If all maps are built for all game modes, this is a very good amount that I can live with.
So far we have two maps that play *very* differently from one another. If the remaining 11-12 maps are as good as these two I will be a very happy gamer come launch day.
A recent GameInformer article talked a bit about Boneyard.
Comments from a Respawn artist:
http://www.gameinformer.com/games/titanfall/b/xboxone/archive/2014/02/12/respawn-reveals-boneyard-map-new-mode-and-burn-card-perks.aspx
Yikes, puts things into perspective.
that I wish they would ask for less money?
We still need conformation from Respawn them self yes you can datamine all you want but it can be different on launch how many modes,maps etc etc there is. At this point there is not justification what it will be at all when it is released.
I don't know, but with less content than other games of its ilk I'm not paying the same/higher price. If you think the quality will balance things out, that's fair, to each their own.Price/Content wise how much should Titanfall retail for?
I can't quantify how much fun is worth but based on the alpha/beta, $60 is fair.
" Indigenous flying NPC creatures can also swoop down to pester your allies and enemies, creating a livelier match"
that sounds interesting. really does seem like they are trying to make each map unique
Are they ever, though?
You lead with your best, after all.
Yikes, puts things into perspective.
Sure go ahead and think this would be it. But i have to tell you nobody's knows how packed this game is. Really wait and see when it's released. Like i said datamining doesn't help any conformation untill Respawn tells what is in store.
The 60$ includes publishing, game print costs. Your premise is flawed to shit. Digital only games are cheaper because they are a cheaper to get into a consumers hands that's it. It has nothing to do with the relative quality.
You lead with your best, after all.
Hopefully the DLC will be reasonably priced.
Yikes, puts things into perspective.
I don't agree. You guys get too hung up on numbers when the weighting isn't even the same. Titanfall maps are far more complicated to design than your standard realistic location maps that typify a given semi-realistic FPS. I mean, with their vertical traversal focus and a need to maintain a dual balance to accommodate TItan movement and combat as well as the human units, these are probably twice if not three times the work than almost any other more grounded maps. As well, this isn't made by a team nearly the size of IW was for those games. I'm pretty sure that TF doesn't have the budget, either. Still, if it comes down them both being $60, I guess I just can't understand the logic when a good time and how far it goes conform to a standard unless we're talking about the same exact kinds of games where content-to-dollar ratio might matter.
The BF3 beta map was Operation Metro.
I don't agree. You guys get too hung up on numbers when the weighting isn't even the same. Titanfall maps are far more complicated to design than your standard realistic location maps that typify a given semi-realistic FPS. I mean, with their vertical traversal focus and a need to maintain a dual balance to accommodate TItan movement and combat as well as the human units, these are probably twice if not three times the work than almost any other more grounded maps. As well, this isn't made by a team nearly the size of IW was for those games. I'm pretty sure that TF doesn't have the budget, either. Still, if it comes down them both being $60, I guess I just can't understand the logic when a good time and how far it goes conform to a standard unless we're talking about the same exact kinds of games where content-to-dollar ratio might matter.
The BF3 beta map was Operation Metro.
again, not talking about quality, talking about content/ dollar. and if pressing discs and shipping them costs so much, then give me a discount for an origin code. I don't want a disc anyway. also theres no licensing fee on pc. but lets keep arguing against the consumer, this is fascinating.
I'll never understand this argument. I think Antitrop (I think that's who said it) put it best saying that $60 is justifable by how much you could be playing it. Hell, I've spent $170 on Battlefield 4 (PC version, PS4 version, and one Premium membership for PS4), and I play the SHIT out of that game. Barring the fact that I bought two copies of the game, do I feel justified in my $100 purchase on PS4? Absolutely. And BF3 Premium delivered a GREAT amount of content for that membership, so I expect the same for BF4, and so far it's looking good.
TLDR: I don't mind the cost, if I'm going to be playing it A LOT.
See?
Are they ever, though?
You lead with your best, after all.
14 maps at launch is quite a lot, why the heck wasn't Respawn bragging about this?
Ehhh. Seems kind of low.
I was hoping for the rumored 16 and personally think it should be closer to 20. Multiplayer was their only focus and they're charging full price.
14 maps is just... okay. Even less so when I know that most games have a few bad maps that the community collectively agrees are terrible. I'd like to think this game would be immune to that, but I'm not that naive.
Hopefully the DLC will be reasonably priced.
They could at least not have kept the number secret.Do they really need to?
again, not talking about quality, talking about content/ dollar. and if pressing discs and shipping them costs so much, then give me a discount for an origin code. I don't want a disc anyway. also theres no licensing fee on pc. but lets keep arguing against the consumer, this is fascinating.
14 maps at launch is quite a lot, why the heck wasn't Respawn bragging about this?
And Caspian Border.
Two most popular launch maps, no?
It's not much for a multiplayer only game. All recent CoDs shipped with more maps and they also had a singleplayer and a Co-op mode.14 maps at launch is quite a lot, why the heck wasn't Respawn bragging about this?
Agree with all this.. At $60, it should have a whole lot more being multiplayer only... or include all dlc, which we all know will never happen.. I might just wait for it to hit $30 or so.. I am willing to pay full price for multiplayer only, but it needs to have more to justify it..
It's not like you're arguing for the consumer, either. You're arguing for what you personally deem worthy of a $60 price tag disregarding that other people put different emphasis and value on things than you while also using your personal view as if its the consensus/fact.
There's no objective weighting in existence to determine whether something is worth x number of dollars so its pointless to argue as if there was.
Ehhh. Seems kind of low.
I was hoping for the rumored 16 and personally think it should be closer to 20. Multiplayer was their only focus and they're charging full price.
14 maps is just... okay. Even less so when I know that most games have a few bad maps that the community collectively agrees are terrible. I'd like to think this game would be immune to that, but I'm not that naive.
Hopefully the DLC will be reasonably priced.
That just seems like a tiny amount for a $60 multiplayer only game.
It looks like Black Ops 2 and Ghosts shipped with just as much (with a bonus map from preordering.)It's not much for a multiplayer only game. All recent CoDs shipped with more maps and they also had a singleplayer and a Co-op mode.
And gamers will most likely stick to a map or two. Just like counter strike's dust and Italy.