Support NeoGAF

[Horp]

I don't get people saying "it was by design" as a response to people expecting more players than a max of 12. So what? Maybe that design choice was a bad one according to a lot of people here? There are tons of games out there with tons of bad design choices; that's one of the reasons some games are better than others.

And no, I think very few people in here are asking for 64 players, so stop bringing that up too. People have seen the game in videos, and based on "thousands of hours" (to qoute Respawn) of experience with mp fps:s have a decent feel for what the game will be like. And many people feel 12 players is too little.

I felt that the AH was a bad idea in Diablo 3. It wasn't put there by mistake, or due to hardware limitations, but it was a really bad design decision in my opinion, way before I tried it myself.

So what are people saying really, whenever anything is announced or shown about any game ever no one should say anything ever until they have played it for x hours? Isn't this a forum for discussing games? Crazy.

And especially if someone from Respawn is here on the forums, of course we are going to voice our opinions!

That never works out. Instaspawn TF2 servers with 64 players comes to mind ... all map and class balance go to shit.

Yea and TF2 "didn't work out"? That game is shite that no one likes, right? Just like BF and other games with a more modifiable player count.

 

[derFeef]

Between the twitter responses and the dev reply in this thread, Respawn seems to be a defensive bunch. You believe that 6 vs 6 is "the most fun" but imply that the player count could theoretically go higher? Why not give the option to up to add/subtract and let the community decide what's fun/balanced?

Also, if the AI aren't just bots then please explain what their function is in the game. Having "dozens" of NPCs running around to "keep the action higher" in a multiplayer game sounds awful.

That never works out. Instaspawn TF2 servers with 64 players comes to mind ... all map and class balance go to shit.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Battlefield 4.

Is a different game (that has its own share of online troubles). Besides, we all know how great Respawn are at technical shit, they couldn't even get 720p going on XBOX 360 and can't get 1080p on Xbone (spare me the 60fps bullshit). DICE are like wizards GODS compared to them.

 

[Goon Boon]

That never works out. Instaspawn TF2 servers with 64 players comes to mind ... all map and class balance go to shit.

Considering TF2 is capped at 32 (I think the highest without crashing was some 36 player server), please stop talking out of your ass.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

I don't get people saying "it was by design" as a response to people expecting more players than a max of 12. So what? Maybe that design choice was a bad one according to a lot of people here? There are tons of games out there with tons of bad design choices; that's one of the reasons some games are better than others.

And no, I think very few people in here are asking for 64 players, so stop bringing that up too. People have seen the game in videos, and based on "thousands of hours" (to qoute Respawn) of experience have a decent feel for what the game will be like. And many people feel 12 players is too little.

I felt that the AH was a bad idea in Diablo 3. It wasn't put there by mistake, or due to hardware limitations, but it was a really bad design decision in my opinion, way before I tried it myself.

So what are people saying really, whenever anything is announced or shown about any game ever no one should say anything ever until they have played it for x hours? Isn't this a forum for discussing games? Crazy.

And especially if someone from Respawn is here on the forums, of course we are going to voice our opinions!

Wishing for something is one thing (like I said before, I for one like the idea of big mech battles.) But I'm not going to argue that I know better, because I sure as hell don't. For now I'll just assume that Respawn knows what's up.

 

[lentini]

my only request is to not use EA servers, they break the instant resume feature on X1.

It's all Microsoft servers

 

[Sojgat]

I only have a PS4 so i can't play it either way, but 6vs6 is way to low. I got the sense that this game was going to be epic in scale. Like when i watched the trailer there where people everywhere and a chaotic battlefield. 6 enemies to go against is to little, you can't justify that. Its okey for a game like CS or Gears where the gameplay is suppose to be tactical and slow, but this game is designed to be chaotic and big.
I can't see why they couldn't just makes the maps bigger? It looks like they have made the maps and then added the player count and i am sure that the 360s limitations had something to do about it.

All the footage shown has featured AI teammates. Player count always seemed to be somewhere in the range of 6-8 per team.

 

[Riky]

There are games on the 360 with more than 12 players.

The Xbox version of Black Hawk Down was like 50 players.

People only have to look at how well the original Gears Of War was balanced with 4v4, adding more players to it would only make it worse.

 

[LinkToTheFuture]

I understand people saying wait until you play it until making judgements.

But the devs saying they chose 6 v 6 for 'gameplay balance' and people repeating the same thing is just BS.

It is 6 v 6 maximum because that is the ceiling running it at 60fps with mechs on the XB1's specs. Obviously if this was PC only it wouldn't be limited to a measly 12 players. And the fact the dev is trying to justify it so much says a lot.

I don't understand how someone can say "obviously" about something like this? Simply declaring that if it was a PC exclusive then the player count would be higher is just blind. There is nothing that points to titanfall ever being designed as a massive map style fps. it was never said that there would be huge team battles. Why were people ever making guesses at the player count and getting disappointed for something that was never even talked about till now?

 

[derFeef]

Considering TF2 is capped at 32 (I think the highest without crashing was some 36 player server), please stop talking out of your ass.

I meant 32
Still horrible....

 

[Larson]

There are AI controller characters doing their thing so you you are right. This game was not designed to be chaotic and big, that's Battlefield. Mind you I am not very hyped for this game, but just seeing nonsense like this getting posted everywhere makes my head hurt.

How to you know that, i am just saying what i saw in the first trailer. I got the sense that this was a massive fight. 4 people in my plane and outside the window there was other planes and many people at the ground. I counted 11 allies in the first scene, so when they first showed the game there was way more people. Some way along the line they cut back on the number of peoples.

 

[Hanmik]

So should people with heart conditions be allowed to buy Titanfall?

I just saw this page in the Manual to the game..

Important Health Warning About Playing Titanfall
Heart Conditions
A very HIGH percentage of people will experience heart conditions when exposed to
Titanfall, including Titans or AI enemies that may appear inTitanfall.
Even people who have no history of heart problems may have
an undiagnosed condition that can cause these “Heart Conditions”
while playing Titanfall.
These heart conditions may have a variety of symptoms including a raised heart rate, problems playing other games afterwards,
momentary hype conditions, loss of money and Heart Attacks. Heart attacks may also cause loss of
consciousness or convulsions that can lead to injury from falling down or striking
the Kinect or the Xbox One.
Don´t stop playing or consult a doctor if you experience any of these
symptoms. Parents should watch for or ask their children about the above
symptoms – children and teenagers are more likely than adults to experience these
hyped conditions.
The risk of heart conditions may be reduced by taking the
following precautions: Sit farther from the screen; use a smaller online community; play on a smaller server; do not play games on other consoles.
If you or any of your relatives have a history of these conditions consult a
Microsoft PR person before playing (we will use your story for PR materials).

 

[Rafterman]

What's wrong with 6v6 if the maps are tight enough? The best UT 2004 maps were built for a similar player count, same goes for Halo...not every game with vehicles needs to be Battlefield.

Everything?

I can't stand multiplayer games with small player counts and this definitely kills any desire I had to play this game. More power to those who like that sort of thing, but I like bigger battles ranging from Battlefield size up to Planetside type stuff.

 

[Sojgat]

How to you know that, i am just saying what i saw in the first trailer. I got the sense that this was a massive fight. 4 people in my plane and outside the window there was other planes and many people at the ground. I counted 11 allies in the first scene, so when they first showed the game there was way more people. Some way along the line they cut back on the number of peoples.

In the E3 footage there appears to be 4 pilots in the dropship (including the player), but only the player and two others jump out, along with 3 pilots from the other dropship. All the other teammates are AI characters.

Angel City footage seems to show 8 blue player icons on the map, but it's hard to tell for sure how many players there are.

 

[Bor]

I just watched the Angel City demo, and to me it looks like that there were at least 8 players of the same team in the same area at one point. What gives

 

[LinkToTheFuture]

How to you know that, i am just saying what i saw in the first trailer. I got the sense that this was a massive fight. 4 people in my plane and outside the window there was other planes and many people at the ground. I counted 11 allies in the first scene, so when they first showed the game there was way more people. Some way along the line they cut back on the number of peoples.

What your not understanding is that was campaign MP for starters. That wasn't a standard multiplayer session. Even if it was, why would you assume those aren't AI? You counted allies but what told you those allies were all human controlled? People assumed alooooot of things about this game.

Everything?

I can't stand multiplayer games with small player counts and this definitely kills any desire I had to play this game. More power to those who like that sort of thing, but I like bigger battles ranging from Battlefield size up to Planetside type stuff.

Sounds like this game isn't for you then. I am really missing why people who have no desire to play this game have the time to waste talking bad about it for reasons other than "its not what I like so I'm going to bad mouth it". Not really targeting Rafterman or anyone just wondering in general why this even happens =/ seems like a waste.

 

[Seanspeed]

Is a different game (that has its own share of online troubles). Besides, we all know how great Respawn are at technical shit, they couldn't even get 720p going on XBOX 360 and can't get 1080p on Xbone (spare me the 60fps bullshit). DICE are like wizards GODS compared to them.

Its a different game, but its an FPS, has huge battlefields, loads of vehicles to pilot, tons of destruction happening, 60fps(why spare you on this? because its inconvenient to your argument?) AND 64 motherfucking players on top of all that.

I feel its quite safe to say that this isn't a case of hardware limitations.

 

[FyreWulff]

6v6 could only be adequately fun in very small maps..
Now, considering the scale of the walkers in the game.. Huge walkers, small maps with only 6v6 max sounds like a recipe for boredom in 2 days.
Sounds like the Xbone specs greatly gimped this game.
Also, if 6v6 is SUCH A SWEET SPOT for OMG action, why the bots?
Bullshit meter pinging..

Once again..

the maps are going to be designed around the playercount.

The bots are not replacement players. They are basically a separate class of enemy that you engage separately from other players,

 

[kamspy]

If that's what the maps are balanced for than what's the big deal?

Remember 64p Quake 3 servers? Not that great.

 

[derFeef]

I just watched the Angel City demo, and to me it looks like that there were at least 8 players of the same team in the same area at one point. What gives

If you step out of your titan I have to imagine it's icon would still be on the minimap. So possibly 12 icons per team.

 

[FyreWulff]

The Xbox version of Black Hawk Down was like 50 players.

People only have to look at how well the original Gears Of War was balanced with 4v4, adding more players to it would only make it worse.

Shit, the PS2 had FFXI on it. How many players could be in town at once?

Some people would rather just look at the number in a vaccum and not admit that player counts are part of game design. They DO determine your weapon palette, kill times, and map design. You can't make a game designed for 64 players function for 12, and a game designed around 12 players isn't going to scale up to 64 correctly.

 

[Curly]

In actually reading some posts here, I've concluded that this game simply isn't for me and I shouldn't be part of the discussion. Every bit of news concerning this game -- save for mechs -- has found me as a disappointment.

I hope that Titanfall meets the expectations of all who are interested in it.

 

[Mechazawa]

In the E3 footage there appears to be 4 pilots in the dropship (including the player), but only the player and two others jump out, along with 3 pilots from the other dropship. All the other teammates are AI characters.

Angel City footage seems to show 8 blue player icons on the map, but it's hard to tell for sure how many players there are.

They might've only recently finalized 6v6. I'm sure someone at some point asked them about player count after the game was revealed and I imagine they were given a "we don't know"

Maybe Angel City had a revised player count.

 

[Bor]

If you step out of your titan I have to imagine it's icon would still be on the minimap. So possibly 12 icons per team.

2:50 onwards

edit: image doesnt work? link

 

[Ominym]

Everything?

I can't stand multiplayer games with small player counts and this definitely kills any desire I had to play this game. More power to those who like that sort of thing, but I like bigger battles ranging from Battlefield size up to Planetside type stuff.

The fuck kind of game did you think Titanfall was?

 

[derFeef]

In actually reading some posts here, I've concluded that this game simply isn't for me and I shouldn't be part of the discussion. Every bit of news concerning this game -- save for mechs -- has found me as a disappointment.

I hope that Titanfall meets the expectations of all who are interested in it.

You should try Mechwarrior online

 

[hooijdonk17]

Once again..

the maps are going to be designed around the playercount.

The bots are not replacement players. They are basically a separate class of enemy that you engage separately from other players,

I'll see it work before I believe it; Walking around in a huge mech in a cramped map because it's made for only 6 players is quite BS; That's like flying a helicopter in a 6v6 Battlefield map (best comparison I can draw), which would be all the fun of poking myself in the eye.

And yes, the bots are not replacement players, which brings the number of actual enemies to higher than 6 - so why the stupid 6 player cap? Obviously because the system can't handle more than 6 PLAYERS; it's probably a technical hurdle they couldn't climb.

 

[FranXico]

You should try Mechwarrior online

This interests me. Is it on Steam?

 

[Riky]

Is a different game (that has its own share of online troubles). Besides, we all know how great Respawn are at technical shit, they couldn't even get 720p going on XBOX 360 and can't get 1080p on Xbone (spare me the 60fps bullshit). DICE are like wizards GODS compared to them.

Battlefield 4 isn't 720p on 360/PS3 and isn't 1080p on X1/PS4.

 

[derFeef]

This interests me. Is it on Steam?

Nope, but it's a seperate launcher anyway.

 

[Seanspeed]

Obviously because the system can't handle more than 6 PLAYERS

Battlefield 4.

 

[FyreWulff]

And yes, the bots are not replacement players, which brings the number of actual enemies to higher than 6 - so why the stupid 6 player cap? Obviously because the system can't handle more than 6 PLAYERS; it's probably a technical hurdle they couldn't climb.

Because you're still not understanding that the bots/AI are not the same as the titan pilot class. You are the knights clashing in battle with your horses. They are the peons with a little shield and spear.

Also, every single Halo supports more than Titanfall. Including on the original Xbox. Reach even supported more than 16 players at one point, but the mode that supported the playercount was cut, so they went back to the usual 16. Player count is not a technical problem anymore. Hasn't been for a couple of generations now.

 

[fastford58]

The fuck kind of game did you think Titanfall was?

Probably the kind that was presented in the trailers.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Battlefield 4 isn't 720p on 360/PS3 and isn't 1080p on X1/PS4.

No it's not. But it looks fucking amazing. With 64 players.

 

[NeoGash]

The fuck kind of game did you think Titanfall was?

He probably thought it was going to be a good game, but it only has 6v6 so it is pretty shit. That's only 12 players, Battlefield 4 has 64 players. Basically, Titanfall is more than 5 times shitter than Battlefield 4, AND it has no amazing single-player experience that every Battlefield game comes with. How people are willing to shell out $60 for this affront to the FPS genre is beyond me. They should stick to a well designed game and a man's game like Battlefield.

Obvious is obvious.

 

[Stone Ocean]

As long as the maps are balanced around 6v6, I don't see how this is a problem? People are expecting Battlefield-sized maps with 6 people or something?

This coming from someone that doesn't give a shit about the game, ya'll overreacting badly.

 

[The Living Tribunal]

Halo's sweet spot is 4 vs 4, I'll give the benefit of the doubt to Respawn.

 

[Horp]

The fuck kind of game did you think Titanfall was?

Yeah step the fuck off my fucking Titanfall you fucking fucker.

(Sorry for the language, just making a point there. No one here is a fucker)

Really people? People have opinions, and there are some matters that usually matter a lot to people. Things such as if ADS is in a game, if there are levels with unlockable weapons, and how many players can be in the game.

I really thought we would have 12 v 12. And 12v12 is a totally different experience from 6v6.

 

[derFeef]

Ah well I am out of here.

People should play Planetside if they want huge playercounts (or MAG, if that's still online...) and then you are probably also only shooting one enemy player at a time.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Because you're still not understanding that the bots/AI are not the same as the titan pilot class. You are the knights clashing in battle with your horses. They are the peons with a little shield and spear.

I understand that they are basically mooks you kill to make yourself feel badass. And I still think it's a stupid design choice. It worked out like this, believe me:

16 v 16: Requires huge map, system can't handle/takes too long to design maps for
12 v 12: Requires big map, system can't handle well/takes too long to design maps for
6 v 6: Small map, works fine, but feels like too few players
6 v 6 + mook: Small map, works fine, shit to kill here and there -> Let's go with this.

I think they cheaped out on effort and they did a very poor job technically. I won't spend a penny on this game.

 

[Rafterman]

Sounds like this game isn't for you then. I am really missing why people who have no desire to play this game have the time to waste talking bad about it for reasons other than "its not what I like so I'm going to bad mouth it". Not really targeting Rafterman or anyone just wondering in general why this even happens =/ seems like a waste.

I realize it's not for me, which is why I said I was no longer interested in playing it. As for "talking bad about it" I was merely pointing out that the revelation that it's merely 6v6 has put me off the game even though I was interested in it before.

I think there were a lot of people interested in this game that suddenly realized the same and that's why they are commenting on it now. It's no different than any game, really, you follow it for a while, anticipate it, and then hear details that make you realize that it isn't what you want or isn't the kind of game you would play.

 

[Ominym]

Probably the kind that was presented in the trailers.

So, you're telling me that the trailers made the game look like Planetside or Battlefield? Guess we watched different trailers.

Yeah step the fuck off my fucking Titanfall you fucking fucker.

(Sorry for the language, just making a point there. No one here is a fucker)

I didn't call anyone, anything. I said, "the fuck" as in "what the fuck kind of game did you think this was?" At no point did I call anyone any names, as you're implying.

 

[Sojgat]

They might've only recently finalized 6v6. I'm sure someone at some point asked them about player count after the game was revealed and I imagine they were given a "we don't know"

Maybe Angel City had a revised player count.

At any rate, it's a negligible difference, and the player count hasn't been greatly reduced as some people seem to believe.

 

[BrokenIcarus]

I wonder if they shortened the time to get a Titan because at Gamescom it took aprox. 1-2 minutes to get one and your would get destroyed in maybe half that time. So you'd have a Titan about 40% of the time.

With only 6v6 i think that the maps might feel a bit empty if it takes such a long time to get your titan.

We'll just have to wait and see I guess.

 

[SargerusBR]

6v6 max? Well my interest just lowered, i was expecting 12v12 at least. Unless PC version allows more players.

 

[Super Stardust]

What is it with titanfall threads that bring out the worst in people? Some posts in here, especially the ones directed at that respawn dev are just sad to read

 

[nOoblet16]

Is a different game (that has its own share of online troubles). Besides, we all know how great Respawn are at technical shit, they couldn't even get 720p going on XBOX 360 and can't get 1080p on Xbone (spare me the 60fps bullshit). DICE are like wizards GODS compared to them.

But it isn't bullshit ?
If you know anything about the xbox 360 you'd realise that the way the machine was build made it impossible for them to have a 60FPS game at 720p and 2*MSAA. They could have gone 720p with no MSAA but according to their observation and research it looked worse than the resolution they picked with 2*MSAA. Their priority number 1 was response time, they were the very first non fighting game developer ever to specifically focus on input lag and reduce it as much as possible and which was the main reason for them to aim at 60FPS.


Also BF4 might be a different game but it also has 64 players on a very large map with vehicles and jets, Titanfall is 12 player with 12 AI in a small map, this has nothing to do with Xbone's limitation. The only thing that has to do with Xbone's limitation here is the game not being 1080p, yet somehow you seem to be blaming Respawn for that too.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Here is my take as an outsider looking in.

6v6 is fine for a game like this, IF It is the type of shooter that you don't go down in a few hits.

My biggest issue with Titanfall is it wants to move out the realm of the military shooter and into the realm of fantasy, but it still want's to hold on to the same military shooter tropes.

You can jump into in to mechs the size of tower blocks, jump and wall run with rockets strapped to your back, but you can only hold 2 weapons at one time and can die with one well placed shot?

Am I the only one that sees the disconnect here?

 

[illustri0us]

im guessing they want the hit detection and ping to be the best it can be

 

[hooijdonk17]

But it isn't bullshit ?
If you know anything about the xbox 360 you'd realise that the way the machine was build made it impossible for them to have a 60FPS game at 720p and 2*MSAA. They could have gone 720p with no MSAA but according to their observation and research it looked worse than the resolution they picked with 2*MSAA. Their priority number 1 was response time, they were the very first non fighting game developer ever to specifically focus on input lag and reduce it as much as possible and which was the main reason for them to aim at 60FPS.


Also BF4 might be a different game but it also has 64 players on a very large map with vehicles and jets, Titanfall is 12 player with 12 AI in a small map, this has nothing to do with Xbone's limitation. The only thing that has to do with Xbone's limitation here is the game not being 1080p, yet somehow you seem to be blaming Respawn for that too.

Their research was wrong, the 2xMSAA 640p image on my 1080p 50" HDTV looks like a fuzzy blurry piece of shitsmear.