Titanfall Review Thread

Garrett 2U said:
That's a pretty great Metacritic score for a 60$ multiplayer only title.
I hope it starts a trend, I'm so tired of half assed campaigns.

Anyways, I can't wait to play it in less than half a day :D!
Click to expand...

If Skyrim couldn't stop half-assed multiplayer modes Titanfall won't stop half-assed campaigns.
 
which are reviews worth reading, as in from people that are like competitive CoD players or what not?

Wanna read about initial balances/inbalances and long term potential and what not.
 
I love that Titanfall has reviewed so positively. So positively in fact that certain doom and gloom Gafers felt it necessary to open up threads focusing on one negative element that happens infrequently.

Games are about having fun. Anyone who played the beta clearly saw that this is fun. I’m delighted that this is reflected in the reviews.
 
AndrewDean84xX said:
Is that what you heard, or what Jeff told you personally?
Click to expand...

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116360-Jeff-Gerstmann-Explains-His-Departure-From-Gamespot

The issue, Gerstmann claimed in a streaming interview, was that a new management team inexperienced in dealing with editorial groups, had come to power at Gamespot and overreacted to what Gerstmann describes as "publisher push-back." According to his recollection, Eidos threatened to pull ad revenue from Gamespot as a result of his review, and though this kind of thing is relatively common in games journalism, the nascent management team panicked and decided that Gerstmann was unreliable. "They felt they couldn't trust me in the role," Gerstmann said.

"We did what an editorial team does. We did what we were supposed to be doing. We reviewed games, we instructed people about the quality of games, and we were completely honest," he added. "This management team buckled when faced with having a lot of ad dollars walk out the door."
Click to expand...
 
Respect to the sites waiting to assign an official review score for an online multiplayer game until it's live in the environment players will be experiencing it in. Appreciate it considering how major releases have gone as of late once they're sent out into the wild. Hooray for integrity!
 
pokeystaples said:
Reviews look good, but this is odd for me. I figured the reviews would come in a little after everyone has had a chance to play the game in the wild considering how well online games fair upon release. Especially when they come from EA.
Click to expand...
I said in my previous post that I think all these reviews were done at an EA hosted event, because Jim Sterling said he wasn't attending one, but I can't tell for sure since all of these sites still consider this information not relevant for disclosure. They haven't even learned to be forthcoming about the circumstances of their reviews. Fuck if I'm gonna trust any of them, especially after last time.

So far Jim Sterling has decided to review the thing on his own time, and Jeff Gerstmann will update his currently score-less non-review as he's played the game in a retail environment. So kudos to those two for bothering to acknowledge this issue.
 
Orayn said:
From my experience with the beta, the parkour is a big enough change to a major aspect of the game that calling it with "CoD with X" is selling it short.

The gunplay and structure of the multiplayer are substantially similar to CoD, yes, but everything is quite a bit different in practice.
Click to expand...

Even the structure is different due to how points are handled in objectives and how these matches flow. The closest this game probably gets to COD will likely be in Pilot Hunter. To me having dropped even considering COD since Black Ops 1, the only familiarity was the weapons handling.
 
wow their some amazing scores. Congrats respawn.

Really surprised their all so high for a multiplayer only game. To put them in the same category as some top story based games makes me wonder should Multiplayer have its own rating system. Games with multiplayer + SP rated separately.

I guess the multiplayer must be worth its full price in $£
 
ArchedThunder said:
Skyrim got more than a 90 on metacritic on every platform and sold amazingly well in an age where everyone was saying the single player game was dead and yet developers and publishers still feel the need to slap multiplayer into as many games as they can.
Click to expand...

Skyrim is a 100+ hour game. Publishers slap multiplayer on 5-8 hour single player campaigns because those can't be sold for $60 anymore.
 
n0tail said:
I find it fascinating that people are completely OK with singleplayer only for $60, in fact, they praise it, and completely bash multiplayer only.

10-hour singleplayer only = OK
1000-hour multiplayer only = too expensive, should be $30.
Click to expand...

That 1000 hours is playing the MP over, and over, and over again.
I can play the SP over, and over, and over again too.

and I've seen plenty of people complain about short SP games, you act like they are all 10 hours. Most SP games will take you 30 hours to play through every part of the game, some 100+, and that's just playing it once.

and SP games have a story, actors, scripts, A.I., set pieces, cut scenes, side quests, hidden collectables, etc....

and most games now have SP and MP for $60.
 
ArchedThunder said:
Skyrim got more than a 90 on metacritic on every platform and sold amazingly well in an age where everyone was saying the single player game was dead and yet developers and publishers still feel the need to slap multiplayer into as many games as they can.
Click to expand...

there is a difference between a sandbox and a story driven game though, you cant group the two together. sandbox can last hundreds of hours but its tough to make a story driven game thats longer than 12 hours without mucking it up. If a game is that "short" many will claim it needs multiplayer.
 
Nice scores. If it didn't come out on Dark Souls 2 day I'd probably pick it up on PC. Maybe on PC a couple months down the line if it can sustain a sizable community, which is pretty tough for PC FPS without Counter-Strike or Battlefield in the title.
 
miDnIghtEr20C said:
Lol.. what the hell is The Globe and Mail (Toronto)? Giving the game a 70 out of 100? Lol.. metacritic letting any website up there these days? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/tech...-but-it-left-us-wanting-more/article17392517/
Click to expand...

The Globe and Mail is a nationally distributed Canadian newspaper, based in Toronto and printed in six cities across the country. With a weekly readership of approximately 1 million,[3] it is Canada's largest-circulation national newspaper and second-largest daily newspaper after the Toronto Star. The Globe and Mail is regarded as Canada's "newspaper of record".


From wiki, probably not just "any website" as you put it.
 
Bsigg12 said:
You can review mechanics and content at a review event where they have 24 or more people there playing the game together.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a preview. Game's not out, privileged press get to play it at invite only event. Only difference is they're calling it a review. I don't have a problem with this really, but in the case of a multiplayer online only game, they really should wait a while. But then no clicks, so games journalism.
 
Spades said:
I love that Titanfall has reviewed so positively. So positively in fact that certain doom and gloom Gafers felt it necessary to open up threads focusing on one negative element that happens infrequently.

Games are about having fun. Anyone who played the beta clearly saw that this is fun. I’m delighted that this is reflected in the reviews.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of great games that have an 87 metacritic, but putting stock into a metacritic's score without reading any reviews is pretty dumb. Multiple reviews have mentioned performance problems, even someone like Arthur Gies. You can be willfully ignorant because you want to be, but performance with the circumstances for this game in mind, is damning.
 
VibratingDonkey said:
I said in my previous post that I think all these reviews were done at an EA hosted event, because Jim Sterling said he wasn't attending one, but I can't tell for sure since all of these sites still consider this information not relevant for disclosure. They haven't even learned to be forthcoming about the circumstances of their reviews. Fuck if I'm gonna trust any of them, especially after last time.

So far Jim Sterling has decided to review the thing on his own time, and Jeff Gerstmann will update his currently score-less non-review as he's played the game in a retail environment. So kudos to those two for bothering to acknowledge this issue.
Click to expand...

Nope. Played it at home. Sorry. I live in DC. Trust me when I say nothing happens out here.

TimeEffect said:
Where the 360 reviews at?
Click to expand...

We only got code for the Xbox One version.
 
Vizzeh said:
wow their some amazing scores. Congrats respawn.

Really surprised their all so high for a multiplayer only game. To put them in the same category as some top story based games makes me wonder should Multiplayer have its own rating system. Games with multiplayer + SP rated separately.

I guess the multiplayer must be worth its full price in $£
Click to expand...

SHooters in the west kind of remind of me JRPG's in the east. I have to take reviews with a grain of salt but after playing the beta I don't necessarily think it's a 9 but you can't discount the fun factor. That being said, I will judge it more when I play the full game.
 
You would think that people would get tired of the moneyhat conspiracy claims everytime a game they want to fail gets good reviews. I am curious if these same people will make the same claims on the 11th when advertisements cover webpages of another soon to be released title.... It all comes off as childish and immature to me.
 
miDnIghtEr20C said:
Lol.. what the hell is The Globe and Mail (Toronto)? Giving the game a 70 out of 100? Lol.. metacritic letting any website up there these days? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/tech...-but-it-left-us-wanting-more/article17392517/
Click to expand...

That review was a good read. I would also bet more people read The Globe and Mail than some of the random bloggers that get credentials to review games and get put on Metacritic. At least they come off as professional and actually critique things and write good articles. I feel like if they gave it 90/100 you wouldn't have brought them up.
 
Massa said:
Skyrim is a 100+ hour game. Publishers slap multiplayer on 5-8 hour single player campaigns because those can't be sold for $60 anymore.
Click to expand...

Except they can, and they do. Nobody buys games with a tacked on multiplayer for the multiplayer and very few people actually play those modes. Plus we have other successes of Single player only games like Dishonored and Metal Gear Rising. A tacked on multiplayer does not move more units, nor does it stop people from selling their game.
 
skitzyzim said:
You would think that people would get tired of the moneyhat conspiracy claims everytime a game they want to fail gets good reviews. I am curious if these same people will make the same claims on the 11th when advertisements cover webpages of another soon to be released title.... It all comes off as childish and immature to me.
Click to expand...

I just wish it was on the PS3/4 so these discussions would be about actual technical merits or deficiencies (and pixel dickwaving) and not obvious derail attempts by console warriors

...also I want to play it :P
 
miDnIghtEr20C said:
Lol.. what the hell is The Globe and Mail (Toronto)? Giving the game a 70 out of 100? Lol.. metacritic letting any website up there these days? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/tech...-but-it-left-us-wanting-more/article17392517/

The reviewer is playing a game it seems he has no idea the point of. He's complaining he can't play it by himself or no SP. Ya.. it's MP only for a reason. Crazy review.
Click to expand...

Well I'm sure that a few consumers will feel the same way upon picking up the game. Especially the ones who get their gaming information from The Globe and Mail.
 
AyaisMUsikWhore said:
I hope not. Not every single competitive shooter should half ass there way out of a good story the same way single player games half ass themselves out of making a good multiplayer.
Click to expand...
You're talking as if there is a formula to create a AAA game, which there might be currently. But ideally, I don't want that.
I don't think putting your full effort into a multiplayer game is half assing your way out of a good story, as you put it.
Just offer me a great game at a (subjectively) good price, and I'll be all over it.

dark10x said:
A trend? In what way? For those of us that stick to single player games it's not a good precedent. I want more quality sp campaigns (which there are still plenty of).
Click to expand...
Of course, I enjoy campaigns. But not every game needs one, IMO.
If a studio has a great idea for a multiplayer game, they shouldn't need to double their investment to also create a campaign.

ArchedThunder said:
If Skyrim couldn't stop half-assed multiplayer modes Titanfall won't stop half-assed campaigns.
Click to expand...
I understand why developers half ass campaigns or multiplayer modes, but I just would like it to be more common to put all your effort into creating a good game.
And if it proves viable for TitanFall, maybe future developers/publishers won't be as pressured.
The more common that is, the more satisfied I will be :).
 
skitzyzim said:
You would think that people would get tired of the moneyhat conspiracy claims everytime a game they want to fail gets good reviews. I am curious if these same people will make the same claims on the 11th when advertisements cover webpages of another soon to be released title.... It all comes off as childish and immature to me.
Click to expand...

Well said. I had a similar response typed up, but yours was more on point.
 
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