Support NeoGAF

[KurtSloane]

Actually, you're kind of being disingenuous there.

The game was on the brink of being cancelled by EA. Microsoft stepped and said "We'll pay to keep development going as long as it's 100% Xbox exclusive".

Which makes sense if they funded to keep it alive.

That's incorrect, the original deal was timed exclusive, not full.

It was still coming to PS, closer to launch EA and MS signed full exclusivity, something the head of Respawn was very unhappy with.

 

[AnthonypUK]

Actually, you're kind of being disingenuous there.

The game was on the brink of being cancelled by EA. Microsoft stepped and said "We'll pay to keep development going as long as it's 100% Xbox exclusive".

Which makes sense if they funded to keep it alive.

Nope, they stepped in to help, which gave them their exclusive window, iirc it was 12 months, then they paid more for lifetime later.

 

[SneakersSO]

I think a sticking point between MS and Titanfall is whether it uses Azure again or not... if MS have marketing they may want that and Respawn might not.

Although given EA and Sony aren't really doing much marketing atm (post-EA Access fallout? I don't know, Disney and Star Wars seems to perhaps have pushed that deal) maybe that will help MS.

It was in the dev's best interest to utilize Azure last time around. The real question would've been what would their server solution be if they were to have eventually released on PS3/PS4?

Sony & EA have been fine in terms of their marketing deals. It's not like PVZ:GW2 had this huge marketing push for MS either, even though its first title was also an Xbox timed exclusive. Considering just how well both EA & Sony did on the Star Wars BF marketing deal, you can be damn sure EA is reassessing marketing deals with Sony for plenty of their future titles.

 

[biteren]

I'd say there is a certain difference between paying a company a lot of money on a completed game to be exclusive to your platform and putting money into a game to make sure it's finished and then securing the exclusive rights to exclusivity.

the first deal is when MS stepped in a helped funded the game and the PS4 version was given a timed release, then the under the table deal happened later that made TF full Xbox console exclusive

i think thats how it went, the 2nd deal was the one that was the money hat

 

[Theorry]

I could see MS marketing Titanfall 2 while Sony did Battlefield 5. It already has brand regcognition with Xbox and Hardline was marketed w/ Sony I'm pretty sure.

Like i said i believe Battlefield switches everytime. 3 was Sony, 4 was MS, Hardline was Sony. So it could be BF5 with MS and Sony takes then Titanfall. But you never know. They have COD also. So very much doubt they have all 3 and all release arround the same time.

 

[Steverulez]

It was in the dev's best interest to utilize Azure last time around. The real question would've been what would their server solution be if they were to have eventually released on PS3/PS4?

Sony & EA have been fine in terms of their marketing deals. It's not like PVZ:GW2 had this huge marketing push for MS either, even though its first title was also an Xbox timed exclusive. Considering just how well both EA & Sony did on the Star Wars BF marketing deal, you can be damn sure EA is reassessing marketing deals with Sony for plenty of their future titles.

Its true, I guess it may depend on what EA have potentially already signed with who. Ive no idea how far in advance marketing deals are signed really...

Like i said i believe Battlefield switches everytime. 3 was Sony, 4 was MS, Hardline was Sony. So it could be BF5 with MS and Sony takes then Titanfall. But you never know. They have COD also. So very much doubt they have all 3 and all release arround the same time.

If MS are going to go for marketing on one they would be better off going with Titanfall again if they can

 

[etta]

What does this mean in terms of Azure?

 

[SneakersSO]

Sure, and I'm not saying they won't work with Sony or put games on their platform but EA are interested in pushing their services (Origin and EA/Origin Access) and if someone doesn't let them do that they way they want to they seem quite willing to not support that so much.

They would sell more games I suspect if they put their PC games on Steam, but they don't, wasn't part of that due to how Steam wanted to take a cut of DLC sales which EA didn't like?

Recently we can see EA have been favouring MS for marketing of their games in franchises they own/partner with. Im sure there will be plenty of EA and Sony marketing deals outside of Star Wars in future but pointing out EA and Sony havent done a whole lot together recently is a pretty obvious observation. We'll see how things go with Mass Effect, Battlefield, Titanfall 2 and maybe if EA Access comes to PS4.

Peter Moore didn't seem all that happy about Sony's comments on EA Access in the not too distant past either

Peter Moore is an MS company man, through & through. It makes sense to have Madden do deals with MS, even though I don't even think EA has much choice in that on account of the MS/NFL deal that is in place, but FIFA? In Europe of all places? Thats just a waste of time & money.

 

[Matt]

If you paid to help develop a game, would you stop it from going to your competition? Sony had the chance, they blew it. Ms stepped in and took advantage of something good.

There were two investments. The first helped get the game made, the second could be considered a "money hat" (i.e. money and/or resources for exclusivity).

 

[Theorry]

If MS are going to go for marketing on one they would be better off going with Titanfall again if they can

Jup agree.

 

[Steverulez]

Peter Moore is an MS company man, through & through. It makes sense to have Madden do deals with MS, even though I don't even think EA has much choice in that on account of the MS/NFL deal that is in place, but FIFA? In Europe of all places? Thats just a waste of time & money.

I think PM was more annoyed that Sony spoke publicly about EA Access in a way that they (EA) didn't appreciate. I'd be surprised if it didn't end up on PS4 at some point

 

[Jarrod38]

More Titanfall the better. One of the best MP games to come out in some time.

 

[MasterOfPastures]

From Geff in Final Hours:

"The way Respawn saw it, the developer had never agreed to full exclusivity for Titanfall on Xbox platforms, only an exclusive window of up to 13 months. Zampella maintains that the team only found out that EA had turned an exclusive window deal into permanent exclusivity in the summer of 2013, weeks after the game’s spectacular showing at E3. The deal was a complicated one as Respawn wasn’t dealing directly with Xbox. Instead, terms were negotiated through EA, which signed a larger, overarching partnership deal with Microsoft for the Xbox One. In order to make the economics work and keep Titanfall alive, EA needed a first-party publisher to invest. Xbox was willing to step up and save the project, which turned out to be a wise bet. Xbox now has one of the biggest games of the year as an exclusive to it’s platforms, although it lays no claim to any sequels.”

So it seems that EA shadow-dealt with MS without Respawn knowing about it. A bit slimy, but it got the game done. And not a new tactic.
I hope Respawn learned from it.

 

[Shrennin]

There were two investments. The first helped get the game made, the second could be considered a "money hat" (i.e. money and/or resources for exclusivity).

Then again who is seriously blaming Microsoft for going after lifetime exclusivity of the first game? If Microsoft stepping in saved the game, then I don't blame Microsoft for going in later to secure it fully. Sony snoozed on it, so they lost out on the first game.

Edit: This is not directed at Matt. Just a general observation of the comments regarding whether TitanFall was a "money hat" or not.

 

[SneakersSO]

Like i said i believe Battlefield switches everytime. 3 was Sony, 4 was MS, Hardline was Sony. So it could be BF5 with MS and Sony takes then Titanfall. But you never know. They have COD also. So very much doubt they have all 3 and all release arround the same time.

BF does not switch 'every-time'. You recognized a pattern, but chalked it up to the wrong variable; EA sides with who they feel is going to be the market leader. Going into 2013, they were VERY confident that MS was going to be the console market leader, hence why they signed 6 major deals for the next two years (Madden, Fifa, PVZ:GW, Peggle 2, TF, Dragon Age: Inquisition).

Since they realized that Sony is the market leader and that is likely not going to change at all, they have done deals with Sony on both Hardline & SW:BF - their only two major games that aren't a part of EA Sports that were released in 2015, which Peter Moore has been steering towards MS, even when it doesn't make sense to do so (Fifa).

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

The first one wasn't the best at launch, but that game evolved very well over the course of a couple of years. With that said, I may have to install Titanfall on my Xbox One tonight.

 

[SwolBro]

What does this mean in terms of Azure?

this is what has me really worried. this better not be p2p i'll rage.

 

[Matt]

Then again who is seriously blaming Microsoft for going after lifetime exclusivity of the first game? If Microsoft stepping in saved the game, then I don't blame Microsoft for going in later to secure it fully. Sony snoozed on it, so they lost out on the first game.

I'm not criticizing.

 

[ToyMachine228]

Yes! TitanFall was ridiculous amounts of fun. I'm glad to see the sword teaser. I'd love to see even more adventurous weapons such as flame throwers on titans for anti-infantry work and the like.

 

[Maroon Gamer]

Everyone saw this coming.

E3 HYPE

 

[DNAbro]

Really hope it's turns out great. Enjoyed the portions I played on a friend's xbox.

 

[SneakersSO]

I think PM was more annoyed that Sony spoke publicly about EA Access in a way that they (EA) didn't appreciate. I'd be surprised if it didn't end up on PS4 at some point

PM can be annoyed with Sony all he wants, but its not like he's been Sony friendly since he got there. Again, turning Fifa into an MS marketed title made no sense for him/EA Sports. That is purely a personal choice of his.

 

[Shrennin]

I'm not criticizing.

I know. I wasn't directing it at you. I was just talking in general terms and using your comments about the deals as back-up since you summed it up well. I should have made that clear though. =p

 

[Wickerman22]

There are plenty of good reasons as to why people think Sony may have the lead on this. There is also the very real possibility no one has the lead on this, and Respawn isn't gonna partner with one of the big hardware guys to market their 2nd game.

Yeah, but why leave money on the table? The marketing partnership basically infuses huge dollars into advertising and marketing that the publisher doesn't have to spend.

It seems like MS wouldn't let this one go, especially with Sony's COD partnership. Unless EA felt people "associate" Titanfall with Xbox, therefore it was important to partner with Sony for the sequel, to reinforce that it's on their platform.

 

[Steverulez]

1. BF does not switch 'every-time'. You recognized a pattern, but chalked it up to the wrong variable; EA sides with who they feel is going to be the market leader. Going into 2013, they were VERY confident that MS was going to be the console market leader, hence why they signed 6 major deals for the next two years (Madden, Fifa, PVZ:GW, Peggle 2, TF, Dragon Age: Inquisition).

Since they realized that Sony is the market leader and that is likely not going to change at all, they have done deals with Sony on both Hardline & SW:BF - their only two major games that aren't a part of EA Sports that were released in 2015, which Peter Moore has been steering towards MS, even with it doesn't make sense to do so (Fifa).

Isn't it likely MS signed a multi-year deal with Fifa which just hasn't expired yet? I can't remember how long their deal was with the NFL but it was a reasonable long one, no reason to think they didn't do the same only with EA? This next year or two will probably given us an idea if EA want to keep it there.

Also didn't Sony kind of drop Hardline marketing after its delay? It ended up in the MS Spring 2015 TV Ad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDQrgqPdNzQ

PM can be annoyed with Sony all he wants, but its not like he's been Sony friendly since he got there. Again, turning Fifa into an MS marketed title made no sense for him/EA Sports. That is purely a personal choice of his.

Surely it does make sense if - as you said, they thought MS would be the leader and then MS signed a multi-year with that

 

[Kathian]

Needs more weapons; was so disappointed with its loadout options. Also they should kill the 'drone' idea with AI enemies, their not engaging or time consuming - players want to fight players.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Meh... Didn't like the original one on Xbox 1 which is why I bought one... So I'm not exactly enthused by this but I hope it's good. Ill wait for more information at this point.

 

[SwolBro]

Also they should kill the 'drone' idea with AI enemies, their not engaging or time consuming - players want to fight players.

No, they're not there to actually fight like that. The gameplay should not be touched at all. It's perfectly fine the way it is

 

[SneakersSO]

Isn't it likely MS signed a multi-year deal with Fifa which just hasn't expired yet? I can't remember how long their deal was with the NFL but it was a reasonable long one, no reason to think they didn't do the same only with EA? This next year or two will probably given us an idea if EA want to keep it there.

Also didn't Sony kind of drop Hardline marketing after its delay? It ended up in the MS Spring 2015 TV Ad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDQrgqPdNzQ

I think the multi-year deal between MS & the NFL is what locks Madden marketing onto MS. This is why we see so much MS marketing at NFL events (sports casters using Surfaces instead of iPads, for example) Fifa, on the other hand, does Sony co-marketing at Fifa events. Remember the world cup in 2014? Sony was all over that, even though EA was focusing on selling the Xbox version of Fifa in Europe of all places. At the very least, EA is playing fast & loose with Fifa marketing, indicated there is no uniform deal in place.

Edit:

In regards to Hardline, Sony probably pulled co-marketing funding once they realized how low Hardline was gonna come in at, especially once the delay hit. But at E3 2014, they launched an impromptu beta exclusively on PS4 right after the EA press conference - so obviously Sony had some invest in that game's marketing. Whether it was a natural result of the dev team leading on PS4 or Sony paying up is another matter though.

 

[N.Domixis]

If Sony gets to market, its because they have to market this ip to those the first one ignored. Otherwise people will thing its still an xbox only franchise.

 

[draughn101]

Glad more people are going to get to experience Titanfall, I loved the first game

Same here. It wasn't perfect, but it was a fun change of pace. Can't wait to play it on PC.

 

[Theorry]

BF does not switch 'every-time'. You recognized a pattern, but chalked it up to the wrong variable; EA sides with who they feel is going to be the market leader. Going into 2013, they were VERY confident that MS was going to be the console market leader, hence why they signed 6 major deals for the next two years (Madden, Fifa, PVZ:GW, Peggle 2, TF, Dragon Age: Inquisition).

Since they realized that Sony is the market leader and that is likely not going to change at all, they have done deals with Sony on both Hardline & SW:BF - their only two major games that aren't a part of EA Sports that were released in 2015, which Peter Moore has been steering towards MS, even when it doesn't make sense to do so (Fifa).

But then there is mirrors edge wich shows Xbox One first the whole time?

 

[Boke1879]

If Sony gets to market, its because they have to market this ip to those the first one ignored. Otherwise people will thing its still an xbox only franchise.

This far into the gen I don't think it matters. They'll no doubt make it cleat it's coming to to other consoles and by the time this launches PS4 will be pushing towards 60 million.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

What does this mean in terms of Azure?

If they still want to use it, they can use it. There's nothing keeping PS4 games (or PC games or NX games) from using Azure. It's not a proprietary Xbox service.

 

[SneakersSO]

But then there is mirrors edge wich shows Xbox One first the whole time?

Right - not saying that there won't be games that don't market with SM from here on out. But it just might mean that other games will focus on Sony's machine. It's not like Mirror's Edge is some highly marketed title right now either.

 

[jelly]

Sony Marketing for Titanfall 2 on PS4K. 'Drop a Titan on it'

 

[k4n3]

if there is a full story mode ill check it out honestly not a fan of the first games MP with all the stupid AI bots, adding swords is cool i guess...

 

[El_Chino]

It's not...up to Microsoft lol. EA's not going to let the biggest console installed base and a shitload of revenue escape them.



You would indeed be reading into it for no reason. Not to comment on any marketing deal myself, but who posts what first doesn't say anything at all. Playstation Europe's account tweeted it out before Xbox did.

I guess time will tell all.

 

[LifEndz]

Really cool to see how many of you are hyped for this.

Curious as to what fans of the first game want the most from a sequel.

 

[FyreWulff]

What does this mean in terms of Azure?

Azure isn't platform exclusive. You can deploy Azure on PS4, PC, Linux, wherever.

The only 'catch' I remember hearing is that the -discounted- Azure rate applies if your Xbox game uses Azure, but people are free to roll non-Azure cloud on Xbox and use Azure on PS4, they just don't get the discount rate.

 

[etta]

If they still want to use it, they can use it. There's nothing keeping PS4 games (or PC games or NX games) from using Azure. It's not a proprietary Xbox service.

Azure isn't platform exclusive. You can deploy Azure on PS4, PC, Linux, wherever.

The only 'catch' I remember hearing is that the -discounted- Azure rate applies if your Xbox game uses Azure, but people are free to roll non-Azure cloud on Xbox and use Azure on PS4, they just don't get the discount rate.

Yea, I know, but something tells me EA will elect to use their own servers this time.
Hopefully, though, this could be one of the first titles to use cross-service PSN/Xbox Live cross-play.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

That's incorrect, the original deal was timed exclusive, not full.

It was still coming to PS, closer to launch EA and MS signed full exclusivity, something the head of Respawn was very unhappy with.

Nope, they stepped in to help, which gave them their exclusive window, iirc it was 12 months, then they paid more for lifetime later.

That's not quite how this reads, at least to me.

"The way Respawn saw it, the developer had never agreed to full exclusivity for Titanfall on Xbox platforms, only an exclusive window of up to 13 months. Zampella maintains that the team only found out that EA had turned an exclusive window deal into permanent exclusivity in the summer of 2013, weeks after the game’s spectacular showing at E3. The deal was a complicated one as Respawn wasn’t dealing directly with Xbox. Instead, terms were negotiated through EA, which signed a larger, overarching partnership deal with Microsoft for the Xbox One. In order to make the economics work and keep Titanfall alive, EA needed a first-party publisher to invest. Xbox was willing to step up and save the project, which turned out to be a wise bet. Xbox now has one of the biggest games of the year as an exclusive to it’s platforms, although it lays no claim to any sequels.”

To me, that reads like MS moneyhatted the timed deal. Then later, the project needed saving, so MS put up the funds to finish development and full exclusivity would obviously be implied in that case.

 

[Bru]

Respawn made it no secret that they basically used Source because they had to, not because they wanted to

IIRC the entire reason Source was used for Titanfall was because they needed an engine they could use to ship on PS3. And then MS stepped in and moneyhatted later in dev, which meant the entire reason for using Source was now gone, lol

That 'moneyhat' was the only reason the game ever got released. EA was ready to pull the plug, Titanfall would never have seen the light of day if Microsoft hadn't stepped in to fund development.

Edit: Oops! Beaten over and over again.

 

[Kill3r7]

Really cool to see how many of you are hyped for this.

Curious as to what fans of the first game want the most from a sequel.

Here's what I want out of the sequel.

1) A massive Co-op campaign
2) More Titan Chassis
3) Bigger maps that will accommodate 12v12 (assuming you can maintain the same gameplay flow)
4) More game modes (bring back the original hardpoint mode)
5) Better ranking system/matchmaking
6) Improved graphics
7) More weapon variety.

 

[SwolBro]

Here's what I want out of the sequel.

1) A massive Co-op campaign
2) More Titan Chassis
3) Bigger maps that will accommodate 12v12 (assuming you can maintain the same gameplay flow)
4) More game modes (bring back the original hardpoint mode)
5) Better ranking system/matchmaking
6) Improved graphics
7) More weapon variety.

1. ok
2. ok.
3. why? the game is already bonkers at 6v6. this is an insanely fast twitch based arena shooter. 12v12 would be silly
4. sure
5. ok
6 of course
7. hmm, maybe just a little. more doesn't always mean better.

The main three things i want from TF2 would be

1. dedicated severs like it is now
2. gameplay like it is now
3.improved graphics

 

[MilkyJoe]

Two things

If I hear "have you seen Titan Fall" I will not be impressed

If there's no complete single player campaign, I'm out.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Two things

If I hear "have you seen Titan Fall" I will not be impressed

If there's no complete single player campaign, I'm out.

They've already confirmed a campaign

 

[The Freeman]

Really cool to see how many of you are hyped for this.

Curious as to what fans of the first game want the most from a sequel.

At least two more Titan chassis (5 seems like a decent number)

The ability the customise their look and load outs more. In the same way Rocket League allowed you to create your own vehicle but let players know which side you're on still is a good example on how I'd want it to go.

Drop the smart pistol

Would love to see more varied maps - a snow level would be amazing

No killstreaks added - what I liked most about TF was that there wasn't the CoD OTT killstreaks

 

[Kill3r7]

1. ok
2. ok.
3. why? the game is already bonkers at 6v6. this is an insanely fast twitch based arena shooter. 12v12 would be silly
4. sure
5. ok
6 of course
7. hmm, maybe just a little. more doesn't always mean better.

The main three things i want from TF2 would be

1. dedicated severs like it is now
2. gameplay like it is now
3.improved graphics

Personally I have no problem with 6v6 but12v12 would appease the masses, who complain about bots, as there would be more pilots running around so they can try to kill some humans for a change. With respect to weapons, I prefer a few more choices. I am okay with a smaller arsenal as I never use most of the guns offered in COD. However, TF ended up being folks running around the map with the Carbines, CAR SMGs or Smart Pistols. A little bit more weapon variety is not a bad thing.

 

[Ryaaan14]

Robot leg confirmed