Titanfall Review Thread
- Thread starter VisceralBowl
- Start date
statham
Member
eh, I got better things to do.
BF2 came out at a time when PC games weren't $60.
And pc games has mod support.
So they should be able to charge extra for user generated content? So if a game has SP+MP and also mods (so let's say Quake 4) it's cool to charge $80 for that game then?
You're right, they were $50, which was the equivalent at the time.
Neuromancer
Member
I agree. Throw me a fucking bone here Respawn. Just bots in offline/online private matches might have been enough for me to get this game; instead, nothing but always online always competitive MP. They've literally given me and people like me (who do not care for competitive MP) no reason to buy it.
Say what you will about CoD, but they try to put something into the package for just about everyone and I think that has gone a long way towards making it a success.
RealityPales
Member
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
It was $40. And it was awesome.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
You can't really compare a multiplayer-only game to a single player only one, at least like that. Sure GZ might have more time to 100% it, but TF has vastly more replay value being it's a competitive MP game. You may put 75 hours into MGS GZ, but 6 days into TF when all said and done.
Worth is in the eye of the beholder. If you play a ton of TF it's completely worth the price.
Contributor.
doctorcdcs
Member
They sure did. Check out the comments section of the review. It's sad, really.
boredandlazy
Member
Not really the same situation at all, When TLOU first came out there was probably a bunch of negatively written user reviews posted, but over time as the trolls get bored it's balanced out by genuine customers.Not much of the latter for The Last of Us:
Titanfall hasn't been out for 9 months.
Sorry, forgot that digital copies on the Xbox One are going to be full price, my bad! It was aimed at those who use the high price tag as a justification of the game being a failure or whatever, you can already get the game at low prices and if you don't then it's your own choice.
gioGAF
Member
While the whole notion of a "fair" price point is subjective, my opinion on the matter is that the current cost structure of console games is not very good. IMO, some games are worth $60, while others clearly are not (this would take forever to elaborate on, so I will leave it at that).
One thing that should be mentioned is the perceived notion of value provided by a multiplayer component. Even though I enjoy playing Call of Duty, I don't feel like the multiplayer component would warrant a full retail cost. The value of the multiplayer is actually added by the community, not the developer. If I'm playing the same 15 maps over and over again, the developers just gave us a platform to engage other players, they really add nothing after they provide the original tools. The only thing that can be considered of value are the use of dedicated servers.
I'm sure I'm not expressing this idea as clearly or logically as possible, but there it is. While a game has to be fun in the first place, it is the community that causes you to keep playing the game. A fun mechanic is imperative, but you shouldn't have to pay someone every time you want to play basketball.
Especially when MS and EA have paid off most of the journalists in the business to go along with the manufactured hype. Am I right?
Yea, value is obviously subjective. To your point about community, yes I think that is especially true with multiplayer games, but I'm sure EA has done the math. I'm playing PvZ right now, and that's a game I feel is way more overpriced at $40 than Titanfall at $60. I suppose we should be happy that pubs seem more willing to mess with the formula, although I'm not sure that type of thinking goes into something as big as Titanfall. There's MS, EA, respawn, a ton of websites and podcasts all putting light on this game.
its about content that the developers produce. they are not creating more content with a mp only game. That is what i am paying for when i buy a game. thats where my money is going. I pay for what the developers produce. I am fine with games like TF or PvZ:GW being online only if they aren't trying to charge full price.
SmoothRunningGun
Member
.
They could have spent a little bit of time and done some sort of horde mode and I would have been more inclined to purchase. And if devs want people to play through their campaigns multiple times add coop. I played through gears 3 many times with different groups of friends.
This is a bizarre way to respond to people deliberately abusing a system. A reasonable person doesn't look at a situation where a game is being characterized as a "1" for petty reasons and think "boy, I should give it a ten to cancel that out."
It is?
boredandlazy
Member
What is the price of this game though? On consoles you're not just paying $60 for the game. The ability to actually play any of what that $60 got you is behind another paywall. Can't criticise PC for that though...
Edit: Of course this criticism is not unique to Titanfall.
That's the author of the Earthborn Trilogy.
I think if the Last of Us was slated to be a timed exclusive, then Sony bought its way into having it an exclusive, you would see a backlash.
No it was not. It was cheaper, not to mention the fact that PC games were always cheaper than console games until about 4-5 years ago.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
nope. not for the people that it matters to.
BF2 was 40 bucks when it came out.
speculawyer
Member
I'm very happy to see Titanfall having success and I hope it moves a lot of xbox ones!
Having strong competition between Sony and Microsoft is good for us consumers no matter which console you own.
Having strong competition between Sony and Microsoft is good for us consumers no matter which console you own.
PC games are cheaper than console games and buying from retail. Don't know where you're getting them from were they cost the same, but you should stop.
Nymphae
Banned
I feel like "people are willing to pay for it so..." is a bad argument for it being worth the price they're asking.
You can say this about a lot of shit that really isn't worth all that much. At the end of the day, yes it's worth whatever someone wants to pay for it, but there is a certain level of content that is expected in $60 FPS's these days, and this game fall short of that content.
BF2 isn't really a good comparison. PC games were always cheaper and that game was broken as all hell at launch. It was basically the typical Dice release of being a great game that was completely fucked by technical issues and frustration at launch.
EDIT: what i mean to say that game wasn't worth $40 or $50 or whatever they charged. It wasn't a polished game.
EDIT: what i mean to say that game wasn't worth $40 or $50 or whatever they charged. It wasn't a polished game.
Bornstellar
Member
No, it's exactly the right argument. 15 incredibly well designed, complex, intricate maps and amazing gameplay on said maps? Worth it.
boredandlazy
Member
Sure. But even with me being lazy and not actually checking, it's pretty safe to assume that there'd have been at least a few troll reviews on the Metacritic page when TLOU first came out.
I'm just saying that if Titanfall is as good as the professional reviewers say it is, over time the metacritic user score will climb as the trolls find something else to pick on.
Alcibiades
Member
guy may be legit but forbes conts have professional legitimacy of personal blog posts :/
That's not how I remember BF2 at launch... I think I put about 22,000 hours into that game in the first month.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
I would argue including 35GB of uncompressed audio is 'broken'.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Not everyone expects that though. I'm looking at it from the POV that I will sink an insane number of hours into the multiplayer and will most definitely get the value out of that. To me and to many others that's the true value. That may not be the norm but it isn't minuscule either. I fault no one for feeling the content doesn't warrant the price but no one is forcing anyone to buy this.
Yes, because reviewers at "legit" gaming sites are the bastions of honest and fair reviews.
Crazy long loads, servers getting hammered. It was probably one of my favorite games of all time on PC but let's be realistic. I remember their earlier games being relatively issue free, but BF2 had issues.
I don't consider "broken" to be a longer install time but I agree the idea to make universal language support a required installation is idiotic. Developers should be breaking up installs for MP and SP for digital purchases.
Dreams-Visions
Member
sums it up. It's kind of ironic for me, really. Sometimes I almost feel like a fucking moron paying $60 for SP only/focused games that I'll play once, beat, and never play again. Like, why didn't I just wait until they were <$30? I'm getting/got *days* (dozens, hundreds of hours) worth of enjoyment out of MP games like Dota2, LoL, Team Fortress 2, MvC3, CoDMW, SF4, BF3 and 4, Crysis 2, Warhawk, KZSF, Halo 2, UT99, and now Titanfall will be no different. Even of the games listed that had a SP component, I never even bothered to play them outside of "warming up" for online play.
If time spent enjoying something is a measure of value, games with a good MP pay for themselves many times over. My investment cost per hour of enjoyment is and will always be the least, (thus maximized) with MP.
gioGAF
Member
You can say that all you want, but it is completely subjective. IMO Modern Warfare 2 had all that and more for the same $60. Sure, for most of us $60 for something we want is a drop in the bucket, but we are talking about precedent here.
The same type of precedent set by Microsoft when they started charging people for being able to play games online. The masses allowed this ridiculous practice (they are charging me to use the internet connection I already pay for) and their main competitor adopted the same stance, since it would be stupid to leave free money on the table.
I guess next year, EA and Activision can just split Battlefield and Call of Duty into parts and charge us $60 per part, smh.
The campaigns for Battlefield and Killzone are straight up garbage, though, compared to the multiplayer.
Isn't Destiny also online-only? Your argument makes no sense.
Each game gives you X hours of fun for Y dollars. Divide X by Y, get your cost per hour, and that's the only damn thing that matters. Getting caught up in esoteric arguments on what's in the package is pointless.
I'm Canadian, and PC games are not cheaper retail here.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
agreed.
I often think of the money I dropped on Carcassonne on the iphone. It is a very expensive game comparatively, but I've played at least 1000 hours on it so really it's way more than a wash. And evrytime they drop a new expansion I'm in because I know the game hits all the right spots for me. I also understand it's not for everyone and I don't fault anyone for not liking it. Seems like that happy medium of being content and also understanding isn't often grasped. We'd all be better off if it was.
Bornstellar
Member
It is subjective - hence the reviews providing a subjective evaluation of value. But to me, *fun* outweighs any other metric for value when evaluating a game.
Alcibiades
Member
Hey I think videogame journalism has been a joke for quite a while now... heck a lot of "real" journalism I consider a joke. Forbes contribution is still a problem.
I hate it when people complain about the price of the game on the basis that it is just a multiplayer game. I paid 60€ for MAG, and I know a bunch of other people who did too. I never played it nearly as much as some of those other guys, but I appreciated the hell out of it and I think it's one of the best and most underrated online shooters ever despite it not having a single player campaign.
If you don't feel like you'll get your money's worth, don't buy it!
i see it as more rewarding devs with the same money for doing less. I play the sp parts of bf cod and other mp focused games. i like the stories and big cinematic experiences in those. they might not be the most polished things ever but they are usually 6 to 8 hrs of content that add value for me. without those the games' values are just less to me.
Nydius
Member
Would I have preferred 20 maps instead of 15? Sure.
However, I would like to know what this "certain level of expected content" for a $60 FPS is. COD:Ghosts only came with 14 maps and the same old modes COD has always had.
"But it has a campaign," I hear someone saying, to which I just laugh. COD campaign is nothing more than a bolted on piece of crap that simply uses the multiplayer maps and assets. Sure they give some obligatory rendered cutscenes, but that's it. I actually give Respawn some kudos for abandoning the ridiculous pretense. No one goes out of their way to buy COD or Battlefield (except maybe BF: Bad Company) for the campaign. If they do, they're wasting their money on what amounts to maybe a tenth of the total game.
The important part of what I meant though is that BF2 sold for the same price as comparable PC games that had both a SP and MP mode (whilst also having mods, before that comes up again). Some games are made to be exclusively single player, some exclusively multiplayer, and some both. Metroid Prime shouldn't have to be sold cheaper than Prime 2 due to no multiplayer, neither should Bioshock to Bioshock 2 or Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2.
Virtua Fighter 2 shouldn't have to be sold cheaper than Tekken 2 due to having less characters. Ridge Racer 6 shouldn't have to be sold cheaper than Forza 2 due to having less cars and so on. Content creation isn't the only area of game development that incurs a cost. Respawn could have easily doubled Titanfall's map count simply by putting less effort into each one. Or could have spent time creating some throwaway single player scenarios rather than spending time ensuring that the multiplayer was balanced and could stand up over time providing longevity (something that the majority of multiplayer modes tacked onto SP game fail at spectacularly).
If we're at the point where it more important to hit a bunch of checkboxes on paper rather than to actually design the game as you envision, else you can't charge the same amount, and thus can't pay the same people, then our industry is fucked sadly.
Similar threads
- Poll