Titanfall 2 Confirmed, is Coming to PS4

[martyrdrebel27]

No, that distinction would go to Blizzard's what's-its-name (seriously, I don't remember). Overwatch?

But...but...Johnny.......it's not Team Fortress 2! It's nothing like Team Fortress 2! Just look at this game-play!

*links a game-play vid that looks precisely like Team Fortress 2 in a futuristic, not 60's era, sci-fi setting*

See?! NOTHING LIKE TEAM FORTRESS 2!!!!

Yes. Just reached Gen 10 last night. The server populations are dwindling though.

Sadly, the Xbox versions have far larger player bases than the PC version.

But really, Respawn have only themselves to blame. Having it as an exclusive for Origin was a colossal mistake. Hell, forget a Steam version, even having the game available on Uplay or other services would have helped sales dramatically.

actually, since the announcement that all Evolve maps will be free, i 100% support Evolve's DLC practices. it gives us the important stuff, and gives us the option to buy the useless stuff. sure, i think $5 for a paintjob is fucking insane, but still, it's a far better DLC practice than most companies adhere to these days.

Hopefully this changes with Titanfall 2. And, I'm really hoping their DLC practices change as well - for the better, that is. (Yes, Vince, free maps are a great idea. But for the love of FSM, DO NOT COPY TURTLE ROCK'S AND 2K'S DLC PRACTICES!)

 

[Quellist]

Well IMO they could Stuff Titanfall up their arses when it was announced as Multiplayer only. So yeah my feelings on the sequel, not much different...

 

[Vigormortis]

Well IMO they could Stuff Titanfall up their arses when it was announced as Multiplayer only. So yeah my feelings on the sequel, not much different...

Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same towards games like, say, Counter-Strike or Unreal Tournament?

 

[disgruntledgamer]

I don't mean to be cynical, but who cares? It's not even a year old and Titanfalls servers are already dead.

 

[disgruntledgamer]

League of Legends is multiplayer only and it is the biggest game on the planet.

Apples and Oranges in so many ways I'm not even going to bother listing them.

 

[w23eer]

I honestly don't mind when a game chooses to be multiplayer only. If they're gonna half ass the single player anyway, then what's the point? Even half assed single player modes must take a ton of resources that could be used to improve the core experience.

Although, that's assuming they actually put a huge amount of content into the multiplayer, especially if they're charging 60 quid. If I remember correctly, Titanfall was quite bare (at least at launch). Hopefully Titanfall 2 won't make the same mistake.

 

[Lightspeaker]

Although, that's assuming they actually put a huge amount of content into the multiplayer, especially if they're charging 60 quid. If I remember correctly, Titanfall was quite bare (at least at launch). Hopefully Titanfall 2 won't make the same mistake.

Pretty much. Don't get me wrong, its a GOOD game. Its really really hard to characterise the whole thing as a very solid experience.

But there just...wasn't a lot of stuff in there. What was in there was a lot of fun but I can fully understand why people were reluctant to buy on launch. And unfortunately with stuff like this unless you've got an avenue in which you're constantly pushing the game to new players (hello Steam and Counter Strike) then you've got to have a large initial install base or it just never really takes off as a big thing.

 

[Atmos Duality]

There is clearly a market for multiplayer-only shooters - making the game multiplayer only was NOT the problem with this game.

Yeah, and AAA companies are hammering relentlessly away at it.
To the point where one has to wonder if that market is becoming saturated.

Even in your own example of LoL, There haven't been ANY real breakout MOBA successes since League of Legends.
There have been some decent entries (DOTA2, Awesomenauts), but they don't carry anywhere near the same kind of market clout as LoL does. (DOTA2's clout comes from Valve more than DOTA2)

And outside of DOTA2 and LoL, the MOBA genre is a graveyard of empty servers.
To be fair, other multiplayer-only games (shooters esp) are more diversified, but if this last year was an indication, even those have their limits.

What I think is happening mirrors what happened with WoW and the greater MMO market: Everyone tries the new game for a bit, has a decent time for a few weeks, then most go right back to their habitual game of choice because that's where they're already established and invested in.

It's one thing for an indie-nobody-niche F2P shooter like HAWKEN to up and die due to a low player population, it's quite another for games produced by the captains of industry, like Titanfall and Destiny, to blow over (relatively) in EVEN LESS TIME.

Neither of those games were commercial failures, mind you, but they weren't the kind of mega-popular protracted successes their parent companies were banking on either. The original Titanfall isn't even a year old, and they've already slashed the price TWICE, offered the bulk of the DLC for free, and have announced its sequel.

What that tells me, is that the market is either saturated, not as big as AAA estimated, or possibly shrinking.

 

[dystopiaINC]

Although, that's assuming they actually put a huge amount of content into the multiplayer, especially if they're charging 60 quid. If I remember correctly, Titanfall was quite bare (at least at launch). Hopefully Titanfall 2 won't make the same mistake.

Pretty much. Don't get me wrong, its a GOOD game. Its really really hard to characterise the whole thing as a very solid experience.

But there just...wasn't a lot of stuff in there. What was in there was a lot of fun but I can fully understand why people were reluctant to buy on launch. And unfortunately with stuff like this unless you've got an avenue in which you're constantly pushing the game to new players (hello Steam and Counter Strike) then you've got to have a large initial install base or it just never really takes off as a big thing.

I feel like if the game had launched in the state it's in currently it would have been much better received. Some of the new Game types are really fun. Plus they finally gave a few more customization options for your titans... Anyway there have been some big additions to Titanfall in free patches, if they had been in the launch then I think the game might have done better. Who knows why they launched so seemingly early, feels like the dev team was rushed.
I feel like now that Respawn has the first game out, then it will be far easier for them to make a much bigger and content filled game.

 

[Arawn]

While Titanfall was interesting, I don't think I'm in a rush to pick up the next one. Running around the arenas was fun as was fighting against/inside the titans. But the game didn't hook me.Sure I remember zipping along a wall as missiles came howling at me. Or the first time I called down the titan only to be crushed within seconds (did it right in front of enemies) But those are moments the Titanfall had no part in.The other players created those experiences. They just provided the field in which for us to play.

 

[Quellist]

Well IMO they could Stuff Titanfall up their arses when it was announced as Multiplayer only. So yeah my feelings on the sequel, not much different...

Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same towards games like, say, Counter-Strike or Unreal Tournament?

Not so intensely. Ever since I bought Quake 3 as a lad expecting a single player game and got a multiplayer game I've had a bit of a down on multiplayer only games (L4D being the notable exception). Especially those that look like they would be a blast to play a singleplayer campaign in. (Don't get me started on Brink with its 'seamless integration of single and multiplayer'bollocks).

However when Vince Zampella teased us with 'we considered singleplayer but ultimately dropped' it he Really pissed me off...

 

[Vigormortis]

Not so intensely. Ever since I bought Quake 3 as a lad expecting a single player game and got a multiplayer game I've had a bit of a down on multiplayer only games (L4D being the notable exception). Especially those that look like they would be a blast to play a singleplayer campaign in. (Don't get me started on Brink with its 'seamless integration of single and multiplayer'bollocks).

However when Vince Zampella teased us with 'we considered singleplayer but ultimately dropped' it he Really pissed me off...

But single-player wasn't a promised feature. It was one of many considerations during the design process. The same sort of considerations that occur with games like Counter-Strike, Quake, and Unreal. So I guess I'm just confused why people are okay with games like Counter-Strike not featuring any kind of narrative-driven solo mode, but flip their lids in violent anger over Titanfall lacking the same feature.

I don't know. Just seems hypocritical to me. But, at least in your case, you have a universal distaste for multiplayer-only titles.[footnote]Though I still don't quite understand why you feel it so intensely with Titanfall.[/footnote] Can't say the same for a lot of others around here.

 

[Vivi22]

as long as nobody tries to call this game TF2 then it's fine

While we're at it, let's put the kibosh on T2 as well.

this is exciting. Titanfall was an awesome game that was under-rated because of its exclusivity. but the game itself was filled with fun, fast gameplay, smart level design, and managed to stay balanced despite the inherent imbalance of man vs. titan.

I'm not sure how a game that was as massively hyped going into its release as it was could be underrated.

 

[Vivi22]

So I guess I'm just confused why people are okay with games like Counter-Strike not featuring any kind of narrative-driven solo mode, but flip their lids in violent anger over Titanfall lacking the same feature.

For some people, I imagine it comes back to the fact that Counter-Strike is dirt cheap and Titanfall is a full priced console game.

 

[Vigormortis]

For some people, I imagine it comes back to the fact that Counter-Strike is dirt cheap and Titanfall is a full priced console game.

Which is a relatively fair point, though it could be arguable on some level. But that, more often than not, isn't the primary contention for why Titanfall "sucks" or why some have such angry disgust towards the game. It usually boils down to "No single-player? Fuck that! No solo, no sale! Now excuse me while I go play Counter-Strike."

That's the part that bugs me. The hypocrisy of the complaint.

 

[zombiejoe]

For some people, I imagine it comes back to the fact that Counter-Strike is dirt cheap and Titanfall is a full priced console game.

Which is a relatively fair point, though it could be arguable on some level. But that, more often than not, isn't the primary contention for why Titanfall "sucks" or why some have such angry disgust towards the game. It usually boils down to "No single-player? Fuck that! No solo, no sale! Now excuse me while I go play Counter-Strike."

That's the part that bugs me. The hypocrisy of the complaint.

I thought Titanfall was pretty good, but I'll try to come up with some reasons as to why someone like me wanted a single player campaign, or at least a stronger story, in Titanfall.

With something like Counter-Strike, there doesn't need to be a story. There are terrorists and there are counter terrorists, it's not a fantastic setting or anything, it's simple.
With Team Fortress 2, there is actually a lot of story, and it's told through very colorful character interactions, items, and content outside of the game, it spices things up and makes it that much more engaging.

But Titanfall's setting and world was very interesting. Look at those robots, look at those Titans, where are we? Who are we fighting? What's going on? This is interesting and I want to know more.
But then it turns out the general lore isn't that engaging, and their attempts to present it were poor. We get the taste of something good world wise, but it doesn't satisfy the taste, even if it wasn't there main focus.

So then it all comes down to the gameplay, and while it is fun, if there's not enough content to keep you going or engaged anymore, what's the point?

That's just my view.

 

[noobiemcfoob]

I never understood all the hate or general disinterest towards Titanfall. I loved the speed, the maps and just the overall flow of the game. Sprinting through a map, jumping from building to building to a Titan's back was awesome.

The complaining about lack of weapons? I never touched anything but a the sniper rifle and the smart pistol. That's all I wanted/needed.

The only downfall for me was that I got tired after about 3 weeks. It could have used something to up the variability for me, but half that was my unwillingness to try out other game modes. Still, I hope on every couple weeks or so just to be able to run around and pilot a GIGANTIC ROBOT WITH A MACHINE GUN!!!

Really, what more could you ask for?

 

[Vigormortis]

snip

My original post wasn't refuting that sort of view. What I was getting at was my annoyance with people decrying the game outright, even before or without ever playing, simply because it didn't have a solo story option. The same people that love to play games like Quake, Counter-Strike, etc.

I wasn't saying someone couldn't have genuine grievances over the lack of solo options. I was just pointing out the hypocritical, and very common, stance I described above.

 

[Vivi22]

For some people, I imagine it comes back to the fact that Counter-Strike is dirt cheap and Titanfall is a full priced console game.

Which is a relatively fair point, though it could be arguable on some level. But that, more often than not, isn't the primary contention for why Titanfall "sucks" or why some have such angry disgust towards the game. It usually boils down to "No single-player? Fuck that! No solo, no sale! Now excuse me while I go play Counter-Strike."

That's the part that bugs me. The hypocrisy of the complaint.

Yeah, I don't think that applies to everyone, but it's really the only credible reason I could think of for criticizing one multiplayer game but not another. It really just comes down to people are weird I'd say.

 

[Quellist]

Not so intensely. Ever since I bought Quake 3 as a lad expecting a single player game and got a multiplayer game I've had a bit of a down on multiplayer only games (L4D being the notable exception). Especially those that look like they would be a blast to play a singleplayer campaign in. (Don't get me started on Brink with its 'seamless integration of single and multiplayer'bollocks).

However when Vince Zampella teased us with 'we considered singleplayer but ultimately dropped' it he Really pissed me off...

But single-player wasn't a promised feature. It was one of many considerations during the design process. The same sort of considerations that occur with games like Counter-Strike, Quake, and Unreal. So I guess I'm just confused why people are okay with games like Counter-Strike not featuring any kind of narrative-driven solo mode, but flip their lids in violent anger over Titanfall lacking the same feature.

I don't know. Just seems hypocritical to me. But, at least in your case, you have a universal distaste for multiplayer-only titles.[footnote]Though I still don't quite understand why you feel it so intensely with Titanfall.[/footnote] Can't say the same for a lot of others around here.

Mech games are like crack to me, especially ones where you can get out of the mech and have fun also. For example i'm checking pretty much on a daily basis for a release date for Xenoblade Chronicles X (And yes, the idea of multiplayer in it worries me a lot...if the singleplayer experience is in any way reduced by a focus on multiplayer i will be Very pissed). So i particularly hate Titanfall because i would have LOVED it in singleplayer