Kralamoonard
Member
[EDIT] Just in addendum to the OP below, this thread isn't necessarily just in response to the tech test - I'm also thinking about it from a commercial perspective and when the game is releasing, as delaying it will solve multiple problems in my honest opinion. I'd appreciate it if people stopped with the "everything is fine, there's no problem" and "stop over reacting" comments as that isn't the only issue I bring up (and isn't really a valid argument). I appreciate it's a lengthy OP, but come on! 
[/EDIT]
Hey all,
So I'm sure it's no secret to the initiated that the reception to Titanfall 2's tech test hasn't been the most positive on popular sites like Reddit and here on GAF. That's not to say the "pre-alpha" has been a disaster; people have enjoyed it and that is certainly fine, but it doesn't seem to have met or exceeded the warm reception of its predecessor, even when compared to both respective pre-release "tests." This has definitely been a point of contention for those who thoroughly enjoyed the first game.
There is certainly some problems people have been finding and whether they're invalid or not isn't necessarily what I'm asking right now. And the issues certainly don't just stop there - there are also worries about the timeframe of the game's release.
I know it'd be easy to brush this off as internet hyperbole and vocal minority etc, but I think there is some legitimacy to people's concerns about this game, not just from a critical standpoint, but too from a commercial perspective, especially considering its release window (and what people argue it as being sent out to die).
Now I don't personally speak from a stance of authority and validity, as the game's tech test this weekend passed me (here's hoping I can try next weekend), but the criticisms surrounding this game have definitely peaked my interest to say the least. What more however, is how Respawn will respond to the feedback and handle the game's launch.
Now the problem is, some issues I have already came across in many posts aren't just things that can be tweaked or fixed in a patch, but rather need overhauling which is problematic in a game that should be going gold in the next few weeks. So I thought of perhaps one (unrealistic) solution, which I wanted to know what you guys thought of. This is just pure conjecture and I'm probably missing out on some vital points to which I hope others can correct with a different perspective.
What I thought could happen is the game could be delayed to March/April (which is when I personally thought it'd release anyway), which would give additional development time to refine mechanics and balance maps etc whilst giving the game breathing room so that it is not cannibalised by others FPS's, one of which is EA's own BF1.
Now I know this is unlikely considering its EA's call not Respawn, but I thought of it as a not-so-bad compromise "considering it's still in the same fiscal year and I'm sure (not definite) that the game could do better commercially in that time both due to less competition but also possible fixes that could be implemented by that time coupled with another another tech test. Being in the same fiscal year I thought isn't a bad coincidence considering that's when games tend to get delayed to (see Uncharted 4's initial delay) so that it can still contribute to that quarter. I may be completely off in that assessment though.
So, what do you guys think? A plausible proposition or just wishful thinking? Please let me know below!
[/EDIT]Hey all,
So I'm sure it's no secret to the initiated that the reception to Titanfall 2's tech test hasn't been the most positive on popular sites like Reddit and here on GAF. That's not to say the "pre-alpha" has been a disaster; people have enjoyed it and that is certainly fine, but it doesn't seem to have met or exceeded the warm reception of its predecessor, even when compared to both respective pre-release "tests." This has definitely been a point of contention for those who thoroughly enjoyed the first game.
There is certainly some problems people have been finding and whether they're invalid or not isn't necessarily what I'm asking right now. And the issues certainly don't just stop there - there are also worries about the timeframe of the game's release.
I know it'd be easy to brush this off as internet hyperbole and vocal minority etc, but I think there is some legitimacy to people's concerns about this game, not just from a critical standpoint, but too from a commercial perspective, especially considering its release window (and what people argue it as being sent out to die).
Now I don't personally speak from a stance of authority and validity, as the game's tech test this weekend passed me (here's hoping I can try next weekend), but the criticisms surrounding this game have definitely peaked my interest to say the least. What more however, is how Respawn will respond to the feedback and handle the game's launch.
Now the problem is, some issues I have already came across in many posts aren't just things that can be tweaked or fixed in a patch, but rather need overhauling which is problematic in a game that should be going gold in the next few weeks. So I thought of perhaps one (unrealistic) solution, which I wanted to know what you guys thought of. This is just pure conjecture and I'm probably missing out on some vital points to which I hope others can correct with a different perspective.
What I thought could happen is the game could be delayed to March/April (which is when I personally thought it'd release anyway), which would give additional development time to refine mechanics and balance maps etc whilst giving the game breathing room so that it is not cannibalised by others FPS's, one of which is EA's own BF1.
Now I know this is unlikely considering its EA's call not Respawn, but I thought of it as a not-so-bad compromise "considering it's still in the same fiscal year and I'm sure (not definite) that the game could do better commercially in that time both due to less competition but also possible fixes that could be implemented by that time coupled with another another tech test. Being in the same fiscal year I thought isn't a bad coincidence considering that's when games tend to get delayed to (see Uncharted 4's initial delay) so that it can still contribute to that quarter. I may be completely off in that assessment though.
So, what do you guys think? A plausible proposition or just wishful thinking? Please let me know below!
