Titanfall Review Thread

Dark FaZe said:
single digit frames were probably from multiple titans bunched around a nuke, I'd expect general performance to be pretty decent even on xbone
Click to expand...

I saw tearing all the time - in every situation.

I´d call that bad performance.

And inconsistent frame rate? From these guys? With all their history? Very disappointing.
 
I've always been on the side of "You can't review an online game until it's publicly released". You guys found that out the hard way with Battlefield 4.

If Titanfall is a good game then I expect to hear so through word of mouth, not journalists.
 
ElTorro said:
Seems to me like to only really relevant criticism is the relative lack of game modes which doesn't really bother me much.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I expect many patches from Respawn fairly soon. Heck, they are adding private matches, does anyone expect them not to add more game modes?
 
I wonder if a still broken bf4 and a lackluster ghosts contributed to titanfall being so hyped up. I know it certainly had me more excited to play titanfall.
 
JLck said:
What is weird is that 'waiting' to see how the real world servers handle it doesn't really change much.

Ok, I get why - it's an online only game and if it struggles online then what's the point? The issue I have here is that they will be updating their review in the coming days/first week - that's ample time to judge?

Plenty of games come with server issues at the start - it's common. They can improve them drastically over time though.

What if the servers don't hold up amazing for the first week, and they adjust their scores negatively to mirror that, but within a few weeks are near perfect and running smoothly.
Click to expand...

Then they can alter the score when the servers are fixed. I don't understand the early reviews for online centric games. A reviewers job is to give an informed opinion about a product. If they haven't actually tested the live version of the product how can they have an informed opinion on it?
 
Speedy Blue Dude said:
Wow. That's ridiculous and there is no way to defend frame rate drops that big.
Click to expand...
I can't believe I'm defending subpar performance on the XBOne but it's not like this is the only game in history that suffers from frame rate dips and from what I played in the beta they don't necessarily interfere with the gameplay experience too much. It'd be nice for them not to be there but their existence isn't a dealbreaker. Luckily there is a PC version and if your PC is beefy enough you won't experience those dips. Again, if there was a cheaper console that ran the game better, I'd be getting it for that console and would be telling everyone I could that the better version was on that cheaper console but that obviously isn't the case here.
 
http://www.oxmonline.com/titanfall-review

Actually impressed that OXM gave an honest review on the campaign...

We weren’t anticipating anything too involved, but Titanfall’s campaigns feel like the middle of a story you don’t have any stake in. You’re dropped in with almost zero exposition and a vague sense of who the characters are, and then events unfold completely unrelated to how, or even what, you’re doing on the battlefield. Are you mopping the floor with the IMC team? Too bad: the script says the Militia had to resort to desperate tactics and retreat. The story follows the same script when you’re playing on the other side, which also means that the only real difference in the campaigns is who’s talking to you and where your team’s spawn points are.

Again, our expectations weren’t sky-high, but it’s rare to play a campaign where your actions feel so utterly unimportant to the narrative.
Click to expand...

Sucks that the campaign isn't that great. I was really looking forward to it. Each campaign is only 2-hour long and they play out the same way, just with different names and faces.
 
JLck said:
What is weird is that 'waiting' to see how the real world servers handle it doesn't really change much.

Ok, I get why - it's an online only game and if it struggles online then what's the point? The issue I have here is that they will be updating their review in the coming days/first week - that's ample time to judge?

Plenty of games come with server issues at the start - it's common. They can improve them drastically over time though.

What if the servers don't hold up amazing for the first week, and they adjust their scores negatively to mirror that, but within a few weeks are near perfect and running smoothly.
Click to expand...

So reviews should come after the game is released and all the kinks are fixed?

I don't know if i'd be willing to wait that long....
 
The frame rate drops happened with the beta on XB1 and while it was very noticeable on a few occasions it certainly didn't take anything away from how good the game was to play, I was hoping it'd be ironed out for the retail release but it still wouldn't stop me buying it.
 
3rdamention said:
Kinda weird to write a review, release the review, for an online only game, before the online only game even releases.


What if there are huge server issues? What if performance isn't as fluid after launch?




I bet the game will play great when it launches, but releasing the review before the public even have the game, is getting the cart way in front of the horse. Its like Sim City or Battlefield all over again.
Click to expand...

The joys of EA?
I do agree though. Thoughts can be shared before, but the final review should be out after the reviewer has played the game in the normal everyday condition with all other players.


Scores are where I imagined :P
 
Bundy said:
Polygon:

jUusUcgrB5AGq.jpg


:P
Click to expand...

...I almost feel like there should be a different review scale for releases of a different scope or genre. Adventure games can be scored with a single word, since those fanbases like to read. Score-attack games can be letter-rated, i.e. F (lowest) to SSS (highest). Shooters can be a target with bullets in it; a single headshot will be a top score while an undamaged target is a terrible score. Bioware's games can be either blue or red. And so on.
 
technically the graphics might be a bit ropey, but the art design looks great to me

hopefully titanfall 2 will be freed from the shackles of previous gen platforms
and on PS4
so the art style really has a chance to sing
 
During beta, I played a fantastic FPS. After seeing those reviews, it seems that I'm going to get the same thing.

Works for me.
 
The fact that Respawn couldn't get the framerate locked on Xbox One is embarrassing, for them. The Xbox One has more than enough power to handle the source engine and what Titanfall is doing.

Hopefully they patch it tomorrow or soon after launch. I feel bad for everyone that wants to play without a PC good enough to play it on.
 
Dark FaZe said:
you know

there is a pc version
Click to expand...

And... there is an xbone version that has those problems. Scores should be different. Now if it was a matter of graphical fidelity sure, I can see them getting the same score as it would be relative to what the console is capable of. But framerate problems that effect gameplay should have a negative impact on the score.

Anyways, glad to see it's a solid game otherwise, looking forward to them taking note of the negative points and improving for the sequel. Of course splitscreen still won't happen for the sequel and my interest in the game won't be as big as other games that offer local multiplayer.

May try this out on the PC. Almost always, games like these, I would get on consoles due to the option of local multiplayer/splitscreen that the PC versions don't offer, but due to the lack of that feature, and getting reminded that this is on PC with the same modes/features, it pretty much gets rid of any urges to buy an xbone to play this game.
 
8s-9s are some pretty solid scores, I'll probably pick up the PC version when I can get it for cheap. I really don't want to pay 60 bucks for it, I think 40 would be a fair price.
 
soultron said:
Really glad some sites are waiting to see how it plays on live servers before publishing their review.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The pressure is now on EA and Microsoft's server management to prove worthy of a purchase.

Really the way to go for a review of a game like this.
 
JLck said:
What is weird is that 'waiting' to see how the real world servers handle it doesn't really change much.

Ok, I get why - it's an online only game and if it struggles online then what's the point? The issue I have here is that they will be updating their review in the coming days/first week - that's ample time to judge?

Plenty of games come with server issues at the start - it's common. They can improve them drastically over time though.

What if the servers don't hold up amazing for the first week, and they adjust their scores negatively to mirror that, but within a few weeks are near perfect and running smoothly.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of sales are in the first two weeks. Reviews are supposed to reflect the state of the game during that time when people are considering a purchase. The condition of the game before that doesn't matter, and the condition of the game six months or so later doesn't really matter that much either. What matters is "What is this going to be like when I play $60 to go and play it" cause that's how 90% of the audience will experience it.
 
gamechanger87 said:
Agreed. I expect many patches from Respawn fairly soon. Heck, they are adding private matches, does anyone expect them not to add more game modes?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even care if they would not add further modes. Maps are way more important than modes.
 
nbthedude said:
The vast majority of sales are in the first two weeks. Reviews are supposed to reflect the state of the game during that time when people are considering a purchase. The condition of the game before that doesn't matter, and the condition of the game six months or so later doesn't really matter that much either. What matters is "What is this going to be like when I play $60 to go and play it" cause that's how 90% of the audience will experience it.
Click to expand...

couldn't have said it better myself
 
DJRawr said:
Gerstmann said he won't have a score on the review until after he sees how the servers handle launch. Which is how every single outlet should be handling this.
Click to expand...

naa, like if giantbomb have any review in time anyway, he just lazy.

Why would you butcher the score for a launch day hick up ? This game is going to be populated for years and the beta was already miles better than BF4 (stability speaking).
 
Vire said:
The amount of shotgun use in these video reviews concerns me. Especially since I already thought it was a problem in the Beta.
Click to expand...

It seemed only crazy viable in Angel City, which makes sense with it being CQC friendly. Then again, Fracture was all sorts of a mess to really gauge it against Angel City regarding balance.

Oh well, going to watch the Rev3Games review and see how Sessler handles it being the end of the road for covering that game for the most part. Probably will be doing a bunch of Let's Plays if he can get away with it though and bring it up, again, for their Casual Friday piece. Hopefully that will be the end of it.
 
nbthedude said:
The vast majority of sales are in the first two weeks. Reviews are supposed to reflect the state of the game during that time when people are considering a purchase. The condition of the game before that doesn't matter, and the condition of the game six months or so later doesn't really matter that much either. What matters is "What is this going to be like when I play $60 to go and play it" cause that's how 90% of the audience will experience it.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with the 90% of the audience experiencing it at launch.

You only have to look at the popularity of PSN's instant game collection to see that there is a significant percentage who do not buy games at launch.
 
JLeack said:
1. Why would you want a game to do poorly?
2. How are 8s average?
Click to expand...
Because, I want people to understand that shooters aren't everything.

There's nothing more you can do with the shooter genre other than make it totally realistic meaning that your injuries don't fully heal. You have to spend a load of time reloading. If you die then you start from the beginning.


I am tired of shooting games and I hate last generation because it was the birth of the dude bros.

I am tired of all of this online aspect stuff. I want games to return to story and gameplay first.

We give developers so much leeway now but I don't. If your game doesn't do anything for the genre then it does nothing for me.

GIVE ME SOMETHING NEW! PROVE ME WRONG.

7-8 ia average in my opinion then again, I am a hard judge anyway.
 
Etnos said:
naa, like if they have any review in time anyway, they just slack.

Why would you butcher the score for a launch day hick up ? This game is going to be populated for years and the beta was already miles better than BF4 (stability speaking).
Click to expand...

How do you know this? Didn't Halo 4 drop in userbase very steeply past it's honeymoon-period?
 
travisbickle said:
I'm sure I'll wake up to the fallout from the inevitable 6/10 score from an obscure website.
Click to expand...

There's always one or two outliers, like Polygon's 7.5 for TLoU.

After all, we've seen cases where metacritic-eligible reviews are reviewed by haters of the particular game genre, so there's no surprise there.
 
At this point I bet the 360 version will run better because they won't have yo jack the resolution just to say its above 720.

A game like this at 60 fps bad textures sub hd is better than a wavering to single digit frame rates with 790p and mediocre textures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lunar Remastered Collection | Review Thread
Opinion Review 
43
3K
anthony2690 replied
Avowed | Review Thread
Analysis Review  28 29 30 31 32
2K
86K
GymWolf replied
AI Limit | Review Thread
Opinion Analysis Review 
36
2K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
  • Poll
Assassin's Creed: Shadows | Review Thread
Analysis Review  18 19 20 21 22
1K
71K
Rocco Schiavone replied
'A Minecraft Movie' | Review Thread
2 3 4
157
7K
LordBritish replied
Top Bottom