I have yet to hear good news from this game. Every time a new piece of information comes out, I get less and less interested in it.
It's now starting to sound like a downloadable shrunk down version of a mayor franchise like Battlefield 1943, only that one what 15 bucks, this one is 60.
I find it pretty funny that this narrative has become so prominent here. Think about it for a second. Trying to summarize why Titanfall originally generated so much excitement, I'd mention the following: it brings together a series of refinements/innovations to the core CoD formula, ranging from adding another dimension of movement to the introduction of Mecha, and seems to do so in a highly polished way; it looks fun, and hands-on feedback has been very positive; many of the people behind games like CoD 4 are behind this one; and it had been cooking for around 3 years.
So, what have we learned since the original reveal? What controversies have we gone through to cause this "more and more, I feel like..." phenomenon? The 6v6 focus, a misunderstood quote about the single player issue, and now this split screen thing. Am I missing something? If not, what specifically about any of those points implies a budget title at all? Is split screen actually so significant that its absence gives a bare bones feel to the entire game? Is there something about the developers feeling 6v6 is the game's sweet spot that gives the impression Titanfall is "just a test run for Titanfall 2?" Or is it that as we look at every detail through a microscope, we've begun to take things
slightly out of proportion?
Now, I can totally understand someone finding the new things we've learned disappointing. But it's fairly bizarre that so many have latched onto these specific details in such dramatic fashion, to the point that the implication of those details is a "downloadable shrunk down version of a mayor franchise like Battlefield 1943," which I don't think even had single player!
