Respawn Entertainment's - Titanfall

    You know, some of you might have come across some posts I made where I'm talking about EA/Origin in negative way (BF4 thread). But to be honest, for me it's not the rushed games, alpha releases, dubious microtransactions, killing great franchises, destroying studios, forcing Origin or the lack of support. No, none of that. I tried it, believe me I did, but the fact is that I like to get kissed before I get fucked.


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from Pampers

    Remember when everyone hated steam?


    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/VdiqwH1.gif]

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/lalMEZS.gif]


    To be fair, this was like AOL days. It was also the first of its kind.


    Then again what annoys me about Origin really is ultimately the fact that its not Steam, not that there is any particular issue I have with it. I just found it weird and unwieldy in BF3 days, last time I tried it. Haven't been tempted to bother since.

    The benefits of an out of game server browser far outweigh any of the positives (there are none) of having it in your in-game UI. I can't think of a single reason why it's better for the developer or the player to implement a server browser in game aside from people unwilling to accept anything at all different.


    But wait, Steam does this and has for 10 years and it's amazing and life changing, no more fucking around just jump into your MP match and you're good to go.


    Battlefield does it and it's the worst thing that's happened to the human experience and gives you diarrhea also.

    Quote from Erratic

    The benefits of an out of game server browser far outweigh any of the positives (there are none) of having it in your in-game UI. I can't think of a single reason why it's better for the developer or the player to implement a server browser in game aside from people unwilling to accept anything at all different.


    But wait, Steam does this and has for 10 years and it's amazing and life changing, no more fucking around just jump into your MP match and you're good to go.


    Battlefield does it and it's the worst thing that's happened to the human experience and gives you diarrhea also.


    I understand you're trying to curb the Origin hate, and that's fair, someone needs to at a certain point, but browser usage is really annoying.


    Why the need to reinvent the wheel? Isn't the entire point of having applications that they are seperate and distinct? Combining a bunch of different shit into a browser is just plain unintuitive. It's one of the only issues I had with Quake live, instead of neat and tidy update downloads, it always felt like it was trying to hijack your browser with strange plugins. It also really devalues the idea that Origin is a thing, instead of working on their UI and getting some reasonable facsimile of Steam, they put everything into a browser so that it feels even more cheap and weak-ass. It's also a lot like conceeding defeat: they knew people wouldn't want two balls-out gaming platforms on their PC, so they tried to do something differently from Steam since they knew people were not going to ditch Steam entirely. Unfortunately the method they pursued just gave up the game, it was whack. I guess Quake live recently wised up and moved things into an app.


    I'd have a more up to date opinion of things if my last impression of Origin wasn't BF3. I know I'm becoming a broken record, but seriously, Origin was a day late and a dollar short to the Steam party and everybody knows it. The lesson is innovate first, pretty much.


    And now their fuck up de-rails the Titanfall thread. Sorry

    Quote from Erratic

    The benefits of an out of game server browser far outweigh any of the positives (there are none) of having it in your in-game UI. I can't think of a single reason why it's better for the developer or the player to implement a server browser in game aside from people unwilling to accept anything at all different.


    But wait, Steam does this and has for 10 years and it's amazing and life changing, no more fucking around just jump into your MP match and you're good to go.


    Battlefield does it and it's the worst thing that's happened to the human experience and gives you diarrhea also.

    I completely disagree. It was so janky it was a little surprising. I'll give DICE credit, the game was fairly lightweight when launching though. It takes absolutely no time to actually get the executable loaded, but then there's the other issue: the game handled becoming the background so inconsistently. Sometimes it would go windowed, other times it would minimize, sometimes it would return to fullscreen upon focus, other times it wouldn't. To get into a game, I don't want to update Origin, the BF web plugin, and BF itself. And if the overall low quality wasn't enough, it REALLY didn't help that it threw voice chat into the browser as if you were just loading teamspeak in the background.


    I'm not giving steam anything here either, the steam integrated server browser is garbage. To this day I don't actually know how it works (or IF it works). Servers seem to not load at random, games are mixed together, and it's just plain confusing. The only great thing steam does in terms of server browsing is the easy friends list "Join Server" button.


    This isn't an issue with Origin though. With BF3 basically being Origin's Counter-Strike: Source though, it wasn't in the best state to convert people. Origin itself is a pretty decent program though. It certainly gains a lot from being made after Steam, i.e. not being almost entirely based on a slow web browser (and now, as of the new steam downloads and community pages, extremely visually inconsistent).

    I liked the looks of it. Let's not forget, there's nothing wrong with the "base" CoD-gameplay (CoD2, 4). It's just that recent CoD games haven't really been balanced and they've been bloated with lots of unnecessary things (150 million killstreaks, "cool" callsigns etc).


    Just my personal opinion though.

    I agree with pud. The reason the new CoDs are shit is partly poor level design (levels designed for 1 mode but being used in all gamemodes, and some maps are just circles) and the other is balance. All the millions of perks, killstreaks and guns make the game an unbalanced piece of shit.

    Wasn't the idea of a new game like CoD the reason everyone was watching Respawn? CoD is one of the best feeling shooters out there. It looks llike they made a better Brink with more Halo influence, then added the mechs because fuck it they look cool.

    Quote from Marcem

    Wasn't the idea of a new game like CoD the reason everyone was watching Respawn? CoD is one of the best feeling shooters out there. It looks llike they made a better Brink with more Halo influence, then added the mechs because fuck it they look cool.


    I think that's not necessarily true. At least not for a few people. I'm a big fan of Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and Call of Duty 1, and I think that the direction those franchises took after the original developers left went nowhere but downhill.


    So when I read that a good chunk of the people who worked on each of those games originally (including Vince Zampella) went on to form a new studio to work on a new project, I was very excited to see what they could do. Something new, something innovative - but that was only wishful thinking. I'm more or less indifferent or maybe even against TitanFall now simply because it looks like a glorified later-day Call of Duty reskin after seeing some Alpha gameplay videos.


    What are the arguments that it isn't a glorified Call of Duty reskin? That it has mechs? That it has jetpacks and wall running? Those thinly added layers of gameplay additions to the gunplay that resembles the later Call of Duty games were hardly innovative or "risky" to have done. This game was a safe bet from the start of development, and I would go so far to say that some people can easily mistake it as a new game in the Call of Duty franchise.


    But, for the people who are big fans of the later Call of Duty games, I think this is going to be a definite buy for them. And I think that was the point from the beginning.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login