Stories are all about depth and meaning, not just "OMG! Borg! Run for your lives!" It bothers me that so many people write off the Borg because they're not "scary." Any bad-guy in any series needs to be well fleshed out and have something more than single-minded-destroy-everything with no depth or purpose mentality. I really wonder if sometimes the "they're not scary anymore" comment so many give is truly the reason, or if it's really that the direction they were taken in wasn't to their liking. Or do people really want an enemy that is never ever given back story, reason, or ever covered, just this one dimensional entity that swoops through and destroys everything every once in a while. The latter, to me, is absolutely HORRIBLE and I'd never want that.
It also bugs me that people think that just because a couple of people wrote the Borg poorly that the Borg simply can't be written well ever.
So, to me, even if Destiny is "all Borg all the time" the fact that I've yet to see how David Mack handles them leaves me without opinion on the subject until I actually see it. I only go in with the thought that so far he hasn't written a book I've disliked (not even a little bit) so this one almost can't be bad because of that.