because it has more developers or because Bungie/Microsoft are more reputable. Ok, this point is rather redundant considering what should be taken into account are the final products, since noting the developers of the games is just a ridiculous point which would only matter if we were arguing which game had better marketing. I’m going to put it out there that Destiny was marketed incredibly well, out-hyping the yearly releases of Assassin’s Creed. The problem is that Bungie/Microsoft failed to deliver when they OVERHYPED it.

“DESTINY is a somewhat interesting mixture of Activision's Call of Duty franchise, Bungie's HALO, and Gearbox's Borderlands. If you have played the game yourself, you would know what the FPS MMO is like, and how much of a great mixture of multiplayer, action, and story it has.”
I don’t understand why Pro suggests the Call of Duty franchise is added to the Destiny “mix”. Halo is a futuristic FPS so why add CoD in? In my opinion, Destiny simply takes the futuristic inspiration from Halo, the looting system from Borderlands, and the MMO experience from basically any MMO… I’m not criticizing the concept because it is probably the best part about it. The problem with Destiny is they took this amazing idea and failed to fulfill its potential.

“The overall game was amazing due to good graphics, story, online, and setting. Peter Dinklage's voice-acting is a little weak, but it was okay after a few updates. The game itself consists of three classes. The stealth and agile Hunter, the strong and powerful Titan, and the in-between master of void energy Warlock. With a wide variety of weapons and and gear, the characters are fully customizable. One of the few reasons players like the game.”
I’ll acknowledge that the graphics were probably the most refined aspect of Destiny, but the story, gameplay, and setting were disappointing. The story was never fully explored in-game, making players have to refer to external resources to fully understand the lore. The missions are extremely repetitive, especially in the campaign. The amount of time it takes to reach max rank is absolutely pathetic compared to other MMOs, considering it only took 106 hours for the first person to do it. Lastly, in terms of the setting, while stunning to look at, reviews are critical of the emptiness of the expansive environment. If you try to rebuttal with the potential usage of DLCs to build on the world of Destiny, tread lightly. What has been offered for its $70 standard edition price is unsatisfactory.

“Anyway, that is why I think DESTINY is better than Assassin's Creed.”
Pro, all you talked about was Destiny, but you never mentioned anything about Assassin’s Creed. Here’s my case as to why I think Assassin’s Creed is better than Destiny. Despite struggles to deliver on a couple of pacing and story elements in ACIII, especially the culmination of Desmond Miles’ story, the Assassin Creed series as a whole is nothing short of monumental. The universe is incredibly fleshed out without the need to look up things from external sources. If you do want to delve into it more, there are minor releases, comics, short movies, and even a novel to further satisfy a contextual sense. The different settings are incredibly notable and even slightly educational, ranging from Renaissance Italy to Colonial America. The cat-and-mouse multiplayer is incredibly unique, more original than Destiny’s ambitious blend of several major titles. Of course, the free running elements allow you to fully explore every nook and cranny, meaning it makes up for some of the titles relatively small maps with dense environments. Also, the Assassin’s Creed series has been more of a critical success, with an average Metacritic rating of 86 on the Playstation console, while Destiny only scored a 77.

Closing Statement for R1: Destiny has a number of flaws that need to be fixed in future releases/DLCs. Destiny is still a great game, but right now, the Assassin’s Creed universe is more fleshed out and realized. Development for the first game started 11 years ago in 2003. Instigator, understand that it was quite a weird proposition to begin with. Both are from completely different genres and I could have started off by saying the games are simply incomparable.

Thank you for reading.

Sources:

http://www.metacritic.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.gamespot.com...
http://tay.kotaku.com...
Debate Round No. 1
LittleWindstar

Pro

Hhhmmm... well you do have a point on how the two are nowhere close to related, but they are both two popular games that are coming (and already came) out. In my opinion, the new Assassin's Creed game has gone down in graphics quality, but I have seen gameplay, and it does look rather interesting. I'm not saying I don't like ANY of the Assassin's Creed games, but that some of them just weren't worth playing. So, another thing I'd like to address is how you asked "How is CoD anywhere related?". Well, my answer is the gameplay. You can't exactly play the game like Halo, because it's much more realistic. You won't be able to run around with a minigun in a set of high-tech space armor and expect not to get shot at. You have to play the game as if you were actually INSIDE the story. Take paintball for instance. You don't want to get shot, because if you do, you're out. I honestly have nothing against Assassin's Creed, but the third game was just terrible. I also think it was pretty crazy how you backed that up with evidence and supports. I thought this site was only about opinions!
happycman

Con

Ah, I see what you mean. I disagree with your opinion about the 3rd game. It wasn't really bad, it was simply disappointing. The story was pretty terrible, but the gameplay and the setting had a refreshing feel to it considering previous AC games were set in Europe or the Middle East.

Anyway, I'll clarify that Destiny has the potential to surpass the AC series in the far future. The thing is AC has been making releases for such a long time that it's not really a fair comparison to make, especially since the Destiny storyline is touched upon in such a shallow way.

Also, I just cited the sources to point out other notable opinions and scores.
Debate Round No. 2
LittleWindstar

Pro

LittleWindstar forfeited this round.
happycman

Con

happycman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
LittleWindstarhappycmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: A largely subjective debate. That said, Con even impressed Pro with the level of depth that he went into regarding the series. Sources should be obvious. Arguments, because as Con noted, AC simply has had more games to generate more depth and, while not all of the games are on the same level, there's more there. An interesting and fun debate to read. As always, happy to clarify this RFD. Incidentally, both sides forfeited--the only reason neither of you lost conduct is the other one did. Forfeits are bad!