You have to kill 20 Soldiers (possibly less, as few as 10, depending on how good you are at headshots) to match the amount of points you would get from killing 1 Pilot or Titan. Doesn't seem all that efficient, to me.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Titanfall has maximum player count of 12 (alongside AI) [Respawn comments post #558]
- Thread starter Fracas
- Start date
You have to kill 20 Soldiers (possibly less, as few as 10, depending on how good you are at headshots) to match the amount of points you would get from killing 1 Pilot or Titan. Doesn't seem all that efficient, to me.
Erm, what you quoted from the developers contradicts everything you and others have been saying about 'bots', they are clearly not bots and that's why the developers don't use that term.
And killing trash mobs hasn't gotten too boring in Dota yet, so I'd say it has a long shelf life if the player vs player part of your game is interesting.
Love how the people here who hate the player limits are both ignoring what the developers have said the experience is and have never played the game themselves. As I said earlier, willful ignorance, by now you're not even interested in learning why this game is different to a 6v6 match in Unreal Tournament - You just want to win the internet debate.
I'm done with this thread.
Can you show me a picture of the scoreboard ?
Or is this just yet another thing we don't know about the game 2 months from launch ?
symmetrical
Member
I personally do not understand the level of massive hype either with this specific title. But with that said, it's one of those games that people will have to play and judge for themselves. That's why there's a split in a lot of gamers preferring COD over BF and vice versa. I'm looking forward to playing this on the PC myself.
I think what appeals to people with this game is the fast paced mechanics that happens to include mechs that isn't really found anywhere else nor in the titles you mentioned.
All I know is that the game looks super dudebro and people seem to love it.
Killing trash mobs in Dota, lol, like thats something you do. The creeps in dota are a game mechanic, could just aswell be a wall you shoot at that moves backwards or forward in a lane, depending on damage from each direction. And you don't get any score for creeps, which you would obviously get for killing the bots in Titanfall.
I doubt it's to try and make a player feel accomplished, but rather to keep them engaged between fights against other pilots. If you watch the footage of the game you can see that skirmishes between players are relatively sparse compared to, say, Call of Duty, but also more complex. They aren't TTK duels.
Turin Turambar
Member
Most surely, they also will have a bit less health and make less damage, to reinforce the fact they are npcs that can be dangerous... but the real danger are the players. They are "filler" to make feel the player is in a war, but not as much "filler" as creep in MOBA games (someone made that comparison), creeps in Moba games are even at a lower level as they are in the game just to be farmed by the players.
hahaha. It's hard to tell who is serious and who is being sarcastic now.
JimiNutz
Banned
I wonder how fun it'll be to play against the AI bots.
Sure Quake 3 was WAY better when playing against human apponents but bots can be ok to play against if they manage to make them a challenge.
Forza 5 has done some amazing things with it's AI with the Drivatar system. I know racing AI is a whole different ball park from FPS AI but I wonder it they'll do a similar thing and track your stats/play style to make a more realistic AI based on your/other players behaviour...
Sure Quake 3 was WAY better when playing against human apponents but bots can be ok to play against if they manage to make them a challenge.
Forza 5 has done some amazing things with it's AI with the Drivatar system. I know racing AI is a whole different ball park from FPS AI but I wonder it they'll do a similar thing and track your stats/play style to make a more realistic AI based on your/other players behaviour...
They can use whatever term they want to describe AI controlled units that are the weakest on the field. They are cannon fodder. You said it yourself.
Except the entire game is built around those trash mobs, and they are a means to an end. Not at all like Titanfall.
You constantly derided other posters for having an opinion which you claimed was poorly formed. Then when provided with your summary of the game, marketing sizzle words and all, we saw it's no different. Certainly not worthy of going after others. There will be people that are "fully educated" (to use your phrasing) that will not like this game. Are they wrong to say as much?
FreddieQuell
Member
All I want to do is learn more about this game. That's why I'm in this thread discussing it. He pasted that quote from the developer because despite them saying they are not "bots" they clearly seem to be bots to him (and me as well by the way) calling them this nebulous ai doesn't change that. There's a gulf of difference between the importance of killing a creep and killing a titanfall bot. Or at least there is based on what we know now.
And finally I want to know more about this game, I want to be excited about it, but I haven't played it. That means I should shut up and go in a corner until I get my chance?
I really don't think so. I think this a new, and possibly quite genious, way of getting less skilled players feel better at the game. That might be why so many press people praised it; cause they didn't feel like they were smashed around as much in Titanfall like in other games.
Edit: also this is something I would believe gives a great satisfaction and fun factor until you figure the bots out, so it would be something that makes the game really fun to play quickly at a convention, but less fun to invest a long time in to get good at. Just guessing by now, but I think I'm quite right.
A "bot" is an AI controlled opponent. How are we supposed to call them? Shootatar (hey it worked for Forza 5, don't laugh)? You can call it whatever you want, at the end of a day it still perfectly falls into a definition of a bot.
Just because marketing crap is being served, doesn't mean we have to gobble it up.
Alx
Member
I'm ready to trust the developers if they said it's the right balance... at least they gave it some thought and didn't just throw numbers "because they can".
From my experience, more isn't always better. My last great experience with online multiplayer was in the first Gears of War, and I appreciated the 4 vs 4 limitation. It makes things more personal, and it's much easier to recognize/get to know other players ("so, we meet again hAxxo0r43 ! I'll make you pay for last time") rather than "you killed player 58 / player 37 took the flag")
A bot is AI, but AI isn't only bots. I think there are ingame events handled by AI different from bot control. That's how I understand most of the previous declarations from the developers anyway, but details are scarce.
From my experience, more isn't always better. My last great experience with online multiplayer was in the first Gears of War, and I appreciated the 4 vs 4 limitation. It makes things more personal, and it's much easier to recognize/get to know other players ("so, we meet again hAxxo0r43 ! I'll make you pay for last time") rather than "you killed player 58 / player 37 took the flag")
A bot is AI, but AI isn't only bots. I think there are ingame events handled by AI different from bot control. That's how I understand most of the previous declarations from the developers anyway, but details are scarce.
GoofsterStud
Member
Any hype I had died...
It went from a day one PC title to a wait and see... >.>
16 is just to little for an always online game.
It went from a day one PC title to a wait and see... >.>
16 is just to little for an always online game.
Turin Turambar
Member
I think it will be more accurate to say that the AI is the equivalent to an enemy grunt in a single player FPS, instead of a bot of UT/Quake 3 or a creep in Dota 2. Something that moves, can damage you for 20-30 health, but you can kill him in a pair of shots.
It's 12 though, not 16.
Except it doesn't. Bots take the place of players in games. Bots are simulated/fake/pretend human players, playing a game for score. The AI in titanfall are not that. They are comparable to the AI in a singleplayer game like Halo or Gears. You wouldn't accurately refer to the marines in Halo SP as "bots".
It's not marketing, it's accuracy. Calling them "bots" would imply completely different things, both technically and gameplay-wise.
Killing Trash mobs is an essential part of DOTA you can't compare the two. It seems like the bots are there just for canon fodder especially with how little points you get for killing them.
As for saying the developers have played it and they know what they are talking about if you haven't learned anything from past game releases in this genre... ok example
COD and Battlefield devs talk up their games like they are hot shit and amazing and we know how well that worked out for them. OH but the reviews and media you say well lets go peak at the scores for Ghosts and BF4... They are great as well? Yet the games are utter trash. I won't believe anything devs say about their game until I have played it I am basing my opinion on gameplay videos and what devs have said. And that points to bots being nothing but a gimmicky filler.
Thread is getting caught up in semantics a little too much now.
Too bad there aren't player controller servers on PC, you could probably easily set something like that up.
Take the biggest map, no AI players, no Titans, massive player count.
Maybe they will have a similar mode to that, they certainly haven't revealed everything at this point.
Its 12 total.
Too bad there aren't player controller servers on PC, you could probably easily set something like that up.
Take the biggest map, no AI players, no Titans, massive player count.
Maybe they will have a similar mode to that, they certainly haven't revealed everything at this point.
Its 12 total.
FreddieQuell
Member
That's the same impression I've gotten, and it is what worries me. I play multiplayer shooters to play against people, not the computer. It seems dreadfully boring to have ~50% of the enemies on my screen not being humans. I've been trying to find out which part of this I'm wrong about, since people seem to love it.
FullMetalx117
Member
Thank god! I miss the old 4v4 halo days. I never liked super high player counts. What's the point? It just seems like something to boast about technically rather than having something meaningful- battlefield 4 64 players, mag 128 player, resistance 2 60 players... all pretty bad. No tight teamwork, no clear objective, etc.
Definitely picking up Titanfall now
Definitely picking up Titanfall now
samurai1226
Member
Sounds awesome. If that games really plays that fast paced like the videos are promising, it will be more than enough.
How exactly are you supposed to have a discussion or make a decision about purchasing a game if the only way you can have an opinion on your desire to play a game is if you have played the game at some point in the past? If any developer would like to send the naysayers builds of their game that would actually substantiate your claim of it working well, go ahead.
You can't really try it until someone pays $60 for the game and tries it when it comes out.
I don't really understand why 6v6 is inherently bad, but some of the people in here saying they prefer bigger player counts shouldn't have to substantiate their claims with evidence of access that only your company can provide.
You can't really try it until someone pays $60 for the game and tries it when it comes out.
I don't really understand why 6v6 is inherently bad, but some of the people in here saying they prefer bigger player counts shouldn't have to substantiate their claims with evidence of access that only your company can provide.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
You have it all wrong. You have actually two options. You can either love the game or wait to play the game to see if you love it.
The fact that you haven't played it yet doesn't actually matter if your opinion is positive.
katsubento
Member
I'm sure it will play as best they decided on. 6 on 6 isn't a bad thing.
pants
Member
There will be a demo surely?
This hasnt ever looked like a game I want to buy from press releases, I'll try the demo and see from there.
jakonovski
Member
When is the last time an AAA game had a demo?
Now they are called betas.
pants
Member
Battlefield 4, well if a public beta (and continued state of paid beta) counts.
jakonovski
Member
Didn't that require preordering some overpriced edition of the game?
No, anyone could get in after a certain date.
Game is still, currently, in beta release. You had to pay for this one though.
Dreams-Visions
Member
let's see how it works first.
I understand fully that a game will be good once the map design compliments the player count but I can't help but feel disappointed since I was expecting this to be a Battlefield 2142 replacement. Even if they couldn't achieve that level of chaos, I wanted at least Call of Duty numbers. Also having A.I. in the multiplayer game is a huge turn off for me.
jakonovski
Member
Ok, I stand corrected. I actually bought BF4, but all I remember from the beta thing is that they were advertising it with some preorder deal.
Acidote
Member
In the end, it is mostly the same thing people was saying about CS: GO. "It is not that bad." "Wait until you play it." "You'll agree once you see the map designs".
Now you browse the server tab and most of them are custom 12vs12 or 8vs8 servers.
Well, at least I'm sure Respawn will let us set up custom servers as it is usual on the PC environment, won't they?
Now you browse the server tab and most of them are custom 12vs12 or 8vs8 servers.
Well, at least I'm sure Respawn will let us set up custom servers as it is usual on the PC environment, won't they?
Castef
Banned
This post nails it. Player count mean nothing in relation to the quality of a game.