Titanfall "Really Tough" to Market, Says Respawn

[vagabondwillsmile]

I don't get it. The concept markets itself. It sounds like there is a disconnect between what will actually sell the game and what the marketing dept. *thinks* the audience wants to see in ads in order to sell the game. Seriously, just show gameplay. They don't need scripted trailer-moment, money-shots to promote this thing.

In fact, every time I see an ad for a game that refuses to show gameplay footage, I wonder, "why not?". It automatically makes me think the game is hiding something - a secret of actually being crap - behind the FMV curtain, and cut-scene trailer shot smoke screen.

They really seem to be over-thinking how to make this thing move.

 

[Grabehn]

Just put some people shooting running around shooting and watching the mechs and add a "Halo-CoD" at the top and you're set.

Seriously though, "movie-like" trailer? I would expect something more... "game-like" from a... you know, a game.

 

[Baresark]

This is a good thing. It's incredibly misleading when companies show movie shots things that just aren't in a game. It's a better move to show the ingame. Or, if you are going to advertise in a way that is fun, I do remember some pretty funny ads for Battlefield Bad Company 2 that didn't have any of that cinematic BS.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Here's a thought: don't try to sell us what isn't in the game! If your game is all about multi-player action, then your trailer should reflect that. There is no need to make a cinematic narrative for a trailer if that isn't the focus of the game.

That, OR add a fucking single-player campaign to a full-priced retail game

Just sayin'...

I'd rather not see another generally scripted FPS single player campaign that's so linear it makes FF XIII seem free roam.

That being said, I think Titalfall isn't going to perform too well on release. We've seen next to no gameplay since the usual scripted E3 showing and that 6v6 player limit announcement is hurting them specifically because of the Dev team's COD related history and the news of the maps being able to hold 50 combatants including AI. Not to say it needs 50 players on the map, but perhaps 12 would have worked better?

I know that people have argued that CounterStrike is best played 5v5/6v6, and it is. But CS has small tight maps where that works. If the Titanfall maps are going to be sprawling then perhaps 6v6 is a bit small. We won't know til we see the game though.

What I don't get is how lacking in being receptive Respawn has been with this game. They were surprised that Japanese gamers like the idea of Giant Robot Combat. Japan gave us Giant Robot Combat. How could they not figure that out?

Methinks EA would have been smarter just paying Respawn to make a proper spiritual successor to Battlefield 2142 or Mechwarrior.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Titanfall might actually be fun mutli-player action, but the story is probably a typical scifi cliche fest and that doesn't matter when you're rocket jumping into a mech cockpit. Halo's multiplayer didn't even make sense storywise; why are the super soldiers that are mankind's last hope killing each other over a flag? I don't got time to care. I gotta beat the red guy with this flagpole while I run from his base.

Here's a thought: don't try to sell us what isn't in the game! If your game is all about multi-player action, then your trailer should reflect that. There is no need to make a cinematic narrative for a trailer if that isn't the focus of the game.

Please don't try to make sense. You're going to confuse the marketing people. They might suddenly start showing the truth about the games.

I hate trailer that aren't showing anything about the real game. Cinematic trailer may be pretty, but in many cases they can give the wrong impression about a game (compare Blizzard cinematics with the final games for example - or can anyone remember the epic SWTOR trailers?).

Oh, Yeah. The Lich King trailer looked like some awesome CGI fantasy movie I'd pay to see, then I saw the WoW logo and went into negative interest. Then, we all see those SWTOR trailers and forget they're advertising an MMORPG for a few minutes and just enjoy the Star Wars movies we deserved but never got.

If you're making a game you should advertise the game not just the story. Give a couple seconds of cinematics then explain why these robots are fighting while showing us actual gameplay. Otherwise if the game turns out to suck or at least dose not deliver on its hype, a few vocal people are going to spread the word not to play it based on how much disappointment they have in it.

 

[DrOswald]

IT'S GIANT FUCKING ROBOTS! HOW IS THIS SO HARD TO MARKET?

seriously try "Blow all of the shit up in giant Robots!"

Yeah, I know, that is what I was thinking. You have giant robots falling out of the sky to assist/kill soldiers parkouring around an arena and you are having trouble marketing it? It has some of the most visually impressive gameplay you could hope to be given and your complaint is that it doesn't have scripted scenes you can make a movie out of?

Here's a thought: don't try to sell us what isn't in the game! If your game is all about multi-player action, then your trailer should reflect that. There is no need to make a cinematic narrative for a trailer if that isn't the focus of the game.

That, OR add a fucking single-player campaign to a full-priced retail game

Just sayin'...

Yes, because shoehorning multi-player into single-player games has worked so well in the past, we should definitely start doing the reverse!

 

[COMaestro]

Since it's an Xbox One/PC exclusive, just give a free week to those with Gold subscriptions. As long as the game is truly entertaining, plenty of people will purchase the full game, especially since everyone is going to be looking for something to play on their fancy new consoles.

Hell, just capture 30 seconds of fun looking gameplay with a good voice-over and you have a winning advertisement. The various videos I've seen of Titanfall had me hooked right away until I learned it was multiplayer only. I'm not interested in MP only anymore. Did that with MAG, which I admit I got my money's worth out of, but I'm not looking to do that again. Sad thing is MAG had up to 128 v 128 which I played numerous times with no lag, no crash, etc. and Titanfall is maxing out at 6 v 6? Seriously?? Sure, graphically it is the far superior game, but they should still be able to do better than 6 v 6.

 

[somethingorother003]

Movie-like trailers? How about game-like trailers. Because games.

Also Titanfall can't be tough to market at all. "We're making a futuristic online first person shooter with giant walking robots in it."

And then everybody buys the game.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Good fucking grief, is this what we have come to?
Is AAA so complacent, so reliant on one-note shit tropes that they're complaining about how it is hard to market GAMEPLAY for a VIDEO GAME?

"It's actually been really tough trying to accurately market Titanfall...If you look at what we've done, its a lot different than what most FPS games do. Without a bunch of highly scripted [single player] moments to recam from different angles, the usual 'movie like' trailer is just about right out."

I fail to see the problem here, because those highly scripted moments? THEY FUCKING SUCK.
They rip control out of the player's hands, occasionally barf up a shitty quick-time-event, and worst of all, none of the awesome stuff is happening because of anything the player did except enter the trigger zone for the script.

That "movie like" experience is not something you should be aiming for in the first place as far as I'm concerned, because when I play a video game, I expect the GAMEPLAY to be the focus.
I expect a "game like experience".

So pardon me for not feeling terribly sympathetic here.

McCoy claims that the sheer depth of Titanfall's gameplay can make it hard to accurately represent. "There's a huge amount of gameplay mechanics available at any one time, and encompassing them in a few minutes is actually quite hard to do."

HOLY FUCK! HOW DO WE SHOW THE MASSES HOW CLIMBING INTO A MECH WORKS?!
OR WALL RUNNING?! OR SHOOTING!?

How about with a short demo? Like a pre-game demo even.
What's that? You don't know what those are?

Well, back in the day, most games had these things called "Demos" (or Splash Demos, pre-game demos) that would play if you let the Starting/Splash screen idle for too long. It stemmed from an old practice used in arcade cabinets to prevent screen burn-in and advertise the game in proximity.

The practice continued on consoles until old CRT TVs were effectively phased out of production.

In either case, the demo also served a neat, albeit limited purpose: showing the player what could happen in the game they were about to play. The cuts weren't all that long, usually no more than a minute or two and sometimes employed edits to other parts of the game.

But the core thing here was THEY SHOWED STRAIGHT UP GAMEPLAY FOOTAGE. Not just doctored action scenes ripped from a James Bond film.

I think you guys could learn a thing of two from that. Just sayin'.