• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Titanfall 2 isn't that bad

Jawmuncher

Member
Sep 2, 2010
61,688
17
790
Isla Nublar
It's not a bad game on its own merits. Especially if you never played the first, it's easier to accept what it is. Hell I know some TF1 fans that afe preferring it for whatever reason. But on that same note I can understand all the backlash the game is getting.
 
Feb 27, 2014
8,414
0
0
Because the point remains: if you don't use the mechanics that are being changed why are you complaining about said mechanics? It's that simple.

This is a situation where people are clearly talking about things they don't know anything about. They're just repeating what other people are saying based on perceived differences.

Teach me the ways oh Titan Lord. /s

Seriously, yours is NOT the only opinion that matters. MANY people have taken issue with the movement/map design. What you seem to be overlooking is they both go hand in hand to further reduce that mobility. In what way is that open field supposed to be even remotely good for traversal?
 

Calm Killer

In all media, only true fans who consume every book, film, game, or pog collection deserve to know what's going on.
Apr 25, 2007
2,739
0
0
West Virginia
Probably also because players were getting used to the game.

Not really. Some game types, unintentionally I can only assume, make camping viable. Bounty Hunt is a perfect example. Hard point to an extent has always been somewhat campish, but your are trying to control points. Play style for that can play into it.
 
Feb 17, 2013
4,004
0
0
United Kingdom
Not really. Some game types, unintentionally I can only assume, make camping viable. Bounty Hunt is a perfect example. Hard point to an extent has always been somewhat campish, but your are trying to control points. Play style for that can play into it.

I don't get how bounty hunt encourages camping. Sure you can overlook an area, but I never did as well as when I was running around. You have to run to bank your cash, you have to run to the enemy spawns, and you won't end up with the largest amount of cash within each wave window if you just sit on a rooftop the entire time.

I was top or second place on the team, in every match I played aside the first (where I did not understand the objective), and not once did I camp out, and sit on top of a roof top or anything like that. Hardpoint is much worse, and was in the original TF, since as you say, you control objectives, and don't need to move. It sounds like you're just giving the mode a free pass, because it was in the original TF.

I have never said that the game that is titanfall 2 is bad. What I have argued is it is not titanfall. It is its own thing, not a titanfall game. If they wanted to make this they need to rebrand it as something else, not titanfall 2.

A sequel should build on what made the first one great. Not completely change the formula.


Not to put the OP down or anything, but as soon as he said he didn't put much time into titanfall I realized that I couldn't change his opinion because he doesn't understand. He doesn't have the history that actual titanfall players have.

It's not about having a history or not though, it's about being able to put that history to one side. It's about how the game can be enjoyed, on its own merits, and it shouldn't be dependent on whether you've played the first or not, to determine whether you can see that.

I liked Starhawk after Lightbox radically changed Warhawk. Liked Resistance 2 after Insomniac radically changed Resistance, I liked Resistance 3 after Insomniac again.... radically changed Resistance 2. I liked Street Fighter IV after Capcom killed the pace of the game set by Street Fighter 3.

I played enough of Titanfall to observe its differences to the sequel, but I'm pretty convinced it wouldn't affect my feelings here. I'm not adverse to playing a different game, with different mechanics. Plenty of games make radical shifts and I haven't had a problem with those shifts. I play almost everything under the sun, so that helps, because even if I don't enjoy a game for one reason, I will usually enjoy it another, but that aside I don't think it benefits anyone to be this resistant to change.

For me it's okay for a sequel to vary quite a bit. Some do, some don't. For instance, fighting games like Blazblue are the same pretty much every time, minor variation with each game and a couple of new characters. Street Fighter on the other hand, it's radically different every time, with a very significant complete overhaul of the games systems. It's interesting how change is more accepted in some genres over others.
 

BigDug13

Member
Dec 20, 2006
20,183
1
0
In a sea of winter shooter releases (BF1 and COD) and a continuing-to-be-popular Overwatch, Titanfall needed to stand out.

The game doesn't seem to stand out like its predecessor.

In fact, if this was the "console exclusive to XBO" game instead of the first one, few would be buying an XBO specifically for it.
 

Stone Ocean

Member
May 27, 2013
31,205
3
0
For me it's okay for a sequel to vary quite a bit. Some do, some don't. For instance, fighting games like Blazblue are the same pretty much every time, minor variation with each game and a couple of new characters. Street Fighter on the other hand, it's radically different every time, with a very significant complete overhaul of the games systems. It's interesting how change is more accepted in some genres over others.
The thing with Street Fighter is that it always feels like Street Fighter, even when being massively different it still has a similar speed and weight, they never alter the base of the game.

Now imagine making Street Fighter VI and adding universal air dashes and double jumps.
 

Izuna

Banned
Nov 23, 2010
28,298
6
0
England
I thought the images in the OP were gifs and waited a long time to see them move. I guess it's a metaphor for Titanfall 2.
 

ethomaz

is mad because DF didn't do a video on a video of a video of a video on PS5
Mar 19, 2013
40,143
40,620
1,310
39
Brazil
Titanfall 2 is good.

That it is biggest issue.

Because it is not great like first Titanfall... it is inferior even being good.
 
Feb 17, 2013
4,004
0
0
United Kingdom
I thought the images in the OP were gifs and waited a long time to see them move. I guess it's a metaphor for Titanfall 2.

Nah sorry I nabbed some images from google to make the OP seem more interesting :p

Normally I take my own shots for threads but the beta isn't up anymore and I didn't take any. I thought about including a video commentary of my gameplay in the OP instead but then that's quite a bit of extra effort and few few would watch it.

I don't actually know a good way of making gifs from my own footage.
 

J 0 E

Member
Mar 19, 2010
1,144
0
780
Jeddah - KSA
Agree with OP

The game is a bit slower than TF1 but that doesn't mean it's "slow", TF2 is gonna be the fastest shooter this holiday

TF1 rodeo system will not work on TF2 with everybody having grapple hooks, I like the new system for the strategic aspect the OP mentioned + making the titans not that overpowered


with some tweaking and testing we could have an amazing game.
 

rakkadakka

Member
Oct 27, 2011
3,335
0
0
In a vacuum it's not.

The tech test proves that it's nowhere near the revelation that the first game was.
 

backflip10019

Member
Feb 19, 2007
20,042
1
1,385
NYC
It just felt... off to me. The player speed being reduced made it feel like an entirely different game. I couldn't find an aiming sensitivity that felt right to me, I think 4 was too slow and 5 too fast.

It's not horrible, but to me it's certainly not up to par with the first game.
 

BattleMonkey

Member
Mar 5, 2009
32,358
59
965
No it's not bad. Its just not as good as the first one so far, and that's a huge problem when the first didn't sell that amazing, and this is being launched against CoD and BF at the same time.

They needed to build on the first, make a better game to attract people. Instead they are pissing off much of it's old school fan base, while it's going to struggle getting new players in.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Jan 18, 2015
8,853
1
0
I can understand why someone who never really experience TF1 would feel liberated by TF2's locomotion... But coming from TF1 I feel shackled.
 

Chris1

Member
Jun 3, 2014
7,706
1
0
No it's not bad. Its just not as good as the first one so far, and that's a huge problem when the first didn't sell that amazing, and this is being launched against CoD and BF at the same time
The first game sold 7M.

The problem the first have was keeping players which just needed a meaningful progression system and more content.
 

Sub Boss

Member
Mar 6, 2013
22,515
2,249
795
i didnt even know there was a TitanFall 2 released, i thought it was kind of a big deal a few years ago
 
Mar 21, 2016
158
0
0
Honestly I'm happy to let this game go, I love Titanfall 1, I hate the changes of Titanfall 2

Titan 1 made you feel useful no matter how you played and it is a lot of fun.

Titan 2 I might aswell try and grind on COD with a larger player base, as if feels like Blackops 3 with a Titan streak
 

TimeEffect

Member
Mar 17, 2010
27,951
0
915
It's not bad.

But it's not Titanfall. It's blatantly clear that they decided to make the game grounded, simplified, and slower. Being "not bad" isn't good enough, it's the bare minimum.

It's not the first game to do this either by the way. Killzone 3, SOCOM 4 are other prime examples. Sure, they "aren't bad", but they aren't what those games were about, and "not bad" isn't anything worth praising
 

TheCanisDirus

Member
Sep 10, 2013
5,470
0
0
In my opinion rose tinted glasses are to blame for a good portion of the criticism. Not saying TF2 is perfect by any means! I think there is a lot that needs tweaking. I'm just saying playing the tech test and TF1 back to back really show that TF2 is mostly going in the right direction if they can sort out the map design.
 

Broadbandito

Member
Aug 29, 2006
6,076
1
0
WI
I loved the alpha. I played 20 hours or so. The worst part so far have been the maps. We've seen 2 of them. The third one for the alpha (which has been shown in many youtube videos this week) look smaller with a lot more room for wall running. The maps grew on me the more and more I played them. You can find routes that get you across each map fairly quickly. I think a lot of people are forgetting to slide in between jumps and whatnot.

The TTK feels pretty good. I wouldn't be against them changing it so it takes another shot or 2 on pilots.

As far as The streaks for titans. I am fine with the change. I was fine with the timer. I think they could definitely adopt the overwatch style and put it on a SLOW timer that only goes faster when you are adding points to your team. I also feel like if you are not moving at all that your timer should stop.

I wasn't attached to attrition like everyone else. I played hardpoint and CTF in TF1. The ai/grunts didn't bother me (thought it was cool that their mp sort of had a campaign feel to it with the AI). Attrition to me was a VERY VERY casual mode where I could get stoned and just not be competitive at all. I enjoyed fucking around in it every once in awhile but it definitely was not the meat and potatoes for me. It made me sad that when the community died out that this was the only mode that really had players in it (I owned TF on pc and xbox one)

Amped Hardpoint is great IMO. It shakes up the normal domination/hardpoint and calls for even more teamplay. We had a group of 6 jump into amped hardpoint and then realized it was 4 hours later after we stopped playing.

Pilot vs Pilot I could care less about. This is because I think TDM is pretty terrible in every shooter except for Halo.

Bounty Hunt was awesome. I noticed so many times where people would just go for kills and totally forget to bank their cash. I love the implementation of AI titan bosses and mini bosses. Overall I would rather play BH than attrition any day of the week.

The hit detection and network are incredible. The hit detection is so fucking satisfying in this game. I'm so glad a developer is working so hard to deliver this. I never felt like I was screwed due to the server/game/lag. Was never killed around the corner, etc.

Networks is one of the coolest/simplest ideas to finally show up. Obviously the normal party system will be there and will (hopefully) work by launch. It is pretty cool though since I run a small gaming community that spawned from our destiny clan on facebook and not everyone is friends with everyone on PSN. This way it lets us all join the network and invite everyone together without needing to be friends. Such a simple and useful tool.

Overall I am super excited for the game. Looking forward to seeing more maps/modes as we get closer to the release date.
 

DirtyLarry

Member
Apr 6, 2010
3,854
1
805
Dirty Jersey
I happen to agree with the OP, and full disclosure, I played the first one for about 10 hours or so, and never loved it as it seems others did. I thought it was okay but I also never got really that good at it so it became frustrating to casually play, so I just stopped playing.

With that said, I am sure everyone has seen this thread with a reply from the Game Director about the changes. Simply put, They wanted to make it more accessible.

I think that says all we really need to know.

Let's not forget the expectation has always been that Titanfall is not supposed to be a smaller niche shooter that a small group of people love while the rest do not. It was/is supposed to be a COD replacement that the masses love and embrace.

I think it is safe to say, even if TF1 was beloved by many, it simply did not meet those types of expectations.

What a few 100,000 players may believe is the better game is not going to convince the developers that is what needs to be done. They want millions of players. So they have changed the gameplay up to hopefully hit that mark. If they lose a few 100,000 players, but gain a few million because it is more accessible, whose opinion do you think matters most to them?
 

SwolBro

Banned
Jun 21, 2015
3,387
23
0
Teach me the ways oh Titan Lord. /s

Seriously, yours is NOT the only opinion that matters. MANY people have taken issue with the movement/map design. What you seem to be overlooking is they both go hand in hand to further reduce that mobility. In what way is that open field supposed to be even remotely good for traversal?
Those are 2 maps. 2 maps of what will probably end up a 10+ map launch.
 

TimeEffect

Member
Mar 17, 2010
27,951
0
915
Those are 2 maps. 2 maps of what will probably end up a 10+ map launch.

We've seen 3 maps. We know they dont have anywhere near the verticality of the first game.

I think it's fair to be incredibly skeptical, considering what we've seen and what devs have said about their new philosophy
 
Nov 9, 2013
1,517
0
0
i think it needs more than "not that bad" to compete with cod and bf
Agreed. I will say though that BF continuing fucking paid maps has removed it from my radar for good. Moving TF2 back into the running for me. Assuming TF2 will go with free DLC maps.
 

Ghazi

Member
Jul 23, 2012
11,047
1
0
In my opinion rose tinted glasses are to blame for a good portion of the criticism. Not saying TF2 is perfect by any means! I think there is a lot that needs tweaking. I'm just saying playing the tech test and TF1 back to back really show that TF2 is mostly going in the right direction if they can sort out the map design.
Uh, well, after playing the tech test I went and bought Titanfall 1 on Origin (originally played it on the One), and it further cemented the idea that the first game is a vastly superior one. In fact, I'f go as far as saying that it was better than I remembered it (minus the smart pistol).
 

wilsonda

Member
Sep 25, 2013
504
0
0
Seeing enemies hp was actually really cool... didn't think I would like it as its kinda of gamey but it does make it feel a bit more responsive
 

TheCanisDirus

Member
Sep 10, 2013
5,470
0
0
Uh, well, after playing the tech test I went and bought Titanfall 1 on Origin (originally played it on the One), and it further cemented the idea that the first game is a vastly superior one. In fact, I'f go as far as saying that it was better than I remembered it (minus the smart pistol).

Totally your opinion and completely valid. I played a few hundred hours of TF on the XBO as well. I launched TF1 last weekend after thinking it was better than TF2 from what i remembered. I was completely mistaken! I immediately went back to playing the TF2 tech test as i though it was better than TF1 in every single way other than map design. THAT shit needs fixing.
 

Ghazi

Member
Jul 23, 2012
11,047
1
0
Totally your opinion and completely valid. I played a few hundred hours of TF on the XBO as well. I launched TF1 last weekend after thinking it was better than TF2 from what i remembered. I was completely mistaken! I immediately went back to playing the TF2 tech test as i though it was better than TF1 in every single way other than map design. THAT shit needs fixing.

I agree that better maps would dramatically improve how TF2 plays. The ones in the technical test do not mesh well with the parkour mechanics, especially compared to the first.
 

TimeEffect

Member
Mar 17, 2010
27,951
0
915
i think it needs more than "not that bad" to compete with cod and bf

The idea that it is being made to compete with those games, and the idea that TF2 was simplified to do so isn't going to pay off.

It's likely going to fall into the same camp as games like Crysis MP. Fun, but not something that's going to compete with those big games...like 2 COD games itself, Battlefield, Overwatch, and even Rainbow 6 Siege.

"Not bad" isn't good enough. It's 2016, and shooters are incredibly competitive against each other.

What does Titanfall 2 have in map design and movement that COD wont have? Simplified maps, fast TTK, open fields, bigger ground gameplay aren't going to be good enough to win over the average shooter fan looking for a new shooter (if they are even looking).

While games like R6 and Overwatch craft their own demographic, Titanfall 2 is here simplifying its game, chasing one.

TF1 lost its audience to a number of reasons, and I dont think the core gameplay was a big enough reason. The devs dont want players to be intimidated, and they dont want a high skill ceiling where average players see teammates whizzing around, and they dont want complex maps that require some learning.

I dont know what to say, other than good luck. This kind of decision has NEVER worked out for a game, at least of recent memory. Killzone 3, SOCOM 4, Halo 4, Resistance 3.

I remember games like Killzone 3 and SOCOM wanting to "simplify" and "lower the threshold". It did them no favours. If TF2 pulls it off, then good for them though. I just doubt it.
 

Revas

Member
May 12, 2014
880
52
420
I think most of us can agree that TF2 isn't "bad". Fans were not expecting "not bad" considering the foundation of the first game. I never felt during the technical test that I was playing garbage, it is just not at all the game I was expecting, nor can I see myself paying full price for it. Maybe they will find a new fanbase that will carry the series to new heights but I really doubt it. That's what kind of bothers me about it, they fired the old fans in hopes of gaining new ones when it was probably a better idea to just appeal to those like myself that still play R1.
 

SwolBro

Banned
Jun 21, 2015
3,387
23
0
We've seen 3 maps. We know they dont have anywhere near the verticality of the first game.

I think it's fair to be incredibly skeptical, considering what we've seen and what devs have said about their new philosophy

They're no different than Fracture, Boneyard, Lagoon and i'd say somewhat better than those maps.

I'm in the mindset that these guys gave you a goddamn gauntlet to test speed runs. If they decided to do that and then not give any parkour heavy maps... well, that's just crazy. Seriously, you guys think they're all crazy over there?
 

family_guy

Member
Mar 17, 2013
9,675
3
610
I would use MGSV as an example. To many it's a great game, but it feels like a spinoff and not a true Metal Gear game.
 

ethomaz

is mad because DF didn't do a video on a video of a video of a video on PS5
Mar 19, 2013
40,143
40,620
1,310
39
Brazil
Seems like they changed what you found good to great again OP.

For the better.

You can back to good CoD again :p
 
Feb 17, 2013
4,004
0
0
United Kingdom
Seems like they changed what you found good to great again OP.

For the better.

You can back to good CoD again :p

This doesn't make sense. It's as if you didn't read the OP, or a single post I made.

I stated on several occasions that the mechanics were different rather than being better or worse. Not that I liked them because they were slow, and would hate them if they were faster.

I'm sure I will still enjoy Titanfall 2 with faster aerial movement, and the post is still relevent, even with these changes. Some of the things people complained about included elements of the game like map design and the Titan gameplay, Respawn don't seem to be changing those, so it's still worth highlighting why these areas of the game might not be so bad, after all. For example, how by sacrificing customisation by making every Titan unique, the game affords increased competitive validity, enabling pilots and Titan's alike to accommodate the enemies kit into their playstyle when attacking.

I hope the changes they're making affect singleplayer too, otherwise the two experiences might feel very disjointed. In either case it's the right thing for them to do if they want to ensure the success of their franchise, a lot of people were unhappy and whether those people were providing a fair critique or not doesn't really matter, launching without at least making an effort to appease fans of the previous game would have significantly harmed the games commercial performance.

We will have to wait and see how impacting the changes are however. As during the last tech test they changed hard point so that more Titan's would be available... however their changes made a very small difference. Hopefully the proposed changes are more than a token gesture, and offer meaningful change in the direction that people wanted.

In a vacuum it's not.

The tech test proves that it's nowhere near the revelation that the first game was.

Very few sequels are though, right? Dark Souls 2 wasn't the revelation the first game was. Modern Warfare 2 wasn't the revelation the first game was, Tekken 2 wasn't the revelation the first game was. Usually sequels only end up having an impact that equals or outweighs the first if the first game actively failed to achieve its intentions. Games like Assassins Creed (AC 1 vs 2) and Street Fighter (SF 1 VS 2) saw revolutionary sequels, but they were only so because their predecessors were lacking in some way or another.
 

EcHoMaN

Banned
Jan 8, 2014
21
0
0
The first game sold 7M.

The problem the first have was keeping players which just needed a meaningful progression system and more content.

It's a sad state of affairs when an FPS game needs irrelevant progression(levels) and unlock systems to be compelling. I guess I'm just an older gamer and mechanics/gameplay will always be placed higher in my gaming needs/wants than useless levels or 100 different gun skins where only rate of fire may change by 25, and dmg by 10....

Also I don't see the need for Respawn wanting a concurrent player base when maps will be free and DLC/microtransactions will only be in the form of Titan paints,gun camo, player camo. Also by releasing in October they automatically place themselves in selling less copies which is where all their revenue will be generated from since no paid expansion DLC has been announced.

The inclusion of the Grappling Hook has a direct affect on map design, which has already seen to be lazy and less thoughtful.
 

RichiRamjag

Member
Nov 6, 2014
6,910
0
0
It's a sad state of affairs when an FPS game needs irrelevant progression(levels) and unlock systems to be compelling. I guess I'm just an older gamer and mechanics/gameplay will always be placed higher in my gaming needs/wants than useless levels or 100 different gun skins where only rate of fire may change by 25, and dmg by 10....

Also I don't see the need for Respawn wanting a concurrent player base when maps will be free and DLC/microtransactions will only be in the form of Titan paints,gun camo, player camo. Also by releasing in October they automatically place themselves in selling less copies which is where all their revenue will be generated from since no paid expansion DLC has been announced.

The inclusion of the Grappling Hook has a direct affect on map design, which has already seen to be lazy and less thoughtful.

People like feeling like they've accomplished something. Even skin unlocks and such makes a large impact.