Chronospherics
Member
There's an astounding amount of negativity on the game, and most of what's positive tends to get lost within that, and so I thought it might be alright if this had its own thread. Especially as there's a thread of its own dedicated to the negative feedback.
My background
I'm not ashamed to admit that I didn't spend much time with the original Titanfall, no more than a few games, as I didn't own the game, but played it on the PC of a friend. With that said I feel that allowed me to enjoy the technical test for what it is, rather than what I wanted it to be, based on my experience with the first game.
That aside, I play anything and everything from Uncharted 4 multiplayer and Rainbow Six Siege, to Battleborn and Garden Warfare 2. I tend to enjoy all of them, for their own reasons, at least to some degree, and I'm sure I would have enjoyed the original TF if I had spent more time with it.
In either case, I enjoyed Titanfall 2, and the awkward thing is that reading the comments here on neogaf, and on reddit made me feel almost ashamed for having fun on it. People talk about components like the movement system as if they're objectively worse, and the only reason you would enjoy things as they are now is if you wanted them dumbed down... but for me, I didn't care, I was just having fun with what I had.
I'll just run through a few of the reasons I like the beta, and why I'm looking forward to the full game. Some of these issues will be in reference to what people dislike, and present a counter-argument and others will emphasise smaller areas of the game that I enjoyed, that perhaps other games often neglect. Obviously, you're more than welcome to disagree, I'm not saying your feelings are wrong.
Movement
One of the beta's biggest criticisms in the beta regard the games movement systems. For many players the movement in Titanfall 2's technical test wasn't fast enough, and this - and the map design - are the particular issues that people tougt as having 'dumbed down' the experience. For me, the movement felt liberating - I felt as though the movement systems played sufficient a role to enable me to swiftly navigate wherever I wanted on the map, without feeling that they were going to be the sole crux of everyone's playstyle. I didn't feel that I was set to die if I stopped moving (like what happens on games like Tribes) but I did feel that the movement systems gave me ample traversal options when considering getting from A to B, and considerable flexibility when engaging in gunfights, or seeking to outsmart my opponent.
In either case, the notion that Titanfall was objectively a better game with faster movement is difficult to consider. It's a different game, and I appreciate that many people, especially fans of the original game would not like that - familiarity is a very powerful effect - however it's as I say, different, not better, or worse. Slower gameplay infers it's own set of advantages, orientating gameplay more towards strategy and positioning than it once was, and less towards dexterity, but at the same time, it's worth bearing in mind that the game is still one of the fastest paced shooters on the market. It's still considerably faster and more flexible than games like Advanced Warfare, Black Ops 3, or even Lawbreakers. It's not at the level of the original Titanfall, but again, it still provides more movement flexibility than any other shooter on the console market (excluding the original TF), and most on PC (Tribes etc).
Respawning
As someone that doesn't have Call of Duty in my daily routine, I often feel that excessive mobility can cause an experience to be overly chaotic. The aggressive respawning of that series is my biggest gripe, and this alone, made me enjoy Titanfall 2 much more than I have a Call of Duty game. Unlike most modern first person shooters the respawning algorithm in TF2's technical test felt like it was predictable, and I didn't need to continually react to people spawning all around me. The problem with many modern shooters is although you can develop a good sense of enemy awareness based on where engagements are occurring, that enemy awareness is continually interfered with by respawns that feel almost random. It's interesting how something relatively small can make a considerable difference to me, and it's the same reason why I don't like modern Call of Duty titles, but I did like Call of Duty 4. I felt as though my mental-map of where everyone is wasn't being messed with in that game every time someone died, it was more controlled, predictable, and fair.
Titans
In my time with Titanfall I enjoyed the Titans significantly. I know many were complaining that they weren't seeing their Titan enough, but for me I was getting between 2 and 4 Titan's per match, and spending between 30 and 50% of each game within my Titan. A big issue that people have seems to be the titan spawn timer, and I imagine I was just getting my Titan quickly because I was getting kills quickly. Considering the nature of the game, I do agree that everyone should be able to access their Titan, it would be nice if it shifted towards a system similar to Destiny or Overwatch's super and ultimate abilities, where score speeds up the process but the abilities are passively generated with a set timer so that everyone get's a relatively regulated amount.
Once in the Titan however, gameplay felt great. I felt as though the Titan's were appropriately balanced against one another, and against each other. Titan on Titan fights were enjoyable, and infantry went down quickly, but at the same time could avoid Titan's quite easily. Unlike the first TF, I did not feel that my Titan was able to easily one-shot enemy Pilots, and I liked that. I liked that Titan's weren't able to immediately pull pilots out of their gameplay experience and when I did kill a pilot it felt fair. It felt that their death resulted from their mistakes, rather than simply a difference in our equipment. At the same time, while pilots could avoid Titan's with relative ease, it wasn't easy to kill a Titan alone, incurred a large enough amount of risk to the pilot and making Titan's feel powerful, as if they offered a battlefield advantage.
I also loved unique 'hero' Titan's. I know this was different in Titanfall 1, where you could customise the Titan's abilities and weapons, but having them uniquely identifiable meant that both pilots and Titan's alike meant that you could accommodate the enemy Titan's kit into your playstyle when attacking. When fighting scorch you could take advantage of the fact that he was optimum at close range, avoiding the floor to evade his scorching AoE effects, while the opposite was true for Ion, where he was weaker at close range, struggling to hit you with his more precision orientated fully automatic rifle. It felt more competitively valid than the customisable alternative. The same is true for the pilots too as they are all uniquely identifiable based on their ability, though I felt that this mattered far less, as they could use any weapon, and engagements are quite quick, often finishing before you recognise the class.
Rodeoing Titan's for batteries is also fun strategic element that makes the interplay between pilot and allied titan feel more meaningful, while also encouraging hopping in and out of your own titan, an interesting gameplay concept that infers quite a bit of risk. I enjoyed it.
Map design
Although the map design didn't stand out to me, I didn't quite feel the hate that many others appear to. It's true that you cannot take full advantage of all of the movement systems across the entire map. The Swiss cheese design of the original Titanfall is gone on the maps present in the technical test, however for me, that did not necessarily feel like a terrible thing. I did not feel that I needed all of the movement options available to me at any one time, and I enjoyed the adaptive style of gameplay enforced by the variance from one portion of the map to another. As I moved from packed, to open areas, I appreciated the adjustments required of my playstyle, and the affect that had on the games pacing. Sure, I wasn't able to run across a wall, all of the time, but that did not prevent me from using the environment and my movement to my advantage in combat, especially if equipped with the grappling hook.
Hopefully the game does include more inner city maps that feature a 'Swiss cheese' design that's a little closer to the original Titanfall, but I would not want this to be all of the maps in the game. I like the fact that they are different, and the various components of the maps are different, I did not feel like the game suddenly fell apart when I wasn't running off a wall. The gunplay is solid and enjoyable, and that's constant throughout.
Gunplay
Appropriately, the gunplay in the game is very good. I played the technical test on PS4, and the controls felt great, very easy to aim and acquire targets (though I was still getting used to it, and getting better at the game with time) and the weapons provided sufficient feedback to feel impactful and fun to use. Significantly, I really liked the enemy health bars. Most games don't feature health bars for enemies with relatively low HP, like those in Titanfall, but it goes a long way to providing the player feedback on every bullet fired and making encounters feel fair. Often in games like Uncharted or Call of Duty I will feel like the player I was shooting escapes on a sliver of health, with a sense that they 'should have died' but as you can't see their health, it's unclear what actually happened, was it lag? did I miss? Titanfall 2 provides the visual feedback to reconsile that much of that debate with the health display and it makes the gunplay feel better as a result.
Networks are neat
The network feature is neat, not enough games facilitate clan-esque features, let alone provide a platform for communication that is specific to your clan. While it wasn't working properly in the technical test it's a fantastic idea that will bring communities and players together in game, more titles should be doing things like this, because for me, it's quite a big deal.
The controls are great
While this kind of goes with gunplay I thought I'd feature it in its own section as so many games actually manage to mess up the feel of shooters on consoles. Games like Overwatch and Killzone are big name titles that have had control issues in the past, with atypical deadzones being a common issue. It's almost condescending to have to praise a game for controlling well, but either way, Titanfall 2 felt great.
What I didn't like
While I had a lot of fun with the technical test overall, there were of course some elements of the game I didn't like. I didn't like either of the game types that much. It seemed as though Titans were admittedly less frequent on hardpoint, which was a little less interesting, and I found the ruleset for 'bounty hunt' to be a little convoluted and generally, not especially competitively valid. Losing half your score because you're killed by an enemy pilot? It's a nonsense mechanic that rewards random chance more than anything else. It isn't as if enemies can see the amount of score you have and hunt you based on that, it's just sheer luck if they kill someone with a large amount of cash, or not. Pilot versus Pilot and Amped Hardpoint were okay aside for the lack of Titan's, serviceable modes, if unremarkable. I'm surprised that the developers haven't included something like the Warzone gametype that featured in the Killzone series. I liked the dynamic objective there, and it seems it would suit the large open environments, and interactivity with AI very well.
I also thought the time to kill could be just slightly higher, and amped damage should be removed. It's hard to tell someone's using it before you're dead, and it allows even guns like the SMGs to kill in just a couple of bullets. It's a silly mechanic that reduces the skillful gunplay to nothing more than target acquisition, and I really feel that it shouldn't feature in the game. The overall time to kill feels okay. I'm inclined to say everyone should be able to take one or two more bullets but then that would mean snipers would probably still remain as a one-shot-kill, thereby receiving a buff overall, which I do not think they need. Either way, it's not my job to balance the game, the time to kill could be a little better and amped damage is devoid of competitive validity, it's a facet of the game I would consider poorly designed.
Summary
I really enjoyed my time with the beta, and reading everyone's comments I can see that my lack of time with the original Titanfall has perhaps helped with that. With that in mind, that doesn't make Titanfall 2 any less of decent game. Just because it doesn't offer the same vein of gameplay as its predecessor doesn't make the mechanics on offer here, inherently bad. It's clear that this isn't a sequel developed with fans of the original at the forefront, and given that it's mainly these fans that clambered to give the beta a go I can understand the negativity, but components of the game like the movement systems aren't inherently, poorly designed. They're simply not what you wanted. Disappointment in this regard is quite common within the industry. Expectations shape how people frame their experiences and in many cases those expectations are intentionally cultivated by the developer, leading to inevitable disappointment (see No Man's Sky) however here the developer has been quite open about the changes they're making, and given you an invitation to give their new systems a go, before you buy.
To use an analogy (stay with me here...), if games were board games, then No Man's Sky pretended it was chess up until launch, but when it released it turned out it was a game of checkers, a different game, not the game that consumers were set on buying, but not inherently a bad game in and of itself. Titanfall 2 on the other hand, inferred it was chess from its title, then ended up being a game of backgammon. A wholly different game, but again not an inherently bad game either. Either way, if backgammon was releasing in 2 months it would be difficult to turn it into chess 2, so perhaps the best option would be to try the second beta with a more open mind.
If you don't like it, that's fine and I'm not saying your wrong. Whether a game is good or bad is inherently quite an individual thing, and if you're not having fun then you're right, the game isn't good, not for you. However in most cases I've always found that the best thing to do is to try and go into it with an open mind, and perhaps consider what it is that other people like. It's easy to get caught up in negativity and assume that your perspective is the objective truth because no one else is enjoying it either, but I like what I played of the Titanfall 2 tech test, and like to think I'm not all together alone.
My background
I'm not ashamed to admit that I didn't spend much time with the original Titanfall, no more than a few games, as I didn't own the game, but played it on the PC of a friend. With that said I feel that allowed me to enjoy the technical test for what it is, rather than what I wanted it to be, based on my experience with the first game.
That aside, I play anything and everything from Uncharted 4 multiplayer and Rainbow Six Siege, to Battleborn and Garden Warfare 2. I tend to enjoy all of them, for their own reasons, at least to some degree, and I'm sure I would have enjoyed the original TF if I had spent more time with it.
In either case, I enjoyed Titanfall 2, and the awkward thing is that reading the comments here on neogaf, and on reddit made me feel almost ashamed for having fun on it. People talk about components like the movement system as if they're objectively worse, and the only reason you would enjoy things as they are now is if you wanted them dumbed down... but for me, I didn't care, I was just having fun with what I had.
I'll just run through a few of the reasons I like the beta, and why I'm looking forward to the full game. Some of these issues will be in reference to what people dislike, and present a counter-argument and others will emphasise smaller areas of the game that I enjoyed, that perhaps other games often neglect. Obviously, you're more than welcome to disagree, I'm not saying your feelings are wrong.
Movement
One of the beta's biggest criticisms in the beta regard the games movement systems. For many players the movement in Titanfall 2's technical test wasn't fast enough, and this - and the map design - are the particular issues that people tougt as having 'dumbed down' the experience. For me, the movement felt liberating - I felt as though the movement systems played sufficient a role to enable me to swiftly navigate wherever I wanted on the map, without feeling that they were going to be the sole crux of everyone's playstyle. I didn't feel that I was set to die if I stopped moving (like what happens on games like Tribes) but I did feel that the movement systems gave me ample traversal options when considering getting from A to B, and considerable flexibility when engaging in gunfights, or seeking to outsmart my opponent.
In either case, the notion that Titanfall was objectively a better game with faster movement is difficult to consider. It's a different game, and I appreciate that many people, especially fans of the original game would not like that - familiarity is a very powerful effect - however it's as I say, different, not better, or worse. Slower gameplay infers it's own set of advantages, orientating gameplay more towards strategy and positioning than it once was, and less towards dexterity, but at the same time, it's worth bearing in mind that the game is still one of the fastest paced shooters on the market. It's still considerably faster and more flexible than games like Advanced Warfare, Black Ops 3, or even Lawbreakers. It's not at the level of the original Titanfall, but again, it still provides more movement flexibility than any other shooter on the console market (excluding the original TF), and most on PC (Tribes etc).
Respawning
As someone that doesn't have Call of Duty in my daily routine, I often feel that excessive mobility can cause an experience to be overly chaotic. The aggressive respawning of that series is my biggest gripe, and this alone, made me enjoy Titanfall 2 much more than I have a Call of Duty game. Unlike most modern first person shooters the respawning algorithm in TF2's technical test felt like it was predictable, and I didn't need to continually react to people spawning all around me. The problem with many modern shooters is although you can develop a good sense of enemy awareness based on where engagements are occurring, that enemy awareness is continually interfered with by respawns that feel almost random. It's interesting how something relatively small can make a considerable difference to me, and it's the same reason why I don't like modern Call of Duty titles, but I did like Call of Duty 4. I felt as though my mental-map of where everyone is wasn't being messed with in that game every time someone died, it was more controlled, predictable, and fair.
Titans
In my time with Titanfall I enjoyed the Titans significantly. I know many were complaining that they weren't seeing their Titan enough, but for me I was getting between 2 and 4 Titan's per match, and spending between 30 and 50% of each game within my Titan. A big issue that people have seems to be the titan spawn timer, and I imagine I was just getting my Titan quickly because I was getting kills quickly. Considering the nature of the game, I do agree that everyone should be able to access their Titan, it would be nice if it shifted towards a system similar to Destiny or Overwatch's super and ultimate abilities, where score speeds up the process but the abilities are passively generated with a set timer so that everyone get's a relatively regulated amount.
Once in the Titan however, gameplay felt great. I felt as though the Titan's were appropriately balanced against one another, and against each other. Titan on Titan fights were enjoyable, and infantry went down quickly, but at the same time could avoid Titan's quite easily. Unlike the first TF, I did not feel that my Titan was able to easily one-shot enemy Pilots, and I liked that. I liked that Titan's weren't able to immediately pull pilots out of their gameplay experience and when I did kill a pilot it felt fair. It felt that their death resulted from their mistakes, rather than simply a difference in our equipment. At the same time, while pilots could avoid Titan's with relative ease, it wasn't easy to kill a Titan alone, incurred a large enough amount of risk to the pilot and making Titan's feel powerful, as if they offered a battlefield advantage.
I also loved unique 'hero' Titan's. I know this was different in Titanfall 1, where you could customise the Titan's abilities and weapons, but having them uniquely identifiable meant that both pilots and Titan's alike meant that you could accommodate the enemy Titan's kit into your playstyle when attacking. When fighting scorch you could take advantage of the fact that he was optimum at close range, avoiding the floor to evade his scorching AoE effects, while the opposite was true for Ion, where he was weaker at close range, struggling to hit you with his more precision orientated fully automatic rifle. It felt more competitively valid than the customisable alternative. The same is true for the pilots too as they are all uniquely identifiable based on their ability, though I felt that this mattered far less, as they could use any weapon, and engagements are quite quick, often finishing before you recognise the class.
Rodeoing Titan's for batteries is also fun strategic element that makes the interplay between pilot and allied titan feel more meaningful, while also encouraging hopping in and out of your own titan, an interesting gameplay concept that infers quite a bit of risk. I enjoyed it.
Map design
Although the map design didn't stand out to me, I didn't quite feel the hate that many others appear to. It's true that you cannot take full advantage of all of the movement systems across the entire map. The Swiss cheese design of the original Titanfall is gone on the maps present in the technical test, however for me, that did not necessarily feel like a terrible thing. I did not feel that I needed all of the movement options available to me at any one time, and I enjoyed the adaptive style of gameplay enforced by the variance from one portion of the map to another. As I moved from packed, to open areas, I appreciated the adjustments required of my playstyle, and the affect that had on the games pacing. Sure, I wasn't able to run across a wall, all of the time, but that did not prevent me from using the environment and my movement to my advantage in combat, especially if equipped with the grappling hook.
Hopefully the game does include more inner city maps that feature a 'Swiss cheese' design that's a little closer to the original Titanfall, but I would not want this to be all of the maps in the game. I like the fact that they are different, and the various components of the maps are different, I did not feel like the game suddenly fell apart when I wasn't running off a wall. The gunplay is solid and enjoyable, and that's constant throughout.
Gunplay
Appropriately, the gunplay in the game is very good. I played the technical test on PS4, and the controls felt great, very easy to aim and acquire targets (though I was still getting used to it, and getting better at the game with time) and the weapons provided sufficient feedback to feel impactful and fun to use. Significantly, I really liked the enemy health bars. Most games don't feature health bars for enemies with relatively low HP, like those in Titanfall, but it goes a long way to providing the player feedback on every bullet fired and making encounters feel fair. Often in games like Uncharted or Call of Duty I will feel like the player I was shooting escapes on a sliver of health, with a sense that they 'should have died' but as you can't see their health, it's unclear what actually happened, was it lag? did I miss? Titanfall 2 provides the visual feedback to reconsile that much of that debate with the health display and it makes the gunplay feel better as a result.
Networks are neat
The network feature is neat, not enough games facilitate clan-esque features, let alone provide a platform for communication that is specific to your clan. While it wasn't working properly in the technical test it's a fantastic idea that will bring communities and players together in game, more titles should be doing things like this, because for me, it's quite a big deal.
The controls are great
While this kind of goes with gunplay I thought I'd feature it in its own section as so many games actually manage to mess up the feel of shooters on consoles. Games like Overwatch and Killzone are big name titles that have had control issues in the past, with atypical deadzones being a common issue. It's almost condescending to have to praise a game for controlling well, but either way, Titanfall 2 felt great.
What I didn't like
While I had a lot of fun with the technical test overall, there were of course some elements of the game I didn't like. I didn't like either of the game types that much. It seemed as though Titans were admittedly less frequent on hardpoint, which was a little less interesting, and I found the ruleset for 'bounty hunt' to be a little convoluted and generally, not especially competitively valid. Losing half your score because you're killed by an enemy pilot? It's a nonsense mechanic that rewards random chance more than anything else. It isn't as if enemies can see the amount of score you have and hunt you based on that, it's just sheer luck if they kill someone with a large amount of cash, or not. Pilot versus Pilot and Amped Hardpoint were okay aside for the lack of Titan's, serviceable modes, if unremarkable. I'm surprised that the developers haven't included something like the Warzone gametype that featured in the Killzone series. I liked the dynamic objective there, and it seems it would suit the large open environments, and interactivity with AI very well.
I also thought the time to kill could be just slightly higher, and amped damage should be removed. It's hard to tell someone's using it before you're dead, and it allows even guns like the SMGs to kill in just a couple of bullets. It's a silly mechanic that reduces the skillful gunplay to nothing more than target acquisition, and I really feel that it shouldn't feature in the game. The overall time to kill feels okay. I'm inclined to say everyone should be able to take one or two more bullets but then that would mean snipers would probably still remain as a one-shot-kill, thereby receiving a buff overall, which I do not think they need. Either way, it's not my job to balance the game, the time to kill could be a little better and amped damage is devoid of competitive validity, it's a facet of the game I would consider poorly designed.
Summary
I really enjoyed my time with the beta, and reading everyone's comments I can see that my lack of time with the original Titanfall has perhaps helped with that. With that in mind, that doesn't make Titanfall 2 any less of decent game. Just because it doesn't offer the same vein of gameplay as its predecessor doesn't make the mechanics on offer here, inherently bad. It's clear that this isn't a sequel developed with fans of the original at the forefront, and given that it's mainly these fans that clambered to give the beta a go I can understand the negativity, but components of the game like the movement systems aren't inherently, poorly designed. They're simply not what you wanted. Disappointment in this regard is quite common within the industry. Expectations shape how people frame their experiences and in many cases those expectations are intentionally cultivated by the developer, leading to inevitable disappointment (see No Man's Sky) however here the developer has been quite open about the changes they're making, and given you an invitation to give their new systems a go, before you buy.
To use an analogy (stay with me here...), if games were board games, then No Man's Sky pretended it was chess up until launch, but when it released it turned out it was a game of checkers, a different game, not the game that consumers were set on buying, but not inherently a bad game in and of itself. Titanfall 2 on the other hand, inferred it was chess from its title, then ended up being a game of backgammon. A wholly different game, but again not an inherently bad game either. Either way, if backgammon was releasing in 2 months it would be difficult to turn it into chess 2, so perhaps the best option would be to try the second beta with a more open mind.
If you don't like it, that's fine and I'm not saying your wrong. Whether a game is good or bad is inherently quite an individual thing, and if you're not having fun then you're right, the game isn't good, not for you. However in most cases I've always found that the best thing to do is to try and go into it with an open mind, and perhaps consider what it is that other people like. It's easy to get caught up in negativity and assume that your perspective is the objective truth because no one else is enjoying it either, but I like what I played of the Titanfall 2 tech test, and like to think I'm not all together alone.