Titanfall 2

OMG just watched a video on the smart pistol... wtf were they thinking making an aimbot gun >_>
 
Blade-Runner said:
Single most retarded weapon ever included in a competitive FPS game.



And like Battlefront and every other CoD released after MW1, but these guys never learn.
Click to expand...

It wasn't that bad. After all, the inbuilt delay pretty much meant that, if you never tried another gun, you'd NEVER be good enough to actually play anywhere near competitively. Everyone else with good aim will crush a player with a smart-pistol, as any Titanfall player should know if they've used it themselves.
 
The_Oasis said:
It wasn't that bad. After all, the inbuilt delay pretty much meant that, if you never tried another gun, you'd NEVER be good enough to actually play anywhere near competitively. Everyone else with good aim will crush a player with a smart-pistol, as any Titanfall player should know if they've used it themselves.
Click to expand...

Yeah no, it was terrible on numerous levels. Firstly, that in-built delay was reduced when you upgraded the smart pistol. Secondly, the verticality of the game coupled with a cloaking ability meant that there were often encounters where smart pistol users had a significant unfair advantage regardless of how skilled the other play was. It was ridiculously easy to shadow a player and instantly kill them with no skill whatsoever, how is that balanced when the dying player has no opportunity whatsoever to respond? A good smart pistol user knew not to attack other players head on, instead they just skulked around for easy kills, hence why it was not unusual to see them at the top of the score board for pilot kills. A weapon like this simply has no place in any online FPS game.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Yeah no, it was terrible on numerous levels. Firstly, that in-built delay was reduced when you upgraded the smart pistol. Secondly, the verticality of the game coupled with a cloaking ability meant that there were often encounters where smart pistol users had a significant unfair advantage regardless of how skilled the other play was. It was ridiculously easy to shadow a player and instantly kill them with no skill whatsoever, how is that balanced when the dying player has no opportunity whatsoever to respond? A good smart pistol user knew not to attack other players head on, instead they just skulked around for easy kills, hence why it was not unusual to see them at the top of the score board for pilot kills. A weapon like this simply has no place in any online FPS game.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I realize that I can't defend it, but to be fair I was the idiot who ran head on as opposed to being smart :p.
 
I'm interested as long as the game launches with a reasonable amount of content. The first Titanfall launched with minimal maps and no single player. Either plentiful maps or include single player guys, it's that simple. UT never felt like it was ripping me off by not having single player because of all the content.

I actually still play Titanfall, but I refused to buy it until it hit $20 because of the lack of value.
 
Quix said:
I'm interested as long as the game launches with a reasonable amount of content. The first Titanfall launched with minimal maps and no single player. Either plentiful maps or include single player guys, it's that simple. UT never felt like it was ripping me off by not having single player because of all the content.

I actually still play Titanfall, but I refused to buy it until it hit $20 because of the lack of value.
Click to expand...

Disagree, Titanfall had the correct amount of content for the price.
 
It will be another console cash grab. No server browser bc why? bc they hates us is why. dead on pc faster than battlefront.
 
I wonder what engine will this game use, because the first Titanfall was just horribly unoptimized despite being on the Source engine, being capped at 60 FPS was bad enough but I experienced framerate drops and compared to other Source games, the graphics didn't look any better either.

And like others mentioned, the matchmaking service really sucked, but I doubt this one would come with a server browser.
 
Titanfall 2 having a single player campaign will be a major improvement that a lot more people will buy for that alone
 
DPI said:
Hypenfall 2: 2 More Robots™

Only question now is will Microsoft give EA an even bigger bribe check than they did for TF1 to keep it off PS4 again. Because PS4 has the bigger installed base and that isn't going to change even with TF bolstering Xbone sales for a few weeks. Just..how..much is MS willing to subsidize their console is the question.
Click to expand...


Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't MS just announce they're willing to have cross platform games more frequently now?
 
MavericK said:
Agree to disagree I guess. Game did not have anywhere near $60 worth of content IMO.
Click to expand...

Agreed, content was completely lacking for the price, the season pass more so. Anyone who paid full price should have been pissed.

spaceman said:
It will be another console cash grab. No server browser bc why? bc they hates us is why. dead on pc faster than battlefront.
Click to expand...

I am glad other people are finally coming to this realisation, no server browser and wafer thin content just about guarantees it will fail hard. Too bad publishers, and especially West and Zampella, cannot get it through their thick skulls that certain long established features are basic requirements for an MP game to succeed on PC. Ironic that these are the same guys who created COD4, which to this day still has more players than either Titanfall, BLOP3, Battlefront or Hardline.

polonyc2 said:
Titanfall 2 having a single player campaign will be a major improvement that a lot more people will buy for that alone
Click to expand...

Even if the campaign ranges from mediocre to crap? I don't know, I fully expect West and Zampella to tread the same tired linear and scripted formula that people began to rail against with all their CoD games. Also that of itself won't be a selling point if the MP is going to be another shallow and hallowed out shell like the first one.
 
ChronoDetector said:
I wonder what engine will this game use, because the first Titanfall was just horribly unoptimized despite being on the Source engine, being capped at 60 FPS was bad enough but I experienced framerate drops and compared to other Source games, the graphics didn't look any better either.

And like others mentioned, the matchmaking service really sucked, but I doubt this one would come with a server browser.
Click to expand...

I disagree, for the level of visuals it provided the game was incredibly optimized and ran well on a large variety of hardware. I'm not sure if you encountered driver issues or what but I played the game across many different systems with various levels of power and it ran smoothly on pretty much all of them.

The matchmaking / server browser / community issues have nothing to do with the engine / optimization those were strictly design choices most-likely put in place by EA and/or a result of it being an Origin Exclusive.

The first game had plenty of potential and isn't nearly as rubbish as some make it out to be. I think if they dial-up and focus on the first games strengths and come through on the support/stability/content side of things they could have a winner on their hand. It was certainly much more ambitious than their previous CoD efforts and the gameplay mechanics were as tight as CoD but much more refined/versatile.

I'm still upset that this will almost 99.9% be an Origin exclusive, Steamworks and the prospective visbility/playerbase it provides could be a big boon to the game. The series as a whole will never quite achieve what it is capable of as long as it remains on Origin only.
 
Eshelmen said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't MS just announce they're willing to have cross platform games more frequently now?
Click to expand...

LoL - until they actually implement it and the console whores get their shit pushed in by PC gamers. Lots of wailing and smashing of monkey thumb controllers will ensue and they will back track on that idea most ricky tick. Can't make the console monkeys feel inferior.
 
TheBlueChanell said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

I completely agree with everything you said, except for the part about optimization. I found it was quite heavy on the various systems I tried (relative to its graphics.)

But yeah, the game itself was extremely solid. They would have had a big hit on their hands if it had more content (from maps and weapons to little stuff like skins and cosmetics.)
 
Colonel Sanders said:
I completely agree with everything you said, except for the part about optimization. I found it was quite heavy on the various systems I tried (relative to its graphics.)

But yeah, the game itself was extremely solid. They would have had a big hit on their hands if it had more content (from maps and weapons to little stuff like skins and cosmetics.) And being on Steam! :)
Click to expand...

Bright minds think alike, however I did add a little nugget of my own in there. :)

Totally off-topic (sorta) but I'm also 100% positive that it is the ONLY source based game that is not and will not ever be available on Steam. That always yanked my chain, I remember being incredibly hyped when I heard they were working with Source albeit a build heavily modified by themselves. The Source Engine, imo, has some of the best multiplayer netcode of all past and current game engines. This is also coming from someone who has played competitive CS at a very high-level for 10+ years in addition to bouts in competitive DOD:S, CoD2 / CoD4 Pro Mod and a little bit of TF2 scrimming / pugging (though no league play here).

The only FPS games that have ever come close are Q3A/CPMA which makes sense as both the IW Engine/Goldsrc were based off of idTech. Source 1.0 inherited a lot of that as well. I haven't done much (basically any) digging but it seems Source 2 so far has done away with a huge majority if not all of that 20+ yo code.
 
Looks better than the first, by how much I can't say. I really disliked the maps in the first game, felt they were too small and "basic", almost felt like when I created my first custom CS map when I was like 17. Hopefully this will have bigger maps with more ways to win.
 
delita said:
Looks better than the first, by how much I can't say. I really disliked the maps in the first game, felt they were too small and "basic", almost felt like when I created my first custom CS map when I was like 17. Hopefully this will have bigger maps with more ways to win.
Click to expand...

I thought the maps were too big given the low player count, would run around in circles looking for actual pilots to kill whilst ignoring the brain dead AI grunts. Whether or not this offers a significant improvement over Titanfail 1 is going to depend on the player count and whether they finally get it through their thick skulls that there needs to be a server browser, and even then there is the very possibility that they kill it with $DLC just like they did the first time.
 
Christ, so this is going full-out Battlefield in scope? A single player campaign and expanded MP?

Given how much I've played the first game I'm excited, but cautious: the game population was left to wither away numerous times.
 
Why does anyone buy EA games anymore? We all know its a shit company with bad business practices. They are screwing over the consumer yet people are excited for their next release!

Stop buying their products. You always end up disappointed
 
Brodaddy said:
Why does anyone buy EA games anymore? We all know its a shit company with bad business practices. They are screwing over the consumer yet people are excited for their next release!

Stop buying their products. You always end up disappointed
Click to expand...

Soylent Green is people is too.


Gimma ma Battlefield 1!!!!
 
I rather enjoyed Titanfall. Haven't played in months though. I can only imagine how dead the servers must be now.
 
Based off their stance on matchmaking being superior to a server browser, I doubt we will see one in this game either so I plan on avoiding it. The first one had potential, but I found it disappointing. I don't see that changing this time around either.
 
ChronoDetector said:
I wonder what engine will this game use, because the first Titanfall was just horribly unoptimized despite being on the Source engine, being capped at 60 FPS was bad enough but I experienced framerate drops and compared to other Source games, the graphics didn't look any better either.

And like others mentioned, the matchmaking service really sucked, but I doubt this one would come with a server browser.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're talking about because the game ran at 70-90 FPS for me on GTX 780 SLI at 1920x1080.
 
Armenius said:
I don't know what you're talking about because the game ran at 70-90 FPS for me on GTX 780 SLI at 1920x1080.
Click to expand...

I had crazy good fps numbers in the first game also. Can't wait for this one after watching the multiplayer trailer!
 
That multiplayer trailer did look pretty cool, but how much of that is just staged for the trailer?
 
brennok said:
Based off their stance on matchmaking being superior to a server browser, I doubt we will see one in this game either so I plan on avoiding it. The first one had potential, but I found it disappointing. I don't see that changing this time around either.
Click to expand...

Seriously, the first one felt like a demo cash grab....it was so obvious. This one, will either piss me off because it will either have everything the first should have, or not at all lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top