-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Titanfall Review Thread
- Thread starter VisceralBowl
- Start date
serversurfer
Member
Not unplayable; 9/10
~Arthur Gies
I think this should be the banner-quote for the GOTY edition.
~Arthur Gies
I think this should be the banner-quote for the GOTY edition.
anonymous_abc
Member
Memorabilia
Member
Good information, thanks for the response. I'll keep my fingers crossed you're correct about a patch to improve the framerate issues because what I'm seeing fairly frequently when things get intense is much more than screen tearing or frame skips...the frame rate bogs down at times. The worst I've seen a handful of times is during a heavy firefight with multiple mechs and when I have to eject. It has definitely hit single digits when the camera pans out. The upside to this is gameplay isnt affected by this particular instance bc the ejection process is over fairly quickly and by the time I land the fps is back up to a decent clip. I should emphasize that none of the stutters or slowdowms have affected my enjoyment of the game, but they are definitely real.
All I see, is a beautiful man.
Memorabilia
Member
This is a great point. With this in mind I'd probably adjust my personal rating for the game downward to a 7 from my original 8. Its a very good game and a "7" should still imply this. The problem is review inflation has us thnking about a 7 like its just an "OK" game.
AndrewDean84xX
Banned
Still no update from those reviewers sitting on scores? The game works, servers are fine and nothing has gone wrong. Basically, everything went great.
VanCityGamer
Member
Actually, most of them already did update their reviews. I believe Giant Bomb is the only major outlet that hasn't done so yet.
Hip Hop
Member
VanCityGamer
Member
Interesting. It's not on the Xbox One Metacritic yet, which is what I've been checking.
Hrm? Peak time day 1 of the release Live was unavailable for many people.
we finally made it! what do you guys think of the layout? 
http://www.vgnetwork.it/recensioni/titanfall/
http://www.vgnetwork.it/recensioni/titanfall/
ALAN ULTIMATE
Neo Member
Thanks for the serious reply, might skim through the thread to catch up on this later.
Fixed2BeBroken
Member
we finally made it! what do you guys think of the layout?
http://www.vgnetwork.it/recensioni/titanfall/
i personally think it is sweet. I love how when you scroll down it brings the picture and text together. with that said, I have no idea what the text is saying
SEGAvangelist
Member
About what I expected, but I don't understand the concern about taking down the servers in the new column on the left.
Why would they be reassigned? The whole benefit of Azure is being able to spin up servers and reduce them when necessary.
EA and Microsoft have both shown an extreme willingness to try to coerce upgrades. Titanfall2 comes up and there's still a modest amount of people playing Titanfall 1? No problem, shut down the servers. This really messed up logic seems to be the way these companies think and there is literally 0 reason to not expect them to do this. Every single action they've both taken over the past months to recent years tells you they will. The fact your disk (or download) will likely be as good as a brick in a few years has definitely decreases its inherent worth. It certainly destroys any notion of collecting.
The PC community will find a way to carry on after server shutdown. I believe!
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
When have MS shout down a server early?
SEGAvangelist
Member
I don't believe MS has this tendency. Can you cite some examples? I am genuinely curious about this. I know for sure EA is a big culprit of forcing upgrades, but the servers aren't EA servers in this case. I feel EA and Sony are the suspects in this category. Also, this is an online-only game, so if MS suddenly took down the servers three years from now (which makes no sense given the Azure setup) they would get a ton of bad rep for it.
The examples are plethora.
1. XBox 360 is released late 2005. In early 2010 Microsoft kills all online access for all original XBox titles.
2. Games for Windows Live - launched in 2007. Microsoft revealed (and then removed the notice) that it will be going offline in July this year. Even if temporarily delayed it's pretty obvious that every single GFWL game is now on death row.
3. OS's:
XP was supported for 8 years.
Vista for 5 years.
Windows 7 without SP1 support was 4 years. With SP1 you can add 2 to that.
4. APIs:
DirectX 11.1 is now going to Windows 8 exclusive because... whatever - screw you buy Windows 8.
Those servers are going to be dead the second it's profitable to do so.
SEGAvangelist
Member
Those aren't examples of game servers being taken down after 3 years. Even Halo 2 went 6 years.
Yeah that "concern" is lame, keeps promoting the idea video games are possessions instead of experiences. Plus you may die, the world may end, a new job may not let you play... Worrying so much about the future is pointless. Buy the game, get your fill, stop worrying, Make it seems like spending 50-60 on a videogame is such a big deal.
You experience them, then they are just a bunch of data, not sure why would you want to posses that, it has no longer value.
I was more going for a character pattern rather than directly comparing OS's to games which I agree is pretty silly. Everything under Microsoft is showing a fairly clear trend of iterating out faster. In at least some instances it seems to be crystal clear that it's being done solely to coerce upgrades, which is concerning. This is actually the kind of softball question (Will all games' XBox One servers stay up during the life of the XBox one?) something like a tweet to Major Nelson could get a response to if disabling the servers for profit is not something that's on the table.
SEGAvangelist
Member
You wrote this...
FACT!!! You also provided no examples in the case of gaming or games as service. Nice FUD.
SwiftDeath
Member
What happens if someone wants to experience Titanfall in 10 years? 15? Why should an experience have an expiration date? If I want to play Ocarina of Time or Mario 64 or the original Halo I can still play it, still experience the experience. Why should we not expect the same ability from any game? What happened to MAG for instance is terrible. That game no longer exists in any playable state. It is gone from this world and that sucks.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
89 metacritic for pc not bad not bad at all.
SEGAvangelist
Member
It sucks for some people, but games as service is where things are headed. Even the big multiplatform titles are starting to head that way (Destiny, The Crew, The Division etc...). Fortunately in MS's case, the servers can be adjusted based on population, so I don't think there should be a real fear of servers suddenly being taken down. Smart Match should also help with the smaller communities as you can just play or watch something else while waiting for a match.
I understand it's easy to get confused about who wrote what. You'd actually have to scroll up a couple of posts. Here's a quick recap for you.
The discussion was not about "games as service" but coercing upgrades in general. Though I'm still not sure what you're even on about there. XBox Life for originals was killed, they've already inadvertently revealed the impending death of Games for Windows Live, and coercing upgrades for DirectX is obviously targeting gamers. In any case - grow up. Obviously a lot of what I'm saying can be argued against. Do that instead of misquoting and acting like a tool and we might actually be able to get somewhere!
SwiftDeath
Member
There is no way anyone is keeping servers online in perpetuity for any game. I dislike that aspect but could live with it if the platform holder/publisher would find a way to allow individuals to host their own servers to compensate for the loss of the game.
You are correct though. Every publisher wants to move towards games as a service, I'm sure DOTA among other games really created the path on that movement. It's disappointing as I've always preferred single player experiences but something I could accept if the experience didn't have an expiration date.
This whole topic though is fairly off-topic so I'll try not to say more on it
Yes, I don't see why expiration date for some experiences is such an outrageous thing. This is an on-line experience by very definition a interaction between people that happen on the internet, By the time people stop caring about such experience it will die, and that is perfectly normal.
No one is gonna be selling Titanfall at $60 in 10 years. This is technology, things change, facebook is not the same it was 10 years ago, and it wont be the same in 10 years for now. There are records, archives, and probably someone is going to be running a reverse engineer private server for Titanfall in 20 years if that is what you worrying about.
In the meanwhile just enjoy there is a fucking good videogame out there. Butching a score because of theoricals seems rather un-professional and overly paranoic.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
More than likely if official servers go down.. it means the player base is almost non-existent.. and even then on PC you'll see someone make there own servers.
I'm not worried. It's a great game, enjoy it now.
If the servers are gone 5 yrs from now I could give a shit honestly.. I'd have gotten my money's worth.
I know that to some people that's a problem, but honestly I think the % of people who worry about this in a serious manner is considerably small.
I'm not worried. It's a great game, enjoy it now.
If the servers are gone 5 yrs from now I could give a shit honestly.. I'd have gotten my money's worth.
I know that to some people that's a problem, but honestly I think the % of people who worry about this in a serious manner is considerably small.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I thought it was pretty obvious we were initially talking about games, then you moved into other products and services to provide evidence for the fact Titanfall won't be playable in three years. Maybe I should have been clearer about our discussion pertaining to games rather than software platforms, but how is your three years talk not FUD? Also, how does calling you out on this make me a "tool?"
I don't think it's too off-topic since all this talk stems from the Eurogamer review, but maybe it deserves a thread (maybe there is one?). I imagine in the case of Titanfall we won't see PC users having the option to host their own servers, though, and that's a bummer.
SwiftDeath
Member
Hmm people still care about every incarnation of counterstrike so it hasn't died? Thus if any single person still cares about titanfall it won't die or what are you actually trying to say? That it should die when the companies in question see no value in keeping it online?
Cool? Why would I care what Titanfall sells for in 10 years? Why would that impact me as a consumer in such a way for me to care about EA's or Respawn's bottom line?
Facebook is not a game? It is entirely a service. It is free unless something has changed of late?
Cool someone may figure out how to run their own server for Titanfall 20 years from now. That is so encouraging. Honestly to keep people like me happy all they have to say is that they will offer a switch to private hosted servers in 8 years/ 10 years whatever. Just build in the hooks needed to do so at a later point. Maybe it won't be as compelling a solution but the game wouldn't simply disappear entirely
I don't care about the score but trying to view the long term value a game may have to a consumer doesn't seem unprofessional in the least bit though
You are worrying over nothing, this game is gonna have long legs. By the time the population is minimal there would be a Titanfall 5, If you for some weird reason insist on ONLY playing Titanfall 1 there is gonna be a private server for you to join.
You answered your own concern, WHY are you worrying about stuff that is NOT Happening RIGHT now? Game has a huge population and you can enjoy the full experience right now, that worths 60.
I'm not sure what you mean with EA and Respawn, but this is why I think constant focus on videogame publisher/dev politics is silly, it makes people stop enjoying good videogames, which is why we are suppose to be here.
Titanfall, COD, Battlefield, Diablo, Dota2, CS... this are no longer games in the traditional sense, They are services, a online entertiament service: with updates, changes, evolution. Change is a good thing.
They are not going to say that now because they are more worried about fixing tearing issues and matchmaking, They have no time to worry about whats this game gonna be standing in 20 years for now.
SwiftDeath
Member
How do you know that? Where is it actually stated how long the servers will last? What is their EOL policy on the product?
I'm not sure what you mean with EA and Respawn, but this is why I think constant focus on videogame publisher/dev politics is silly, it makes people stop enjoying good videogames, which is why we are suppose to be here. [/QUOTE]
I don't follow your logic? I can't worry about maybe wanting to play an online only game a couple years down the road? I just have to accept that such games can/should only be enjoyed in the immediate because you say that's how it should be?
My point about the EA/Respawn comment is why would I care what Titanfall costs in the future? I'm not saying the game is not worth $60 now. I actually think to most who play it it is. My concern is simply if I buy it now why do I have to accept that I likely cannot play it at some point in the future?
Change is a constant. That much is true. Simply assuming change is a good thing is entirely incorrect though. Not all change is good.
Games as a service is good for the publishers going forward that much is true. It will have growing pains and likely kill some publishers but others will take their place etc.
It is not true that games as a service is objectively good for gamers/consumers as simply put there is at least one such person who does not benefit from it.
COD and BF can still be enjoyed if the internet was to die tomorrow. The others not so much. Different people have different preferences and priorities. You cannot make a statement about what is better for everyone because of that.
Why is it so hard to simply state what the EOL is going to be like when they deprioritize the game on the servers? They don't have to prep the EOL right now simply have to state what their plan is for it.
I do agree that performance patches should be top priority but its really not something you would dedicate resources to at this point but that doesn't mean you don't have some idea where it would end up.
@SwiftDeath alright dude, I respect your opinion but I don't like to argue on Theoricals, as you constantly say: We don't know, the conversation turned into a speculation spiral.
I went dinner with my GF yesterday, I very nice beer marinated hamburger. Paid $50 for that hamburger alone, the experience was great. Was I worried about Am I gonna have a hamburger that taste like this again? Is my GF gonna be my GF next month? Am I gonna be able to afford a hamburger like this in 10 years? FUCK I DONT KNOW, if I follow that line of thought I'll be living in anxiety forever.
As I said I can see your points and why you worry, but I think it would be sad if you miss out a good videogame because stuff that may or not may happen in 10 years for now.
I went dinner with my GF yesterday, I very nice beer marinated hamburger. Paid $50 for that hamburger alone, the experience was great. Was I worried about Am I gonna have a hamburger that taste like this again? Is my GF gonna be my GF next month? Am I gonna be able to afford a hamburger like this in 10 years? FUCK I DONT KNOW, if I follow that line of thought I'll be living in anxiety forever.
As I said I can see your points and why you worry, but I think it would be sad if you miss out a good videogame because stuff that may or not may happen in 10 years for now.
SwiftDeath
Member
Damn it now I want a burger.
Also I realize I am fairly crazy when it comes to this sort of thing. Doesn't make me stop worrying about it.
And it wouldn't stop me from playing a game I really wanted. It would just make me devalue that game while I play it as it might not have a future.
Also I realize I am fairly crazy when it comes to this sort of thing. Doesn't make me stop worrying about it.
And it wouldn't stop me from playing a game I really wanted. It would just make me devalue that game while I play it as it might not have a future.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I want a burger too. Titanfall is more than a console seller. It's a burger seller too.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
So from the Joe thread earlier, someone said how can the game's multi deficiencies hurt. I'll explain:
1) can I play the game in a clan?
2) can me and some buddies play a private game?
3) can me and some friends create a private lobby before jumping into the game?
4) can we vote on map rotation?
1) can I play the game in a clan?
2) can me and some buddies play a private game?
3) can me and some friends create a private lobby before jumping into the game?
4) can we vote on map rotation?
TrueGrime
Member
https://twitter.com/mauliksharma/status/445945651915137024
Just to share. He's entitled to his opinion but I respectfully disagree.
Just to share. He's entitled to his opinion but I respectfully disagree.
I don't think that was a problem with BF4 and half FPS out there.
salty people gonna salt.
I don't think those features automatically make a bad game good. More customization features would have provided a few more carrots on sticks but if the game weren't a fun experience, it's still a bad game. Clans mean absolutely nothing to me. Being able to see and compare stats with friends is way more important to me.