GiantBomb: Titanfall Quick Look is Live

Dragon said:
Yeah you sound just like a developer... Don't use the word kink.
Click to expand...

I know this is OT, but what is wrong with using the word "kink?" Is that not a common synonym for a flaw or unexpected issue? I looked it up and couldn't find that it was derived from something offensive. (I know there is likewise sexual slang associated with it, but that's hardly the most common use or understanding of the word.)
 
Don't understand how it can have such a small amount of content I.e. Modes and game types and then frame rate issues and crashes etc but then receive all these 9 and 10's, do these reviewers actually play the game or just copy paste a review given by EA?
 
ChrisW said:
Don't understand how it can have such a small amount of content I.e. Modes and game types and then frame rate issues and crashes etc but then receive all these 9 and 10's, do these reviewers actually play the game or just copy paste a review given by EA?
Click to expand...

The game is getting 9 and 10's precisely because reviewers played the game. I'm assuming you've played it as well?
 
ChrisW said:
Don't understand how it can have such a small amount of content I.e. Modes and game types and then frame rate issues and crashes etc but then receive all these 9 and 10's, do these reviewers actually play the game or just copy paste a review given by EA?
Click to expand...

What are a few examples of similar retail games that have more content for their multiplayer modes?
 
ChrisW said:
Don't understand how it can have such a small amount of content I.e. Modes and game types and then frame rate issues and crashes etc but then receive all these 9 and 10's, do these reviewers actually play the game or just copy paste a review given by EA?
Click to expand...

If you're super huge on FPS MP, it has enough to keep you occupied, so I can see where reviewers are coming from. I like MP, I like FPS, and I liked Titanfall, just not $60 liked it.
 
Dragonborn said:
Having a good return policy is comical? I'd say it's a pretty big advantage Origin has over Steam (one of the few).
Click to expand...

I think it's comical you had to spend 10 hours on a game to realize you hate it so much you want to return it.

I also find that business model comical as it is open to be easily abused.
 
It's just strange that a game such as killzone which again is mainly known for its great multiplayer, gets bad scores based on its single player component, even though the multiplayer is great fun and has tons of depth.

I'm sure it's fun, but like someone else said, it not much for how long it's been in development and only being on two consoles
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
I think it's comical you had to spend 10 hours on a game to realize you hate it so much you want to return it.

I also find that business model comical as it is open to be easily abused.
Click to expand...

Wow, now you're just putting words in my mouth. My main complaint is that to me, the game got old fast. There's not enough content in there to warrant the full price they're asking for. I never said I "hated" Titanfall, I never said it was a crap game (in fact, I'd say quite the good game). That's why I returned it, I'll buy it again when I find it for 20-30 bucks in a month or two.

KoopaTheCasual said:
Wow, I never knew. Why do some many people shit on Origin, again?
Click to expand...

Most people would rather not have multiple clients with their games spread around. There's also the EA hate (which isn't completely undeserved). I personally have never had an issue with Origin, and their return policy is pretty great (though it's only for EA games).
 
ElTorro said:
Yeah, recorded that earlier on my XBO:

i1S2NDI5sWkgH.gif


Giant Bomb wasn't exaggerating with the single digit fps. The game definitely needs some polish. (It's still awesome, tons of fun, everybody should buy it, yadada)
Click to expand...

I didn't believe this at first, but there you go :/ What an embarrassment.
 
Dragonborn said:
Wow, now you're just putting words in my mouth. My main complaint is that to me, the game got old fast. There's not enough content in there to warrant the full price they're asking for. I never said I "hated" Titanfall, I never said it was a crap game (in fact, I'd say quite the good game). That's why I returned it, I'll buy it again when I find it for 20-30 bucks in a month or two.
Click to expand...

If you're such a PC gamer, you'd know you could have bought it off origin for a little over 30 already.

Secondly, since when these days is 10 hours not enough to warrant a purchase?
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
I think it's comical you had to spend 10 hours on a game to realize you hate it so much you want to return it.

I also find that business model comical as it is open to be easily abused.
Click to expand...

It often takes that much time to figure out whether a game is deep and replayable. Took me 30 hours before I realised how crap Simcity was.
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
If you're such a PC gamer, you'd know you could have bought it off origin for a little over 30 already.

Secondly, since when these days is 10 hours not enough to warrant a purchase?
Click to expand...

I know it's been cheaper, but I bought it yesterday as a last moment thing (again, thanks to that return policy) to give it a shot.

As for you second point, no 10 hours isn't enough to warrant $60 and while I'm sure I could put some more hours into it, I just don't feel it's worth the full price. I'll definitely pick it up when it's $20-30 though. It's mostly an issue of content to me

This isn't a shot against Titanfall or any of it's fans, it's just my own personal opinion based on my experience with the game. And I say again, yes the game is good and if you find enough value in it then that's awesome.
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
I think it's comical you had to spend 10 hours on a game to realize you hate it so much you want to return it.

I also find that business model comical as it is open to be easily abused.
Click to expand...

He didn't say he "hated" the game. Why are you gate-keeping Titanfall threads? Not everyone has to deep throat the game. People who actually spend time with the game to see if they like it are doing it the right way.

As someone who plays fighting games competitively, I try ALL fighting games and play them for more than 10 hours to see if I like a game. Sometimes it takes time to "click" or learn a certain mechanic or character that you may like. Sometimes you may like a game within the first 10-20 hours then when you learn more about the game you might not like the mid-high levels of gameplay.
 
I haven't been paying close attention, so let me see if I have all of this straight.


  • The Alpha is released with 256x256 textures, running at 720p. My cursory googling revealed only minor performance issues, similar to past CoD titles; minor dips and associated tearing.
  • CBoaT tells us all specs are final, and this is how the game will ship.
  • The Beta is released with a 300% increase in texture resolution and a 21% increase in screen resolution, discrediting CBoaT, but also introducing prominent tearing and frame rate dips so significant even Gies is forced to acknowledge their existence.
  • CBoaT insists the ony way to fix the performace issues is to go back to the Alpha specs, but Respawn insists all assets are final, and the performance issues will be fixed in the final code.
  • The final code is released with the same assets and same performance issues. Respawn promises to increase the screen resolution an additional 29-86%, with the caveat they'll never do anything that compromises the performace, despite having just done precisely that.
  • For reasons I cannot fathom, some people decide the resolution increases are insignificant, and the game has suddenly become CPU-bound instead, and expect futher resolution increases along with performance gains.

Does that basically sum things up?
 
Dragonborn said:
I know it's been cheaper, but I bought it yesterday as a last moment thing (again, thanks to that return policy) to give it a shot.

As for you second point, no 10 hours isn't enough to warrant $60 and while I'm sure I could put some more hours into it, I just don't feel it's worth the full price. I'll definitely pick it up when it's $20-30 though. It's mostly an issue of content to me

This isn't a shot against Titanfall or any of it's fans, it's just my own personal opinion based on my experience with the game. And I say again, yes the game is good and if you find enough value in it then that's awesome.
Click to expand...

it's not that it's been cheaper. you could have got it yesterday for a little over 30. were you not in the titanfall thread at all? it was all over that thread yesterday.


Salex_ said:
He didn't say he "hated" the game. Why are you gate-keeping Titanfall threads? Not everyone has to deep throat the game. People who actually spend time with the game to see if they like it are doing it the right way.
Click to expand...

some comments just come off as ridiculous. It's strange when someone who regularly posts on this forum, spends 10 hours on a game and gets it on day 1, does not even venture in the very thread that involves that Game. Then is like "LOL im gonna return this shit." Cmon now......
 
serversurfer said:
I haven't been paying close attention, so let me see if I have all of this straight.


  • The Alpha is released with 256x256 textures, running at 720p. My cursory googling revealed only minor performance issues, similar to past CoD titles; minor dips and associated tearing.
  • CBoaT tells us all specs are final, and this is how the game will ship.
  • The Beta is released with a 300% increase in texture resolution and a 21% increase in screen resolution, discrediting CBoaT, but also introducing prominent tearing and frame rate dips so significant even Gies is forced to acknowledge their existence.
  • CBoaT insists the ony way to fix the performace issues is to go back to the Alpha specs, but Respawn insists all assets are final, and the performance issues will be fixed in the final code.
  • The final code is released with the same assets and same performance issues. Respawn promises to increase the screen resolution an additional 29-86%, with the caveat they'll never do anything that compromises the performace, despite having just done precisely that.
  • For reasons I cannot fathom, some people decide the resolution increases are insignificant, and the game has suddenly become CPU-bound instead, and expect futher resolution increases along with performance gains.

Does that basically sum things up?
Click to expand...

If you make heavy mischaracterizations to try to change the context and content of what a leaker said? Sure, knock yourself out.
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
it's not that it's been cheaper. you could have got it yesterday for a little over 30. were you not in the titanfall thread at all? it was all over that thread yesterday.



some comments just come off as ridiculous. why are you stalking me?
Click to expand...

Okay, maybe I'm not being clear enough here. I took a chance on it because of the Great Game Guarantee on Origin. Yes, it was cheaper in certain and other places and in the past it's also been cheap. That's how PC games are; however, I didn't know for certain whether the Great Game Guarantee would extent to games bought outside Origin.

Chill out man, it's just a game. I may not have liked it, but there's plenty of people that have. You're own comments are pretty ridiculous from what I've seen.
 
Dragonborn said:
Okay, maybe I'm not being clear enough here. I took a chance on it because of the Great Game Guarantee on Origin. Yes, it was cheaper in certain and other places and in the past it's also been cheap. That's how PC games are; however, I didn't know for certain whether the Great Game Guarantee would extent to games bought outside Origin.

Chill out man, it's just a game. I may not have liked it, but there's plenty of people that have. You're own comments are pretty ridiculous from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

it was that price VIA origin. Why wouldnt have you even looked in the titanfall thread if you were gonna get a game day 1 and commit 10 hours to it so quickly?

I would think you'd have popped your head in there at least once.
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
it was that price VIA origin. Why wouldnt have you even looked in the titanfall thread if you were gonna get a game day 1 and commit 10 hours to it so quickly?

I would think you'd have popped your head in there at least once.
Click to expand...

Sigh

Whatever man, this is pointless. I've explained it enough, if you still don't get it, oh well. As I said, it's just a game, you don't need to go around everywhere defending it.
 
Fixed2BeBroken said:
it was that price VIA origin. Why wouldnt have you even looked in the titanfall thread if you were gonna get a game day 1 and commit 10 hours to it so quickly?

I would think you'd have popped your head in there at least once.
Click to expand...

Dude, why do you care so much that he doesn't like a game and wants to return it?
 
Hmm, i've been playing for 10+ hours and have not encountered any major problems yet. Only got some framedrops when the game gets too crowded with titans.
 
Gestault said:
If you make heavy mischaracterizations to try to change the context and content of what a leaker said? Sure, knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
I prefaced my post by saying I hadn't been paying close attention, and finished up by asking if it was accurate. What do you feel I've mischaracterized? Are you claiming my timeline is inaccurate, or do you just not care for the implications?
 
Unfortunately I'm one of the many people experiencing a problem signing into Xbox Live on the Xbox One right now (I can sign in on the 360 without fail). So, I came home and was excited to find Titanfall waiting for me, but can't check it out yet. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem and is "investigating". So, live goes down for many of us on the very day that the biggest online only release is available. lol Yeah, first world problems...not the end of the world and have plenty of work to do to keep me busy while I wait for it to get sorted. But this sort of thing does fray the nerves a little bit in that I always used to hear the argument that Live is "better" than PS+ at least partly because it has more reliable/better up-time as a result of always having been a pay-for service. I paid for Gold for 7 years and rarely had an outage, so this isn't that big of an issue... but I'm considering re-upping Gold solely for Titanfall and not being able to log on today when I happen to actually have some rare free time is a little annoying. Oh well. I wonder how wide-spread the issue is and if it's a regional thing or all over....
 
serversurfer said:
I prefaced my post by saying I hadn't been paying close attention, and finished up by asking if it was accurate. What do you feel I've mischaracterized? Are you claiming my timeline is inaccurate, or do you just not care for the implications?
Click to expand...

I'm claiming it's inaccurate.The sort of superfluous layers of editorial you attached made your outlook seem questionable, but that was beside my point. There are a few points I think you're mistaken about, but I think it's basically worth asking about the one I brought up. Please find the quote to back up this point:

"CBoaT insists the only way to fix the performace issues is to go back to the Alpha specs..."

This in particular, because unless there was something I missed (possible, but unlikely, as I was in the thread where Cboat doubled-down), it would have required deliberate manipulation of the facts or deeply seeded rationalization to have come to that conclusion.
 
Gestault said:
I'm claiming it's inaccurate.The sort of superfluous layers of editorial you attached made your outlook seem questionable, but that was beside my point. There are a few points I think you're mistaken about, but I think it's basically worth asking about the one I brought up. Please find the quote to back up this point:

"CBoaT insists the only way to fix the performace issues is to go back to the Alpha specs..."

This in particular, because unless there was something I missed (possible, but unlikely, as I was in the thread where Cboat doubled-down), it would have required deliberate manipulation of the facts or deeply seeded rationalization to have come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

I think Cboat was right about the perf problems. He just didn't have enough insight or detail to know that they would up the res from 720->792p. Maybe it was a conspiracy to defame him on GAF (:lol). But really, why would you up the resolution when your game is already shitting it's pants with multiple titans? Just leave it at 720p and target 60fps.

#teamCboat
 
Gestault said:
I'm claiming it's inaccurate.The sort of superfluous layers of editorial you attached made your outlook seem questionable, but that was beside my point. There are a few points I think you're mistaken about, but I think it's basically worth asking about the one I brought up. Please find the quote to back up this point:

"CBoaT insists the only way to fix the performace issues is to go back to the Alpha specs..."

This in particular, because unless there was something I missed (possible, but unlikely, as I was in the thread where Cboat doubled-down), it would have required deliberate manipulation of the facts or deeply seeded rationalization to have come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

The Buttocks insisted that the resolution was to be 720P and the textures the same as in the alpha. Full stop. He was VERY adamant about it.

If he was being told performance and as close to 60FPS was the overshadowing goals, its not hard to see why he made that claim. We do know, even now, that Respawn keeps saying that. We also know now that the game is out, that it doesn't necessarily line up with the performance we have currently.

CBOAT made a poor jump on the faith that ex-IW/Respawn is more concerned with performance and art direction than IQ and the infatuation with res. He choose the wrong pony this time (Even if there is some rationality behind it with the new facts on the ground).

Think its also safe to say 1080P patch is a pipe dream. You;re not going to increase the performance delta 30-40% when you have single digit hiccups and some gameplay averaging consistently in the high 20's .
 
TyrantII said:
The Buttocks insisted that the resolution was to be 720P and the textures the same as in the alpha. Full stop. He was VERY adamant about it.

If he was being told performance and as close to 60FPS was the overshadowing goals, its not hard to see why he made that claim. We do know, even now, that Respawn keeps saying that. We also know now that the game is out, that it doesn't necessarily line up with the performance we have currently.

CBOAT made a poor jump on the faith that ex-IW/Respawn is more concerned with performance and art direction than IQ and the infatuation with res. He choose the wrong pony this time (Even if there is some rationality behind it with the new facts on the ground).

Think its also safe to say 1080P patch is a pipe dream. You;re not going to increase the performance delta 30-40% when you have single digit hiccups and some gameplay averaging consistently in the high 20's .
Click to expand...

The chances of a 1080p patch without causing additional issues is nil, as far as I'm concerned. Just to be clear, were you agreeing that Cboat never made any comments on how to address a performance issue, but simply that the game would be launching at X resolution with Y textures? That was what I was getting at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Breaking: Fandom Sells Giantbomb - Jeff Grubb, Jeff Backalar Now Own It
42
1K
DenchDeckard replied
Jeff Gerstmann finally explains all regarding the fall of Giantbomb
News Drama  2 3 4
154
4K
hjninten02 replied
Anno 117: Pax Romana Demo is LIVE on Steam
37
931
HerjansEagleFeeder replied
Dan Houser is doing a live camera interview with IGN
4
341
Barakov replied
Jump Ship - Steam Demo Is Live
1
795
PeteBull replied
Top Bottom