Gaf Reacts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeKbGVI1pXs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeKbGVI1pXs
Titanfall has maximum player count of 12 (alongside AI) [Respawn comments post #558]
- Thread starter Fracas
- Start date
Interfectum
Member
Forum Archive material for sure.
Papacheeks
Banned
I see the whinny reactions making gaf look bad, and the people bitching to the actual developer being a bad representation of gaf.
But the later questions that me and a few other's have stated are actually the much bigger deal that is deserving of attention.
Which is that we know nothing outside of early gameplay for this game.
The 6v6 that was revealed by Vince's tweet, was very out of the blue.
2 Months to go till launch we have no clue on intricacy's of the game.
Fact's, people need to stop defending a game that to it's possible future fanbase, has not answered, or explained what we are getting for 60$.
But the later questions that me and a few other's have stated are actually the much bigger deal that is deserving of attention.
Which is that we know nothing outside of early gameplay for this game.
The 6v6 that was revealed by Vince's tweet, was very out of the blue.
2 Months to go till launch we have no clue on intricacy's of the game.
Fact's, people need to stop defending a game that to it's possible future fanbase, has not answered, or explained what we are getting for 60$.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
One aspect of this game that I can't ignore is how it addresses the void left by an absent Chromehounds sequel and also appeals to those of us who fondly remember long hours of glorious mech combat on Xbox Live. As I recall, those matches had low player counts as well, and yet, they are some of my best memories on Xbox Live. While I will not be able to play Titanfall, I certainly am appreciative of what Respawn is doing and hope it delivers on many levels for those who play it.
God, fuck Google's need to sign-in twice just to comment.
ambar_hitman
Member
6v6 lol that is a new low. And the excuses given are terrible.
Too much action? Really?
AI different than Bots? WTF?
And all this talk is as if everyone defending the game has played a demo or something. Devs are just pimping their game and downplaying anything negative. It is their job, cant blame them for that. Defenders of this game need to think with open mind. 6v6 in so called next gen is terrible.
We have BF4 with TONS of destruction doing 64p on consoles. Are they going to destroy planets and have inter-planetary space war so that the action is too difficult to handle?
Too much action? Really?
AI different than Bots? WTF?
And all this talk is as if everyone defending the game has played a demo or something. Devs are just pimping their game and downplaying anything negative. It is their job, cant blame them for that. Defenders of this game need to think with open mind. 6v6 in so called next gen is terrible.
We have BF4 with TONS of destruction doing 64p on consoles. Are they going to destroy planets and have inter-planetary space war so that the action is too difficult to handle?
threads about this really shows how so many gamers are.
Everything I have heard from people that actually PLAYED the game said it was fast paced and extremely fun.
The developers have said they had made decisions based on what was the most FUN and has nothing to do with technical restrictions.
Therefore this is how people react.
The xbone is not powerful enough to run more than 6vs6 (yes lets ignore 32vs32 bf4.
And so many people who have never played the game suddenly are experts on its gameplay and say it sucks.
I find many gamers bring a new meaning to the word ignorance.
I can understand a wait and see approach but the omg its going to suck is just plain ignorance and those people just need to shut up and go away.
Everything I have heard from people that actually PLAYED the game said it was fast paced and extremely fun.
The developers have said they had made decisions based on what was the most FUN and has nothing to do with technical restrictions.
Therefore this is how people react.
The xbone is not powerful enough to run more than 6vs6 (yes lets ignore 32vs32 bf4.
And so many people who have never played the game suddenly are experts on its gameplay and say it sucks.
I find many gamers bring a new meaning to the word ignorance.
I can understand a wait and see approach but the omg its going to suck is just plain ignorance and those people just need to shut up and go away.
And there's still 8 weeks left to release that information. You haven't lost $60. There's still plenty of time for information to come out. What's the problem? If by launch there is still a ton of undisclosed information then I'd agree. Until then, meh. It's complaining just to complain.
iMorphball
Banned
As long as the maps are made for 12 players, this is okay. No need to have more just because it's "next gen". In fact, I don't know why people even make this connection. For games like Battlefield it makes sense, because the series is known for massive battles. Titanfall isn't trying to do the same thing is Battlefield, therefore, it's okay.
dripdripsplash
Member
This is so cringe-worthy. GAF is so cringe-worthy sometimes.
aannnnd we're back, lol
Eh, more insightful things have been said in this thread.
Turin Turambar
Member
Nextgen Street Fighter has to be 20vs20, or else...!!
Papacheeks
Banned
No it's not, look at any other multplayer game. Look at Gears of war, all that info was disclosed months ahead of time.
It's one thing if it was just minor details that needed clarification.
But the fact that IGN wrote an article asking about what the 360 version looked like and who was developing it.
Same goes for Xbone, most of what we've seen was Titanfall running on pc with xbox controller.
Now Thruway(even though get's banned) tells us they are having possible driver issues getting the game to run at 720p on XBONE.
You think this is just complaining, or people who want the game are worried, and confused on the lack of information.
Stop defending the game you don't own or haven't played.
Other New IP games have all their information out by this time, only thing that usually doesn't make it is minor meta data, and DLC info.
ref
Member
Not a big deal to me, honestly.
Could be an issue if the game has poor level design, but if the game plays well and it never gets boring in an online battle, a non issue.
Bigger isn't always better.
Would have preferred 12v12 though, that seems like it would have been cool in a game like this.
Could be an issue if the game has poor level design, but if the game plays well and it never gets boring in an online battle, a non issue.
Bigger isn't always better.
Would have preferred 12v12 though, that seems like it would have been cool in a game like this.
king picollo
Member
Until you get a feel for what the playing the game actually entails, you can't really judge.
The fact there's AI in there makes me think they're trying something else, this isn't supposed to be a large player meat grinder.
The fact there's AI in there makes me think they're trying something else, this isn't supposed to be a large player meat grinder.
hellmonkey
Member
That is the one that that pisses me off about "devs", they decided what is fun for the rest of us and not even give us options to chage it. Why not allow us to make 8v8 or 12v12 games if that what we as gamers find fun? This is not directed just as Titalfall devs, but any dev that puts restrictions in their game.
If 6v6 is really there because the deem it to be the most fun and don't allow bigger matches, its insulting to gamers that want choice. If it really is because of the power of the xbone and it cant handle bigger matches, then they need to man up and say that.
Or perhaps it's about "give us options"?
6 v 6 might be the perfect balance, but that doesn't mean 3 v 3 can't be fun. Since the reveal I know that people have wanted to hear about the player count. And this reaction indicates segments of the audience who want the option for larger matches. Again, such as 'Ground War' in Call of Duty.
And yeah, it's about give me more for a lot of people. Because they perceive more as better. Nothing they've been shown of Titanfall has convinced them otherwise, yet. It's all about justification, like with Gears of War. Show them why 6 v 6 works. Ironically, giving players a private match setting for 9 v 9 might be the best way to demonstrate how the balance gets messed up. Assuming that is technically feasible, which I doubt.
Good post.
I guess another question i have is, do the bots effect the gameplay and how? are they compliant with your teams objective? Do they not follow orders? What is the work around to remain stealth without them interfering?
Im more upset at how this game was represented by the press. I actually think 6 vs 6 (or 12 vs 12 with mechs) makes it more appealing to me because it is more tactical.
The E3 previews mention 7 vs 7 in the interviews (polygon), or IGN saying it was all human. It was just not represented correctly and a ton of questions remain open.
Papacheeks
Banned
Exactly my issue so far, gameplay looks awesome, but the lack of clarity from both developer and press is disconcerting. Especially press who are over hyping things that they have no clarity on. They are excited because the have to play the same kind of Military shooter every year and review it, so something new that doesn't have a Call of Duty, Battlefield or Halo attached, get's them hot and bothered.
People like Arther Gies have no fucking clue how to be un-biased and reasonable.
Look at his tweets about PS4 sales, he is now a laughing stock of Polygon. You think his articles or opinions on things will have any weight now?
The same goes for any other Journalist that's making this game to be game of the year, and we haven't seen the version of the game that will sell the most, 360.
It's really alarming that people's emotions, and fanboyism for this game cloud the real issues that are slowly creeping up.
If in the next week we get floods of info, videos, interviews and stuff like that, and we get clarification. I will eat crow, but if we get trickle info, and non-straight answers on things that are big like stated above.
There is trouble brewing, if you ask me.
It's their game, they can do what they want with it. If your not happy with that just buy something else. What a weird thing to say. It's okay if the game does not appeal to you, you know.
Yea, we as gamers should be able to decide how "developers" design and develope their games. We obviously know more about Titanfall than they do, and have played way more games too. We know what works and what doesn't so they should actually be paying us!
Interfectum
Member
Yeah man, fuck professional game designers crafting their own experience. Why can't I fly like superman in GTA5? Why doesn't Dark Souls give me the option to use machine guns or jump 30 feet in the air? Why does Mortal Kombat restrict me to some petty 1 v 1 setup? I want 10 v 10 online with my fighting games. Let gamers decide! Freedom!
How do Respawn and Titanfall get such an easy ride from gamers and the press regarding the lack of info so close to launch ?
More established franchises than this have caught shit for it and the BF4 debacle should have everyone wary when EA are involved.
This is meant to be the new poster child of MP FPS and no one wants to show it off.
More established franchises than this have caught shit for it and the BF4 debacle should have everyone wary when EA are involved.
This is meant to be the new poster child of MP FPS and no one wants to show it off.
hahahahahahahah..... NEOGAF Delivers!!
Papacheeks
Banned
More of this, I think I will make a new thread about info, and the lack of it.
I'm sure this will go well.
Do people really need to know every little thing about a game before it's released? I thought everyone was sick of the whole stretching previews out for a year+, and just want games to be announced and then released shortly after.
Actually, please do make that thread, it will be an awesome disaster.
GuitarAtomik
Member
Please don't. At least not two months ahead of release. The real marketing machines don't go full force until about a month out. If we're still like 2 or 3 weeks away from release and barely know more than we know now, then go for it.
To be fair, your points of contention are completely valid in my opinion, but there are very (very) few complaints along the lines of yours in this thread. If it seems like people such as myself are glossing past your posts whilst being quicker to respond to others, it's for one simple reason; I honestly can't say anything worthwhile in regards to those points, because I also have no clue. All I would be able to do in this case would be to agree with you, essentially duplicating your post.
For what it's worth though, I definitely think running the PC version with Xbox controllers is silly. Either let people play it on X1, or let people play the PC version with mouse and keyboard. What they're actually doing here is demonstrating a version of the game, that next to nobody is actually going to play. Even if they choose to play on PC with a controller, they're not going to be playing against others doing the same very often.
This on the other hand I disagree with. How can it piss you off that the devs are deciding what they feel will be the most fun for their audience? That's kinda their job. They either succeed or fail at it, and you choose whether to reward them with your money or not (or whether to simply give it to a different company who DID give you what you want). What they don't do is ask you for permission to make design choices. You may want to consider Kickstarter if you feel you need more influence in how a game is made.
Why doesn't Capcom give you the option to use all specials and supers on the right-thumbstick anymore like you could in Capcom vs SNK:EO? You could choose not to, and they've shown it's possible, so what the fuck right?
The problem is that when some options are given, they are immediately taken by people when they are introduced to the game. These options may actually make the game worse, but many of these players simply won't ever give the developers original vision for the franchise a proper go. The game essentially becomes what they were initially introduced to, and often those options are initially more appealing, even if they harm the game in the long run. It's quite possible that Respawn believe that many Battlefield players will enjoy Titanfall enough in it's current form that all the servers being 6v6 won't bother them once they play it. They may also believe that allowing 32vs32, Titans as a killstreak reward and larger, more terrain based maps would be enough to convince more Quake, Tribes, CounterStrike, Halo, Gears (etc) players to stop playing when only one in five games allow the game mechanics that they created to actually be utilised properly. It's their call to make. If they get it wrong, than that's their problem. But it is their call to make.
I think most people here would agree that simply doubling the max player count in Gears probably wouldn't have made the game better. But I can imagine that there would probably be far less 4v4 (or 5v5 in the sequels) games available if people were able to set it to 8v8 (and 10v10).
The complaints over the player count are sad. First we don't know how matches will play out. If each map is suppose to have a different mode and tell different story points then having a massive fight ala Battlefield might not make any sense if they want everyone playing to be involved. Also if you want 64 players at a time you have other options. Just go play Battlefield. Not ever game should be mirrors of each other.
However the lack of information overall should be a bigger complaint so close to launch. The game comes out March 11/14th. That's two months away. The lack of a non-scripted gameplay footage should be complained about. Lack of true Xbox 360 and Xbox One footage should be the biggest complaints.
However the lack of information overall should be a bigger complaint so close to launch. The game comes out March 11/14th. That's two months away. The lack of a non-scripted gameplay footage should be complained about. Lack of true Xbox 360 and Xbox One footage should be the biggest complaints.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
This player count does not bother me at all as log as the game is fun.
Don't see any complaints that Evolved is 4 on 1. And rightfully so. A 1-1 multiplayer game can be fun. If I need a large player count fix I can play Battlefield or Planetside.
I have a bigger issue with the game being 720p.
Don't see any complaints that Evolved is 4 on 1. And rightfully so. A 1-1 multiplayer game can be fun. If I need a large player count fix I can play Battlefield or Planetside.
I have a bigger issue with the game being 720p.
Papacheeks
Banned
Well we know next to nothing and have been given outside of titan calss reveal, the same gameplay videos of the same map and same scenario's. We know nothing about upgrade system even if there is one.
We know nothing about how the actual Console versions look on the actual console hardware. We have no clue who is making the 360 version. We have no clue if there are even other game modes, or if so what they entail.
2 months from release, and we know diddly squat.
Papacheeks
Banned
It is, but only by me a a select few on this thread. Everyone else is ok with not knowing anything about the game they already did or will purchase.
Iorv3th
Member
The best multiplayer games I have ever played have been 'smaller teams' in the most common gametypes. For competitive play it is far better to have a small team you can communicate and strategize with rather than a large team with no communication and a mess of random shit going on.
Counter Strike, Call of Duty 4, Halo, Socom, and more.
Why was Socom 3 hated by most socom 1 and 2 fans? The maps were too big to try and accommodate a larger player base and it ruined the feel of the game.
Respawn, do not take a lack of sales (if your game struggles) to be because of a stink about player count. I would love to play your game, but if I can't run it on windows 7 or a ps4 I can't.
Counter Strike, Call of Duty 4, Halo, Socom, and more.
Why was Socom 3 hated by most socom 1 and 2 fans? The maps were too big to try and accommodate a larger player base and it ruined the feel of the game.
Respawn, do not take a lack of sales (if your game struggles) to be because of a stink about player count. I would love to play your game, but if I can't run it on windows 7 or a ps4 I can't.
Harts316
Member
Doesn't bother me. The footage I have seen and the track record of the developer sold me on the game. Preorderd a while ago and cannot wait!
GuitarAtomik
Member
I think it's more likely that people expect to have those questions answered before release and are just excited about what they've shown so far. I think very few would disagree with you that not much info has been released compared to other games.
I just don't understand that. I can understand being interested but to be sold when we've seen nothing but developer scripted footage that is running on PCs most people couldn't afford (people should know better on this front) bothers me. The game has my interest. It has since the reveal and has been one of the primary reasons for why I'd pick up an Xbox One over the PS4. However I know my PC won't run this on high settings so I'm stuck with either the 360 version or this will help me decide to get a Xbox One. I need to see and know more. That's even if the game holds up well. It might not in the end. That's a real possibility regardless of the development team behind it.
I would totally support the creation of this other thread, as these points are worthy of discussion, and shouldn't really be buried in this... thing.
However!
Don't do this right now, lol. Regardless what title you use, and what is contained in your OP, the thread is destined to be the sequel to this thread if you make it now. It would likely even bring back all those that got bored of complaining about the playercount in this thread, to join in for another round.
Don't do it man.
