Titanfall

[Griddlelol]

If I hadn't been waiting 10 minutes to get a game before the map packs, then I probably would have bought them.

[Architecture]

The season pass seems comparatively cheap, and Respawn's commitment to continuously updating and improving its game is very respectable.

[Vorlonesque]

Titanfall is adding a new mode where it's basically just Call of Duty - no Titans, no AI.

 

I think it's an odd decision, even if it may end up being a popular mode. I mean, it strips out the identifying aspects of the game which I find potentially unsettling. Also, are they going to adapt the maps at all? I imagine it'll be a lot easier to camp with a sniper rifle on an edge of the map that is generally designated for Titan traversal. There are huge fields of fire meaning that even a bad sniper could have an easy time picking off someone trying to close the gap and kill them.

 

It still has interesting movement options to differentiate itself.  I don't use the Titans all that often because I want to be running routes and going fast.  Its not Tribes or Quake fast (sadly)...but I do find it fun just to move around in the game.

[clyde]

I'm enjoying the 8v8 mode more than I thought I would. The maps and methods of traversal are not designed for this mode; that is why I'm enjoying it. I've only played a few rounds, but what tended to happen in the games I just played was that the teams cluster pretty heavily and a pattern of flushing and flanking developed organically. A lot of people take cover inside of windows that overlook large expanses. I just played a match where we spent a quarter of the game to take one such location and once we did, we gained a considerable amount of points. Everyone camped the many entrances to that room and it was really fun. There is also a lot of instances where players want to cross large distances in a weaving fashion, it gives me a very satisfying stand-off or jousting feel. 

All that said, I found it to be more draining than attrition and not as much fun. 100 kills is a lot of kills. It is an interesting mode and I recommend trying it out. The fact that the maps are designed for a different game makes the mode feel fresh, where you realize all the map-design tropes that you take for granted in most other competitive first-person shooters. Plus it's a different way to see the maps that I'm familiar with. Me and someone else camped the crane-room bay-window area in the lower parking-lot of Overlook. I never spend time in that thing. 

[clyde]

I love that I can see how many people are playing which modes. I just saw that there were a bunch of people playing Capture the Flag and jumped in for some really fun matches. The numbers being there saves me a lot of frustration.

[BusbyBerkeley]

Is it just me or do the DLC playlists in the PC version not have anyone playing on them ever? it would be cool if they just said fuck it, we'll give them to everyone and then give people who bought them some elite skin or something. No way in hell am I going to spend ten to twenty five bucks on some maps that literally two people are playing at any given time. It's such a shame that they fucked up so hard with this game because I do really enjoy it. Just so much they did wrong, yeesh.

[Dewar]

The various different lists have divided the player base pretty much to non-existence which made the remaining people band together in the one place they could all access, the core maps.

[clyde]

I've had the DLC maps pop in when I play the default Attrition mode.

I bought the season-pass and I would be fine with everyone getting them for free. I imagine that there would be a lot of grumbling from others though. I'd just enjoy playing them more frequently.

When I played Capture the Flag last night there were 50 people playing. I'm sure that the mode won't be available during the afternoon. The game certainly has population problems for everything that isn't default Attrition. Luckily that's my favorite mode.

[JonCole]

Anyone care to schedule some time for the 4-player co-op mode? I'd really like to try it.

[clyde]

Anyone care to schedule some time for the 4-player co-op mode? I'd really like to try it.

Sure. I'll be out of town this weekend though. Don't let that stop you if you can find others.

[BusbyBerkeley]

I'd be willing to fill in a coop team or play competitive with some thumbs. Feel free to hit me up on steam or the irc channel with nick Douchetoevsky if you see me online/idling.

[clyde]

https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/topic/9261-titanthumbs/?p=326382

[clyde]

Titanfall is really good. 

What's this battle rank stuff? I like it because it keeps telling me that I'm winning, but I don't know what it is. 

I have so much fun playing this game. I pull off sweet shit all the time. Leaping down an alleyway towards an Ogre as it tries to hit you with a 40mm cannon is like "Ima gonna get you, I'm getting closer, I'M ON YOUR HEAD AND YOU AREN'T VERY FLEXIBLE!!! HAHAHAHAHA!" So much fun. 

1000 stars.

[twmac]

Is this all PC focused?

 

I was hoping to play some Co-Op. And yes, the way the DLC has been handled means that the player base has been ripped asunder.

[Badfinger]

I think Titanfall is amazing. I think it's the best pure multiplayer shooter experience I had in 2014. I think charging for maps in games smaller than Call of Duty is a great way to kill your game. The promise of new maps or modes probably would have kept me playing. The request for like $40-$50 additional dollars to stay current killed it for me.

[clyde]

Is this all PC focused?

 

I was hoping to play some Co-Op. And yes, the way the DLC has been handled means that the player base has been ripped asunder.

 

I think what you are asking is "Is this worth playing on PC?"

 

Yeah, totally. I doubt it is the best platform to play it on, but it's certainly worth your while if it's your only option. The main problem is population on PC; it can be hard to find a game of anything but Attrition during some times of the day. Good thing that Attrition is the best mode. 

 

Last night I was just sniping grunts as much as possible. I kept on saying "Why don't I do this all the time?". The game has drastically different playstyles to go between. It can really feel like a different game based on your weapons. The most infamous example is the grunt-grinder known as the smart-pistol. Racing around the map locking on grunts that just hatched and going pop-pop-pop-pop-pop is really fun. I find myself trying to finish skirmishes with other pilots as quickly as possible so I can go to where the actual points are. 

[twmac]

Ah right, I am playing on Xbox One and there are players there but not as many as I would have hoped.

 

You all seem to be playing on PC though, so I can't really add much more to that.

 

In the newest update they have added so much brain crack in there that I can feel my brain rotting.

[Architecture]

The request for like $40-$50 additional dollars to stay current killed it for me.

The season pass is $25 and can be readily had for less than that via GMG's sales. Even if you purchased all content separately at full price, it would only set you back $30.

[clyde]

Ah right, I am playing on Xbox One and there are players there but not as many as I would have hoped.

 

You all seem to be playing on PC though, so I can't really add much more to that.

 

In the newest update they have added so much brain crack in there that I can feel my brain rotting.

 

 

Oh ok, I misunderstood.

I don't know if the Battle Rank is just PC, this  green thing flashes on the screen and green lighting energetically informs me that ranking is active then it tells me to get points then it gives me 0-5 dots during play and tells me I did a good job then I can press "y" after the game to see how many attrition points I gained and lost on a bar-graph that includes players from both teams. 

[Badfinger]

The season pass is $25 and can be readily had for less than that via GMG's sales. Even if you purchased all content separately at full price, it would only set you back $30.

 

My point is I enjoyed Titanfall but it isn't worth $85-90 dollars. Even if I thought it was, I bought it at a time where I shouldn't have spent any money on it at all so that was doubly magnified.

[JonCole]

My point is I enjoyed Titanfall but it isn't worth $85-90 dollars. Even if I thought it was, I bought it at a time where I shouldn't have spent any money on it at all so that was doubly magnified.

 

Yeah, it's telling that the effective retail price of the game only a few months after release was halved. I honestly think they took unfair advantage of the hype and released this as a full price game when it really shouldn't have been.

[Architecture]

That seems ridiculous to me. I spent more time playing Titanfall than any other 2014 release--my Origin account clocks my time at north of 100 hours. And that's just the base game. I also got it day of release for $50. It would have been incredibly difficult for a savvy consumer to buy all content for the game at a cost of $90.

 

Furthermore, literally every 2014 release was available a month or two after release for 25-50% off its initial asking price. Wolfenstein was $30 less than four weeks after its release date via Steam, and Alien was $20 less than eight weeks after release. Even Call of Duty, a franchise notorious for holding the line at MSRP, was available at numerous times in its first month for 25% off retail. To criticize Titanfall for lowering its price aggressively seems unfair and shortsighted considering the current state of the industry.

 

I'd also argue that Respawn has been better about supporting its game post-launch than just about every other AAA developer out there. They shipped a game that worked on day one, and have continually updated and improved the game with new content for almost a year. And other than additional maps, this content has been free to the consumer.

 

Maybe you wanted a single-player campaign--I understand that. But if you went in with the understanding that it was an online-only multiplayer title, you got at least what you expected if not more. It's one of the best-designed shooters ever. Period.

[twmac]

Architecture, we don't agree on much, but in this one case I am with you on this.

 

Titanfall is easily my most played game of 2014. The fracturing of the user base was a total shame but the rest of the support has been stellar.

[JonCole]

I just don't agree. Titanfall gave me some really great gameplay for a relatively short amount of time - playing a couple hours every day for about a month. Now, I'm not the kind of gamer who begrudges a low playtime count as an absolutely negative point against a game, but I don't think it's unfair to expect more from this kind of shooter.

 

Out of the gate, I felt there were a handful of poor choices. The number of weapons felt low to me, especially the ones that actually felt effective against other competent players. Burn Cards felt mostly irrelevant, which Respawn must have agreed with since they fixed them by removing/adding cards and creating an economy for them. The Titans never felt properly balanced to me - early on, there were plenty of Hardpoint and CTF matches that I lost because the enemy team would capture the flag once and then put all 6 of their Titans on the flag with AoE weapons that didn't let you get close. From everything I've heard, there was a relatively abrupt inflection point where Titans instead became useless as their counters and player behavior were "figured out". Granted my long-term knowledge about this game is mostly anecdotal (I have played a few times in the past 6 months, but not many), it seems to me that Respawn hasn't gone to great lengths to reverse this.

 

I think that giving too many accolades to a game for just working out of the gate is kinda silly. It's certainly a point in their favor, but a functional game shouldn't be a high standard. Plus, a lot of Titanfall's competitors like Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare and Destiny launched with no technical/server issues to speak of so it seems a moot point. Both of those games have also seen a lot of post-launch content and balancing, while taking major strides to address issues with weapon balance and game design.

 

I feel as though Titanfall was simply a case of confirmation bias. We knew that the people at Respawn were capable of making a great game and when they only gave us a good one we really just wanted to believe it was great. I think it bore out throughout the year as the game had almost no continuing buzz and very little attention in GOTY proceedings (this surely is partly to do with bias towards more recently released games, but I still find it relevant).

 

Just because a game has quality doesn't mean its value is the same as every other similar quality competitor. There are a number of really good F2P shooters out right now that offer the same quality as the latest AAA shooter but clearly offer a different value due to black and white systemic differences such as needing to purchase weapons/upgrades/skins. It's a problem with the economics of games that there isn't a more expressed spectrum of value that can address multiplayer-only games of a certain scope and price them appropriately. I think that Titanfall would have held a much more prominent position in my mind if they debuted at a value price point and had a season pass or debuted at full price and offered all post-launch content free.

[Badfinger]

Selling additional maps in games where the entire game IS the map content fractures communities and kills games. Period.

 

It doesn't actually matter whether I personally buy the DLC or not. I'm fine with not having hats or outfits or even weapons (not skins, different actual numbers). The second you split the community by more than game type, if you aren't Call of Duty you're dead. It's not a Titanfall-specific problem, it's an everybody besides CS:GO problem. I'm talking about it here specifically because I liked Titanfall so much, and they destroyed their own game. I don't begrudge any developer continuing to make money and creating a service out of their product. Far from it. But I won't support developers actively sabotaging their cool thing.