We can expect a lot more info in February.
-
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
Says you, last i checked you weren't on their development team so how would you even know?
Ivory Samoan
Gold Member
Sounds fine to me, 12 player cap with a bunch of AI soldiers battling it out; not to mention 12 Mechs in tow/being piloted.... all good.
... small part of me though is hoping it has NOTHING to do with the X360 version holding all the other versions back, surely not?
... small part of me though is hoping it has NOTHING to do with the X360 version holding all the other versions back, surely not?
Woo-Fu
Banned
In most games that feeling of chaos is an effect of player density. You can deduce from the teamsize---and their stated reasons for doing it---that the maps are relatively small and/or linear. You can get killed from a lot more than 5 directions in BF4, yet 64 player matches have plenty of breathing room on the large maps. Smaller maps with chokepoints it can be a mess, like on Operation Locker. Just imagine how small the Titanfall maps must be if they're down to 6-man teams to reduce that feeling of chaos?
I really don't understand the point of bots either. Scrap them and put real players in that space. You're on console, no excuse to not have decent matchmaking, just let bads play bads and/or add a separate horde/comp-stomp mode for the people who don't like PvP. The problem with bots is that the AI is never good enough.
All that said, I'm sure the game will be fun for at least a week or two.
I really don't understand the point of bots either. Scrap them and put real players in that space. You're on console, no excuse to not have decent matchmaking, just let bads play bads and/or add a separate horde/comp-stomp mode for the people who don't like PvP. The problem with bots is that the AI is never good enough.
All that said, I'm sure the game will be fun for at least a week or two.
The 360 version isn't even being developed by Respawn.
Honestly? You don't really sound anti-Titanfall to me. You do however come across as somewhat anti-Xbox One in this topic though. You've been making a lot of speculation as to how the player count on this one game points to hardware limitations of this console specifically, and waving away any suggestions that there could possibly be any other reasons for this.
Now, I assume you wouldn't believe that the PC version of Titanfall would not be able to handle more than 6v6 right? So this implies that you would be willing to consider that the number of players could be chosen for parity across different versions correct? Going on with this line of thought, we then get to the Xbox 360 version of the game also being 6v6. Now if we assume what you say is true and they would offer more players if possible, then this is theoretically the maximum amount of players that the Xbox 360 could handle whilst keeping the game's design intact. This would then logically imply that the Xbox 360 version has limited the Xbox One and PC versions, rather than the Xbox One simply limiting the PC.
Now this isn't exactly what I think has happened, but I find it interesting that this scenario has not been considered in any post I've yet seen you make in this thread. Where if I were to be assuming it was a technical limitation, this would immediately be one of the first possibilities I would have considered.
Secondly, I don't quite understand how if the game was tested with lets say 9v9 at 60fps, and then they decided upon 6v6, that from that point on there would be no way to have a higher player count. I would imagine that any performance savings from this sort of change would not be very pronounced. I'm not sure about you, but generally I don't see significant performance gains when I play FPS games on PC, simply by entering a game with fewer players... especially not if the game has been designed to maintain a reasonable distribution of players so that you typically encounter a similar amount despite the higher player count. I'm not finding it likely that any processing freed up by cutting 6 human players in a roughly 50 unit game could have altered the design that drastically. And if the gains were that good? Well, free resolution bump is what I imagine would follow (and from the sounds of it, this hasn't happened).
So really the speculation you post doesn't come across as very sound. It seems like the sort of thinking that occurs when you've picked an end-point (the console is weak), and work from there back until it matches the information around you, rather than the other way around. I really don't like to make accusations on what motives people may have for their posts, but I kinda feel that we've been going around in a circle here for awhile, with people offering ideas on why it may be a design choice, but these never seem to be factored into your follow up posts... that is, if you even acknowledge them at all.
Anyway, maybe I'm misunderstanding. If so I apologise, but I thought this may help you see why some people may be a little curious as to how impartial you are on this topic.
The hate this game gets before it's even released is downright fascinating to be honest.
Have you just not been reading this thread? Baseless accusations, tinfoil hat bullshit(hurr manufactured hypes derp), insults to respawn, shitting on the game. Concern? lol more like salt.
Weird since that article is pretty much stating that it's how they think the game will play best, along with them stating it outright numerous times since this faux outrage began.
Have you just not been reading this thread? Baseless accusations, tinfoil hat bullshit(hurr manufactured hypes derp), insults to respawn, shitting on the game. Concern? lol more like salt.
Weird since that article is pretty much stating that it's how they think the game will play best, along with them stating it outright numerous times since this faux outrage began.
I think you're getting "hate" and "concern" mixed up, my friend.
There's no "OMG only 12 playurs dis game suxxorz on duh xbawks fix dis rispawn" going on here. Just discussion (I hope).
Wiktor
Member
I don't mind the low player count, but dear God, I wish Respawn would just stick to "this is how we think our game will play best" instead of trying out ridiculous justifications that freedom of movemement required it.
He's saying exactly what you want "stuck to"; explaining how a fundamental part of what the game is lends to 6v6 being an ideal max player count. There's nothing ridiculous about it. Player ability, agency, and mobility in the environment matter.
Here's the full article:
http://www.polygon.com/2014/1/9/529...packed-with-nearly-50-combatants-including-ai
Evil Rabbit
Banned
Yah but ShadowRun was so good it worked great as a 8v8. God I loved that game. My fav shooter of last gen, and top 3 of all time.
It's a shame that people rip on something before it even comes out ( shadowrun had the same fate with it not having a single player)
Most shooters fail at the huge map/huge player counts. Hell, I hated when gears decided to jump to a higher player count, gears should've never left 4v4. This game looks good and I have high hopes for it
dragonelite
Member
Thats all cool but respawn we need footage not words.
I didn't get a chance to experience Shadowrun, I stumbled upon the game this year and it looks very interesting.
I would love it if Microsoft removed GFWL, fixed up the game a bit, and released on Steam with dedicated server support.
Looks like a game with a lot of cool ideas.
Evil Rabbit
Banned
It's a hardcore game with a fairly deep learning curve. With every style of play there is an opposite equal style to combat it(bungie tried something like it with Reach but failed). It's incredibly balanced and goddamnit you get to use a katana while teleporting through walls and ceilings!! Fak!!!
If it could be released on steam (since it's on PC as well) it would no doubt give it the necessary rebirth it needs for some type of follow up. As it is now there's still a very small but dedicated hardcore group that still plays....
Sadly, titanfall will only shrink that group down even more.
Turin Turambar
Member
1 of 3 enemies will be a human. It won't be "extensively difficult". Every third enemy you fight or so will be a human, on average.
Basic math people.
This game will be amazing. I can't believe that some people are doubting the developers and testing team. These guys created the COD franchise. They know what they are doing. If they say 6 v 6 is the optimal experience then that is exactly what it is.
Everyone who has played the game has reported back the same. Universal opinion is that it plays and feels just right.
Everyone who has played the game has reported back the same. Universal opinion is that it plays and feels just right.
Turin Turambar
Member
Man, I'm astounded with some people in the thread. Astounded with the lack of imagination of so many people.
-I'm sure most gamers can imagine a coop game (in other words, an online game where humans kill AI entities) being fun by itself. And everyone understand the AI is AI and not human players not because technical limitations, but because it was designed that way.
-I'm sure most gamers can imagine a player vs player game being fun.
But somehow, lots of people can't imagine a mix of both being fun, or think that it's that way because they couldn't get more humans in a match.
It's like they have zero extrapolation skills.
Think Leaft 4 Dead Versus, humans against numerous weak AI zombies + 4 human controlled special zombies. Modify it a bit to have weak AI in both sides. Baam you have Titanfall.
-I'm sure most gamers can imagine a coop game (in other words, an online game where humans kill AI entities) being fun by itself. And everyone understand the AI is AI and not human players not because technical limitations, but because it was designed that way.
-I'm sure most gamers can imagine a player vs player game being fun.
But somehow, lots of people can't imagine a mix of both being fun, or think that it's that way because they couldn't get more humans in a match.
It's like they have zero extrapolation skills.
Think Leaft 4 Dead Versus, humans against numerous weak AI zombies + 4 human controlled special zombies. Modify it a bit to have weak AI in both sides. Baam you have Titanfall.
They have done alot of good and bad honestly. COD also brought training wheels/ my first shooter perks. That helped scrubs feel good and inflated kdr stats. MW2 brought deathstreaks which was a complete joke. No dev is above reproach.
Hope It turns out well but the more they say like ( the player having too much to think about ) and AI bots for casuals is not good imo.
Final verdict will be when public gets this on release.Wish them the best.
so hang on there are people itt who think the PS3 could manage MAG with 256 players, but think that technical limitations limit xbone to 12?
c'mon guys, it is obviously a conscious decision to design the game around smaller team sizes and not a technical limitation
c'mon guys, it is obviously a conscious decision to design the game around smaller team sizes and not a technical limitation
from what I get Titanfall is a game where you're gonna have to earn killing humans.
which they make less frustrating with easier to kill bots, and flow changing mechs.
It's very sound.
the basic COD MP is a kill orgy that forces you to play to get better equipment to become a fucker rather than a fuckee.
which they make less frustrating with easier to kill bots, and flow changing mechs.
It's very sound.
the basic COD MP is a kill orgy that forces you to play to get better equipment to become a fucker rather than a fuckee.
You earn for killing human players, the A.I, completing objectives etc. The main aim is really to get your Titan and then go an smash things but it means there will be more than one way to let everyone get a Titan.
I hope they talk about their progression/unlock system if they have one in place.
Banjo-Kazooie
Member
Ding Ding Ding.
You earn for killing human players, the A.I, completing objectives etc. The main aim is really to get your Titan and then go an smash things but it means there will be more than one way to let everyone get a Titan.
I hope they talk about their progression/unlock system if they have one in place.
I meant earning in the sense that traversal + bots + mechs each add a layer of "difficulty" in killing a human controlled player.
This thread is really something. Can't say I'm surprised at some of the reactions though...
Respawn really does need to do an official F.A.Q video guide to the game though the lack of explanation for certain elements is weird. Luckily It does seem they are stirring though so some sort of media blowout seems near and hopefully a demo/beta date.
Respawn really does need to do an official F.A.Q video guide to the game though the lack of explanation for certain elements is weird. Luckily It does seem they are stirring though so some sort of media blowout seems near and hopefully a demo/beta date.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I will be the judge of that. And by that I don't mean I need good or bad reviews to justify my personal stance.
Amazing is not an inheritance.
PhantomHound
Banned
I think most players are upset because 6v6 for an online only game doesn't translate to the scale of a 60 dollar game. If you look at Warhawk for the ps3, one of the first online experiences I had for that system, it was online only at a 40 dollar proposition. That game was loads of fun, enemies could come in than "more than 2 ways" and it had a higher player count with interesting Ariel combat.
People also love competition in shooters. By adding ai, there is a valid reason for concern that the game will be broken by too strong ai, or ai that is too weak and easy to kill. That said, I have no idea how the ai even factors into the game. Do you get points for killing ai? Does it add points to get your titan?
The only direct comparison of a competitive game I can think of are MOBA games, but the minions in those games are basically running on a linear line and can be predicted into strategy. If the AI is advanced in Titanfall at the end of the match people will say your "enemy ai was better, blah, blah, blah".
While I think Titanfall will be awesome, I do think it's getting way too much hype. It looks like call of duty with mechs, and for a while, everyone in the reviews industry have been saying "no more call of dutys." This game is call of duty with steroids and a new paint job, and no one seems to really notice.
People also love competition in shooters. By adding ai, there is a valid reason for concern that the game will be broken by too strong ai, or ai that is too weak and easy to kill. That said, I have no idea how the ai even factors into the game. Do you get points for killing ai? Does it add points to get your titan?
The only direct comparison of a competitive game I can think of are MOBA games, but the minions in those games are basically running on a linear line and can be predicted into strategy. If the AI is advanced in Titanfall at the end of the match people will say your "enemy ai was better, blah, blah, blah".
While I think Titanfall will be awesome, I do think it's getting way too much hype. It looks like call of duty with mechs, and for a while, everyone in the reviews industry have been saying "no more call of dutys." This game is call of duty with steroids and a new paint job, and no one seems to really notice.
It really depends on how much content people are getting for their money. If its 6v6 with 5 or 6 maps, I would be pissed as well. If Respawn are crazy and want the game to fail, that is what they will do. I can see Titanfall having a load of content to keep players going and that $60 will be well worth the 100's of hours players will put into it.
Each human players gets s Titan they can call down based upon a cooldown timer. Killing other players drops that timing by a good amount. Not so much for A.I. Completing objectives also lowers the timer, so you can call in your Titan quicker. If you get your Titan blown up, the timer resets and you have to earn it again.
Also, this whole "Its just CoD" thing appears in every Titanfall thread known to man.
PhantomHound
Banned
I wasn't talking about threads. I was more referring to game journalists who are excited for this game, but continue to bash Call of Duty for its mechanics.
Nobody thinks that. What are you talking about?
It makes sense coming from a team that pretty much invented modern CoD, so they are bound to pull on some of their old tricks but Titanfall just does not resemble CoD to me. Sure, it has shooting in it and its fast paced but everything else, especially their push onto the SP in MP experience just pulls it away from being yet another CoD.
Journalists love to bitch about game franchises just milking stuff but I think it is way too early to label Titanfall with that. Its a fresh new IP with a good pedigree behind it. No wonder people are excited. Its not just another CoD rehash, cynically shat out just to make cash. Of course, once Titanfall 6 comes out, then we can moan about it.
Well yeah, after 5/6 years of the same thing it's getting pretty tired. Titanfall may share some of the base shooting mechanics that are in COD but there are still a lot of differences.
sleeping_dragon
Banned
So all that talks about the infinite power of the cloud and how only the Xbox 1 is the best platform to achieve their vision but then is limited to 6 v6 in a MP only game. Oh the irony.
crazygambit
Member
I don't think that's all that relevant. If say they had created a game mechanic that absolutely could not be done in the 360 version, do you think it'd be in the Xbone version? They have to design with the 360 version in mind just like any other cross gen game out there.
PhantomHound
Banned
It makes sense coming from a team that pretty much invented modern CoD, so they are bound to pull on some of their old tricks but Titanfall just does not resemble CoD to me. Sure, it has shooting in it and its fast paced but everything else, especially their push onto the SP in MP experience just pulls it away from being yet another CoD.
Journalists love to bitch about game franchises just milking stuff but I think it is way too early to label Titanfall with that. Its a fresh new IP with a good pedigree behind it. No wonder people are excited. Its not just another CoD rehash, cynically shat out just to make cash. Of course, once Titanfall 6 comes out, then we can moan about it.
I agree the game looks really good. We shouldn't be too quick to judge it, it's not even out yet.
The only problem I have with this game so far is that bull shit quote by the developer saying he had to put the controller down because his heart was pumping so much. WAy too much hype.
PhantomHound
Banned
According to the majority of people concerned by the player count... that's exactly what they're talking about.
Yeah, it was a bit crazy.Hopefully they start showing off some more stuff and we get to form our own opinions if it is worth the hype or not.
Well, Splinter Cell is limited to 2x2 and has nothing to do with system limitations, it's simply a design choice.
Titanfall being limited to 6x6 is obviously a matter of game design, we've seen Xbox One (and 360 games as a matter of fact) support more than 12 players.
As usual, anything less than 200 billion online players is the cloud's fault. Again.
Titanfall being limited to 6x6 is obviously a matter of game design, we've seen Xbox One (and 360 games as a matter of fact) support more than 12 players.
As usual, anything less than 200 billion online players is the cloud's fault. Again.
irishfansam
Banned
So we can expect Titanfall to be 24v24 on PC? Please stop with these stupid comments.
The Real Napsta
Member
6v6?
4v4 on small maps is ideal.
4v4 on small maps is ideal.
Based upon some of the footage, the maps don't see all that small. Especially if you factor in the soldiers using jetpacks and wall-running, plus the Titans stomping everywhere. I am thinking 6v6 + A.I +Titans will be medium/large-ish maps.
Need to see more!!!!
Also want some night missions and something with snow in it
I miss playing Spies vs Mercs in Splinter Cell
I also think that these guys know what they're doing. Six man teams should be fun. I'm looking forward to hopefully getting some more quality FPS multiplayer action outta my 360.
But, Left 4 Dead's only 4 v 4! It couldn't possibly have been a good game!
And on PC you can up the amount of players that can play.
Yeah, it's not as good, but at least I can TRY.
(Though it can be a fun diversion at times)
There are games that come out, where the player limit is low on console,
and we get the developer line that it's meant to be played with a certain amount of people.
Then on PC, people start to add more user slots,
and sometimes have more fun with more players...
It's nice to be able to try things...
Console can keep it the way it is, as console users like the least amount of options possible,
due to wanting the experience to be simple with no complicated settings.
Though on PC, the average user is willing to play with settings a bit more.
Different types of gamers... I like being able to have a game and open up more possibilities.
Even have user made maps at times!