Support NeoGAF

[JABEE]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

 

[Hasney]

What is the point in waiting? Am I missing something?

Have you not seen the server botches from several games recently? I think it should be standard practice on any online-focused game going forward.

 

[JaggedSac]

Justin Bieber sells a lot of records, but doesn't have much credibility as an artist.

Props to GB, Edge, GI, and anyone else who waits and sees.

Gotta eat

 

[Endo Punk]

Do bonuses still depend on metacritic scores?

 

[3rdamention]

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.

 

[FiggyCal]

Have you not seen the server botches from several games recently? I think it should be standard practice on any online-focused game going forward.

Must've slipped my mind. <_<

 

[Speedy Blue Dude]

The latter - absurd.

I can deal with this once every ~8 hours of play just because something ridiculous happens. But it sounds like it's not terribly uncommon, and something you'll regularly run into - especially in certain modes.

Wow. That's ridiculous and there is no way to defend frame rate drops that big.

 

[Mendax]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

apparently its running on ms servers

 

[gamechanger87]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

This isn't running on EAs servers. The Beta didn't and neither will this. They are running on Azure.

 

[JayEH]

Props to GB for waiting to score it.

 

[FUBAR McDangles]

So looking at the scores it seems about as well received as I hoped for.

Looking forward to playing it tomorrow.

 

[jayu26]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

It's not EA's servers...

But yes for games like they should wait before giving a score like Giantbomb.

 

[LurkerPrime]

I feel like this will be a 4/5 game, in the mid eighties somewhere. It's just too spartan in size and scope to really wow reviewers, especially since there's no campaign. If the Titanfall severs don't pull a Sim City, I think that sort of score will be agreeable.

I'm curious to see what will be different in Titanfall Part 2: Fall of the Titans.

[...] It is not here to save you, it is not rewriting the book on competitive action games, it will not wash your car, tuck you in at night, or fix you chicken soup if you get the flu. [...]Source

All of my hopes are dashed...

Fake edit: And like others, I agree that Giant Bomb has the right idea; waiting to score the game is a very sensible thing to do in light of releases like Sim City and Battlefield 4 (though maybe in BF4's case it was less the servers and more the game).

 

[JLck]

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.

 

[Boke1879]

Literally every hyped game gets a few 10's. Deal with it?

Umm I don't have to "deal with it". Any review that gives a game a perfect score should be thrown to the wolves and should have the right to be called out. Sorry I don't accept the status quo.

 

[puffyshirt]

Seems like a solid first entry in a new franchise. Nothing mind blowing, but giving a great product while leaving plenty of reason to be excited for a sequel.

 

[Carl]

Seeing a few hold off scores until they can test in real world conditions is great

 

[Jamie OD]

That's only on the Blighttown map, though, right?

He said it was when he played Last Titan Standing and several titans where fighting in a tight area.

 

[level44]

Wat? Did you see Ghosts reviews?

sure

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-ghosts

I'm talking about the biggest gaming websites.
IGN gave Ghosts 88 lol

 

[excaliburps]

Yet reviews that launch before public servers go live are rewarded with lots and lots of traffic from review roundups like this thread.

Yep. People cannot NOT read the review and whatnot, it seems.

I agree, though, games like these should be reviewed using public servers or based on the experience the general public will have and not on any review event.

 

[Prototype Viktor]

Yet reviews that launch before public servers go live are rewarded with lots and lots of traffic from review roundups like this thread.

To offset that I'll click a bunch of sites without a titan fall review!

But seriously I only went to the ones without a score

 

[Neuromancer]

Clicks: the price of integrity

For some, the decision is easy.

 

[Future PhaZe]

single digit frames were probably from multiple titans bunched around a nuke, I'd expect general performance to be pretty decent even on xbone

 

[PanicFreak]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

I'm surprised you don't know that this game is running on Microsoft's Azure cloud service and not EA's servers. It's going to make a big difference.

 

[Orayn]

I have the game. The amount of content just seems off.

Okay, perfectly valid complaint.

I just think numerical reviews scores are always, always a silly, subjective arbitrary number that we'd be better off without. As a consequence of that, there's not much point in asking what score a game really "deserves" when everyone's just using a personal scale based not based on any external standards agreed upon by anyone.

 

[Bundy]

Polygon:

 

[MarauderShields]

What interests me is all those single player games that get marked down for not having multi-player.... ugh, CoD the destroyer.

Anyway, glad people are enjoying the game, just worried about the precedent this sets going forward. Would rather not have an online only generation where multiplayer is the dominant force.

Marking a game down for not having MP is not any different than marking one down for not having SP.

 

[ACE 1991]

Especially if they recognized this during the review. This is what I was afraid of, too. I was in the beta, and while it was loads of fun, I can't see it being worth 60 bucks.

I predict GAF getting over this game by the end of March.

 

[isb]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

Its on MS servers, nothing to do with EA except origin.

 

[jem0208]

I'm surprised so many sites are trusting EA's online servers given the Sim City fiasco and Battlefield's problems.

You would think informing your readership with accurate and relevant criticism would be more important than shooting ahead and posting a review that may be completely inaccurate in the matter of 12 hours.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

It's running on MS' Azure servers.

 

[Mendax]

this sounds exactly like what i would expect:


VideoGamer
Mar 10, 2014
80
An evolution of the core Call of Duty concepts rather than a revolution for multiplayer shooters as a whole, Titanfall feels, in a way, like a hyper-budgeted mod that will only truly see its aims realised in the inevitable sequel.

 

[opticalmace]

Dunno if old, but Giant Bomb has their review up: http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/this-is-not-a-titanfall-review-yet/1900-630/

No score until after seeing how the online fares, but they said assuming it isn't totally messed it's probably a 4/5.

edit: whoops beaten.

 

[Vire]

OXM - 8.5

Video Gamer - 8

Games Radar - 4/5

Revision 3 - 5/5

 

[LuchaShaq]

But... but... ESRAM and the cloud...

Really though, the idea that it's that low with minimal AA with frame rate problems is insane. Thank god for the PC version.

You mean the cloud that's powering ai bots that seem significantly dumber than bots I've seen in ps2/original Xbox games?

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

He said it was when he played Last Titan Standing and several titans where fighting in a tight area.

Was a Dark Souls joke...

 

[hawk2025]

Yet reviews that launch before public servers go live are rewarded with lots and lots of traffic from review roundups like this thread.

Well, if it helps any, for now I've only read Giant Bomb's impressions, looked at the scores without clicking, and am currently sipping coffee and browsing through Kotaku

 

[Netherscourge]

Well, at least it's good news for Xbox One owners.

Had this been a flop, oh man... can't even imagine.

 

[Shadownet]

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.

Skyrim. 100+ hour singleplayer = more than OK.

 

[KN1GHTMARE]

OMG someone with actual sense!

Kind of hard to review an online only multiplayer game, when you're using LAN at some review event.

Well IGN also didn't score it and Polygon will just lower the score if needed.

 

[ElTorro]

Seems to me like to only really relevant criticism is the relative lack of game modes which doesn't really bother me much.

 

[Silky]

Dtoid's waiting a couple of days to get their review out.

 

[Quadraphonic]

.

I would think a site like Polygon, at least, would learn from their mistakes or is their score revising system just a means to promote irresponsible editorial practices?

Metacritic doesn't recalculate scores when reviews change. Giving a higher score now only to lower it later is fine with publishers since the metacritic score won't take a hit.

 

[LNBL]

He said it was when he played Last Titan Standing and several titans where fighting in a tight area.

Thanks for posting the rest of the statements, instead of just throwing selective sentences into this thread.

 

[Cyberia]

http://www.gameblog.fr/tests/1878-titanfall-xbox-one-pc

4/5

 

[Killer]

Polygon:

Maybe tower fall is the better game? *shrugs*

 

[Resident_UA]

Bit amused by people jumping for the one quote of low framerates in some special occasions. I am sure it is perfectly playable. But hey a good game for XOne: Can't be. It looks fun and I might try on PC (no one here...)

I think the point is that the signature mark of COD was smooth framerate. People are disappointed that this isn't a case here.

 

[Randdalf]

TF2 launched with 6 maps and 2 broad gameplay modes, but I could play (and did play) that game for years (it did launch for £20 standalone though, not £45). If Titanfall has the same depth in gameplay as TF2 does I think it will be fine. The content of a multiplayer game is the time you spend mastering it, learning all the maps by heart, not just rote counting of the number of levels and modes.

 

[JLeack]

More average scores please.

1. Why would you want a game to do poorly?
2. How are 8s average?

 

[DrWong]

I think it's virtually impossible to have a mechanics driven game with no real story to speak of ever getting in the mid-90s nowadays.

Well, not the same genre (and it's a reknown IP) but it's a mechanics driven game with no real story > http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii-u/super-mario-3d-world

 

[Vire]

The amount of shotgun use in these video reviews concerns me. Especially since I already thought it was a problem in the Beta.