Don't forget though, the audience has grown as well. Supply and demand. So while price wise it isn't 1 to 1 with inflation. The amount of people who have access to games has skyrocketed. Remember in the old days when we rented or went to friends to play on a real expensive system? There was also that bit someone was saying about the steam sale, one developer reported they made as much as they had made the entire year to that point from a flash sale.
I would say its cheap if they are not going to do a required DLC bit to have exploits fixed beyond the first few months. Battlelog from conversations of players I know is a joke with reporting hackers. Titanfall wont be using Battlelog, so its even more convoluted.. http://help.ea.com/en/article/how-to-report-cheating/
If anyone has extra PC beta keys please share, I'd like to give it try as well :poly142:. I know some of you guys posted that you guys have extra beta keys to give .
I think the cheater count on Titanfall will ultimately end up being based on if there is a any kind of anticheat solution that ships with the game and if there is a competitive esports scene around this game.
In a game like counter-strike, cheating will ALWAYS be prevalent simply because bad players want to feel like the professional players who live off of playing the game daily and they don't care how much money they have to spend to achieve that feeling. This hack is pretty popular on CSGO nowadays and the only way users can get banned is if they get banned by Overwatch since VAC has never successfully banned anybody using it.
If you look at a non-competitive game like Call of Duty though, the only people you see cheating are the idiots who want to "get back at" the "greedy" devs/publisher by ruining the game for others so they end up boycotting future releases of the game.
These people have the most broken logic I've ever seen, but it's a thing, especially on CoD:Ghosts which appears to have shipped without any functional anti-cheat solution whatsoever. Generally the $60 price tag turns people off of cheating since most of these asswipes are 11 years old and had their parents buy the game for them.
My mouse was jerky at some parts despite having 60 fps, so ill rule that out as beta.
Textures were awful, but I heard they were reduced for beta so ill leave that out
Feels like COD but less floaty. More body movements is nice and the art and animations all remind me of MW2
The art assets each are amazing, love the soldiers. Especially on the loadout screen
Maxed out it looks like a 2007 title and doesn't do the art the justice. I don't think Source is limiting them because Source is a really good engine, I feel like they're building for the 360 where building for the One/pc and then reducing for the 360 would be a better option
During the tutorial it seemed really fun, It felt like mirrors edge pvp which seemed awesome, was excited to play.
first match was also really fun. Got pretty stale after my 3rd game though. Just got really repetitive and battling in titans was pretty clunky because you feel like you're trying to step around a kids playroom.
The maps being too small was a problem from the beginning, and then when you do the game mode where everyone is in a giant titan they feel even smaller.
If its under $20 id buy it if I was bored. No way its worth $60 to me, even if it had 30 maps. After seeing how small the maps are (and then how much smaller titans make them feel) 30 comes out to about 2 BF4 maps.
To be honest if they dropped the titans and just kept the parkour pvp they'd have a pretty interesting game. But without titans the youngins have nothing to get all giddy about
To be honest I thought the titans were cool, added a nice touch to the game as well as the mobility. Didn't really see the awful textures either, all looked pretty cool to me - the visuals and assets again were awesome Apart from that though, kinda meh.
Played some matches last night. Really, really, fun and yet I have to wonder about the lock-on pistol. Seems kinda....OP? I didn't get killed much because of it as I could just cloak, leap all over the place and 3 shot players with very little effort. I have to admit it makes you feel pretty badass ;D
Otherwise I saw no flaws and was happy to see Insane Textures running smoothly on my machine.
More proof that the beta code stunt was just for marketing to tell your friends about the game. It works though lol
What's wrong with getting people to talk about their game? and what's wrong with friends telling friends about a game? I don't understand how that is bad... everybody gets in.
What's wrong with getting people to talk about their game? and what's wrong with friends telling friends about a game? I don't understand how that is bad... everybody gets in.
Then call it a demo. Calling it a beta test is just a way to keep consumer minds a little foggy so anything they don't like they'll dismiss as "oh its beta" . Its too late for any design to change, only bugs.
- Decent looking game on the Xbox One and PC, some of the textures are a bit noisy and will artifact really bad on the Xbox One. I didn't notice this on the PC, but the Xbox One had a ton of mist and dust everywhere for no reason on a lot of the maps.
- Leveling up and getting unlocks was really quick in the beta, but obviously it'll be tuned down for the actual release. It seems like the game might end up being too grindy for my tastes, because unlocks will be the only form of progression without single player.
- I didn't enjoy playing as mechs much, you had to try to play as efficiently as possible, get cover, avoid 2v1, use your missiles at the right time, wait for their missiles to be fired to use your shield, it felt like slow rock paper scissors countering, too methodical for me. I enjoyed the mechs in Hawken a lot more where mech combat was more like a normal FPS.
- Playing as a soldier was a lot more fun for me, parkour at times was amazing. You could cleanly jump up to some windows and buildings, but other times there was places you knew you could climb on top of, but would just have to keep jumping at over and over to climb up like mountains in Skyrim. Soldier vs mech was a bit silly and turned into Ring Around the Rosie jumping off and back onto their mech as they got in and out. Also sometimes jumping onto and getting stepped on was a bit awkward as well.
- If there's no micro-transactions, $60 for a pure multiplayer experience sounds okay, but I would prefer more like $45.
- If there's microtransactions, there seems to be a lot of other F2P shooters I'd rather play. Planetside 2, Loadout, Hawken, TF2, etc.
- The game definitely seemed like a lot was borrowed from other games and put together in a unique way, it's fun, but not GOTY material.
Then call it a demo. Calling it a beta test is just a way to keep consumer minds a little foggy so anything they don't like they'll dismiss as "oh its beta" . Its too late for any design to change, only bugs.
Then call it a demo. Calling it a beta test is just a way to keep consumer minds a little foggy so anything they don't like they'll dismiss as "oh its beta" . Its too late for any design to change, only bugs.
Isn't finding bugs the point of a modern day beta test?
Isn't finding bugs the point of a modern day beta test?
Yes but they can't fix much with only weeks until release. Fixing bugs often just spawns new smaller well hidden bugs.
The real beta should have been November/December.
Lets all remember how bad of a release BF4 had despite its "beta" to find "bugs." its just a trial to generate hype
I'm just saying anything not related to bugs that players don't like most likely won't be changed. But other players come along and say "nah man its just beta release will probably be better" thats rarely ever true. So sick of seeing it in youtube comments.
I'm happy that the general gaming audience mostly understands that you cannot and should not judge beta/alphas, but then again, it's silly to expect the game to change much before launch.
I'm happy that the general gaming audience mostly understands that you cannot and should not judge beta/alphas, but then again, it's silly to expect the game to change much before launch.
This exactly
and TESO did a good call on calling their most recent test a stress test like you said, as they're also getting close to release
I'm just saying anything not related to bugs that players don't like most likely won't be changed. But other players come along and say "nah man its just beta release will probably be better" thats rarely ever true. So sick of seeing it in youtube comments.
Well for starters, I wouldn't expect core gameplay mechanics to change, even if the beta was released earlier. Modern games require a ton of coding and so some gameplay mechanics could very well be the result of several months worth of work. There are plenty of cases where devs don't want to eliminate unpopular mechanics simply because there was so much work put into them and removing them could even cause a lot of problematic gaps in the actual code of the game.
From reading up on the Titanfall beta on the internet, many people are complaining about the fact that the maps are filled with AIs rather than human players. Should the devs just remove that feature even though they most likely developed a great amount of the game with it in mind? Of course not, major changes like this is what goes into the planning phase of sequels.
I'm sure hype is often discussed during the planning phase of a public alpha/beta/"stress test" but it would be just plain wrong to think that hype is the biggest reason for initiating such tests.
As for the average gamer claiming the final release will be better, I usually just see comments like this as either optimism or fanboyism. A lot of games do change a lot from beta to release though, some change for the better, others not so much.
Battlefield 3 had a ton of great (and some not so great) changes from alpha to beta to release. I remember getting 20-30 FPS at the lowest settings during the beta then at release
As for youtube comments, I would advise you to just avoid them entirely. There are just too many stupid assholes there. I remember posting a comment on a video telling some PC fanboy to calm down since he said something like "I fucking hate console users they ruin everything etc." and he stalked my videos until he found one which had my steam name in it, then he proceeded to look me up on steam and spam my wall with insults. After blocking him, he then got 6-7 of his friends to spam my wall along with voting down and insulting all of my workshop submissions and posting rude comments on all of my videos. To hell with people like that.
Beta tests find bugs and help stress test the servers. If it's only service is a glorified demo, the bean counters believe demos hurt sales in the long run that's why you've seen them disappear lately.
I work on MMO's so I don't know how it goes in shooters but we can track a lot of statistics about a players experience. If the beta shows a lot of people dropping out at the same point in the storyline it means we may have a difficulty spike to address or perhaps they are getting exhausted by seeing the same scenery for a long time.
I've seen shooters employ "heat maps" where they can visualize where the players are dying on their maps and adjust layout, weapon placement, etc... to tweak the game flow.
I've seen shooters employ "heat maps" where they can visualize where the players are dying on their maps and adjust layout, weapon placement, etc... to tweak the game flow.
I saw an article in 2007 about Halo 3 that talked about Bungie using heat maps to evaluate trouble spots. Maybe it's common practice now? Any FPS devs want to chime in?
I've seen shooters employ "heat maps" where they can visualize where the players are dying on their maps and adjust layout, weapon placement, etc... to tweak the game flow.
Heat maps are some really cool stuff, but still, I doubt they'd change any map layouts before release. Respawn worked on COD so they've pretty much got map flow down to a science, its a fluent sprintfest just like their style has always been.
But you can get heatmaps from small matches of internal testing also, surely they'd start play testing them at the earliest block in.
@NegevPro I also dislike the AI in the match, I feel so much more insignificant as a player. The titans help "balance" this, but I still have issues with maps feeling too small when in a Titan. The parkour is amazing and feels so great but why do it when everyone is just gunna be in a Titan. And if you're not in a titan you're using your anti titan weapon....
We used MP match data a lot during the Gears 3 MP beta (heat maps, and other voodoo tracking the engineers had). Its why the layout of Stadium/Thrashball and Trenches changed between Beta & ship.
Would think most MP games these has some sort of data tracking & analytic backend stuff, whether its public or not. They most likely have a ton of awesome stuff for Titanfall to help them manage and tweak/hone the game.
Played for a couple of hours, unlocked most of the general stuff. First impression was "I wish the round were longer, the gunplay better and maps larger". Movement and weapons are more unreal than counter-strike. Gunplay is lackluster but solid. The rounds are sometimes ridiculously short and there is very little room for lurking about planning, it all comes down to the run and gunning. Which is a shame, because bringing the tempo down every now and then is for me more interesting than just spamming the respawn button (assuming you die, that is). The battle quickly turns into Titanwars, which is a whole lot less interesting than regular pilot shootouts. I do enjoy the cat and mouse play of Titan versus Pilot, but for anyone used to playing battlefield the lack of destruction makes it a bit silly.
EDIT: Off current topic post because I clicked the first page instead of the last by mistake.
I had so many issues with EA, their support, Origin, getting a refund, etc. I like that there's competition against Steam, but I'm never a fan of locking games into a piece of software. I hate it when Ubisoft does it with titles like Assassins Creed, I hate it with games for Windows live, but at least you have choices where to buy those games. I just see it as market fragmentation more than anything.
So I played another long set of rounds last night and I take back my comment about the smart pistol being OP. It's actually not that useful against skilled players. Anyway I've found my main skill is piloting a Titan
It's pretty easy to survive against most players at the moment because you can easily sneak up on them and do some major damage then you keep close to them and punch them over and over. I remember taking one Titan down with my fists without taking any damage just by strafe dodging.
Otherwise I seriously hate that counter to rodeo ;P Is there a visual sign? Cause it's been a gamble with me. I leap on, do some damage and BAM I'm shocked. Overall though it's been great fun but as it is, not worth 60 dollars. It will need a lot of content and variety in terms of customization to even come close to 40.
Played it for a bit this morning... and i have to say its pretty fun. But i agree with some of the comments here.
I dunn think the matches last long enough.. once you get into a groove the match ends. When there are a lot of titans around sometimes its hard to move... specially in that map where it has really narrow corridors.
The gunplay could be a lot tighter.. and the feedback from any action could be considerably better. Specially when you are shooting. I think the titan is better at doing this. They are pretty awesome.
Hmmm...The game looks ok... no issues running it.. but i feel it could have been a bit sharper... specially on the low poly geometry. its very blocky right now.
Still... great game, and i am excited to keep playing it. Too bad its not on ps4.
played a bunch last night. I dig it so far, visually it looks decent, everything is going on so fast that you are running/jumping all the time you dont really stop to look at low poly geo or stuff like that.
I thought the movement/guns felt super solid, very fluid and easy to get used to, especially for parkour style shit which most games just fuck up horribly. I love the addition of the AI as it keeps you almost always doing something fun, like shooting, dodging, or whatever, and coming around a corner and head shooting 3-4 AIs with the smart pistol makes you feel like a badass.
with 15 maps I can easily see myself getting my 60 dollars worth with putting in 30+ hours or so, hell if I play a game for 10 hours I consider it worth 60 bucks. I dont get how people put such a chintzy value on games and then go spend 15 bucks to watch a 1.5 hour movie, or a lunch lol.
the only thing i will say about the graphics is that it is way too noisy, from a game play perspective its sometimes hard to see people just because they just don't stand out from the environments that much.
other than that the game is amazing the art style is great i just wish they put a little more effort into helping the user distinguish players more easily.
After playing quite a lot of the beta, I've come away with somewhat mixed feelings, while I enjoy it and find each match enjoyable and exciting (Apart from when I get a daft team :P ) I really feel that the titans have been so underutilized.
I was talking about this with a mate of mine and we both felt that they were extremely lack luster, and would benefit from greater customization and personalization. My main issue is on average you're able to call roughly 3 in every match, and they just end up being cannon fodder to gather points for you while you secure objectives and score kills.
How much cooler would it be if you named yours, built yours and customized it armoured core style, calling it into battle would carry a lot more weight. What if it's damaged? I liked the idea that if your titan was severely damaged in combat you'd have to leave it to repair for a couple matches. It would quite quickly feel like it's your titan as opposed to a random hunk of metal to be destroyed without consequence. I think this is where the COD comparisons are most appropriate, to me calling in a titan feels less like a game changing goliath you control, and feels more like what it is, a glorified kill streak.
All that said, I did find the combat itself rather enjoyable, so this is one of those probably purchases for me, I'll have to see what's on offer in the full game once it drops.
Sound engine and environmental destruction, for starters.
Also environmental destruction would have been so perfect for this.
How much cooler would it be if you named yours, built yours and customized it armoured core style, calling it into battle would carry a lot more weight. What if it's damaged? I liked the idea that if your titan was severely damaged in combat you'd have to leave it to repair for a couple matches. It would quite quickly feel like it's your titan as opposed to a random hunk of metal to be destroyed without consequence. I think this is where the COD comparisons are most appropriate, to me calling in a titan feels less like a game changing goliath you control, and feels more like what it is, a glorified kill streak.
As much as that doesn't fit in with the 'arena combat' aesthetic, I can't disagree with this at all. Titans have no weight in gameplay, as they're all too common and easily replaceable.
Found that you just get titans to defend areas that or lure people while you kick them in the face. Also is it just me or is melee retarded?
I enjoyed the game and can see myself getting 30 hours or so out of it. Probably will invest in the collectors edition after seeing some of the feedback of that badass titan statue
Replies
Uf anybody else is playing on pc hit me up. I have exacltly 0 friends on origin. Name is theReverendK
You know when things happen. <edit> fuckit might as well not say anything, just talk to people at a dev meetup or something :P
I've got an extra xbone code if anyone wants it.
Don't forget though, the audience has grown as well. Supply and demand. So while price wise it isn't 1 to 1 with inflation. The amount of people who have access to games has skyrocketed. Remember in the old days when we rented or went to friends to play on a real expensive system? There was also that bit someone was saying about the steam sale, one developer reported they made as much as they had made the entire year to that point from a flash sale.
I would say its cheap if they are not going to do a required DLC bit to have exploits fixed beyond the first few months. Battlelog from conversations of players I know is a joke with reporting hackers. Titanfall wont be using Battlelog, so its even more convoluted..
http://help.ea.com/en/article/how-to-report-cheating/
In a game like counter-strike, cheating will ALWAYS be prevalent simply because bad players want to feel like the professional players who live off of playing the game daily and they don't care how much money they have to spend to achieve that feeling. This hack is pretty popular on CSGO nowadays and the only way users can get banned is if they get banned by Overwatch since VAC has never successfully banned anybody using it.
If you look at a non-competitive game like Call of Duty though, the only people you see cheating are the idiots who want to "get back at" the "greedy" devs/publisher by ruining the game for others so they end up boycotting future releases of the game.
These people have the most broken logic I've ever seen, but it's a thing, especially on CoD:Ghosts which appears to have shipped without any functional anti-cheat solution whatsoever. Generally the $60 price tag turns people off of cheating since most of these asswipes are 11 years old and had their parents buy the game for them.
My mouse was jerky at some parts despite having 60 fps, so ill rule that out as beta.
Textures were awful, but I heard they were reduced for beta so ill leave that out
Feels like COD but less floaty. More body movements is nice and the art and animations all remind me of MW2
The art assets each are amazing, love the soldiers. Especially on the loadout screen
Maxed out it looks like a 2007 title and doesn't do the art the justice. I don't think Source is limiting them because Source is a really good engine, I feel like they're building for the 360 where building for the One/pc and then reducing for the 360 would be a better option
During the tutorial it seemed really fun, It felt like mirrors edge pvp which seemed awesome, was excited to play.
first match was also really fun. Got pretty stale after my 3rd game though. Just got really repetitive and battling in titans was pretty clunky because you feel like you're trying to step around a kids playroom.
The maps being too small was a problem from the beginning, and then when you do the game mode where everyone is in a giant titan they feel even smaller.
If its under $20 id buy it if I was bored. No way its worth $60 to me, even if it had 30 maps. After seeing how small the maps are (and then how much smaller titans make them feel) 30 comes out to about 2 BF4 maps.
To be honest if they dropped the titans and just kept the parkour pvp they'd have a pretty interesting game. But without titans the youngins have nothing to get all giddy about
To be honest I thought the titans were cool, added a nice touch to the game as well as the mobility. Didn't really see the awful textures either, all looked pretty cool to me - the visuals and assets again were awesome
https://twitter.com/VinceZampella/status/434873736546627584
Otherwise I saw no flaws and was happy to see Insane Textures running smoothly on my machine.
Only flaw...I wanted to play more :<
- Decent looking game on the Xbox One and PC, some of the textures are a bit noisy and will artifact really bad on the Xbox One. I didn't notice this on the PC, but the Xbox One had a ton of mist and dust everywhere for no reason on a lot of the maps.
- Leveling up and getting unlocks was really quick in the beta, but obviously it'll be tuned down for the actual release. It seems like the game might end up being too grindy for my tastes, because unlocks will be the only form of progression without single player.
- I didn't enjoy playing as mechs much, you had to try to play as efficiently as possible, get cover, avoid 2v1, use your missiles at the right time, wait for their missiles to be fired to use your shield, it felt like slow rock paper scissors countering, too methodical for me. I enjoyed the mechs in Hawken a lot more where mech combat was more like a normal FPS.
- Playing as a soldier was a lot more fun for me, parkour at times was amazing. You could cleanly jump up to some windows and buildings, but other times there was places you knew you could climb on top of, but would just have to keep jumping at over and over to climb up like mountains in Skyrim. Soldier vs mech was a bit silly and turned into Ring Around the Rosie jumping off and back onto their mech as they got in and out. Also sometimes jumping onto and getting stepped on was a bit awkward as well.
- If there's no micro-transactions, $60 for a pure multiplayer experience sounds okay, but I would prefer more like $45.
- If there's microtransactions, there seems to be a lot of other F2P shooters I'd rather play. Planetside 2, Loadout, Hawken, TF2, etc.
- The game definitely seemed like a lot was borrowed from other games and put together in a unique way, it's fun, but not GOTY material.
k
Yes but they can't fix much with only weeks until release. Fixing bugs often just spawns new smaller well hidden bugs.
The real beta should have been November/December.
Lets all remember how bad of a release BF4 had despite its "beta" to find "bugs." its just a trial to generate hype
I'm just saying anything not related to bugs that players don't like most likely won't be changed. But other players come along and say "nah man its just beta release will probably be better" thats rarely ever true. So sick of seeing it in youtube comments.
I'm happy that the general gaming audience mostly understands that you cannot and should not judge beta/alphas, but then again, it's silly to expect the game to change much before launch.
and TESO did a good call on calling their most recent test a stress test like you said, as they're also getting close to release
From reading up on the Titanfall beta on the internet, many people are complaining about the fact that the maps are filled with AIs rather than human players. Should the devs just remove that feature even though they most likely developed a great amount of the game with it in mind? Of course not, major changes like this is what goes into the planning phase of sequels.
I'm sure hype is often discussed during the planning phase of a public alpha/beta/"stress test" but it would be just plain wrong to think that hype is the biggest reason for initiating such tests.
As for the average gamer claiming the final release will be better, I usually just see comments like this as either optimism or fanboyism. A lot of games do change a lot from beta to release though, some change for the better, others not so much.
Battlefield 3 had a ton of great (and some not so great) changes from alpha to beta to release. I remember getting 20-30 FPS at the lowest settings during the beta then at release
As for youtube comments, I would advise you to just avoid them entirely. There are just too many stupid assholes there. I remember posting a comment on a video telling some PC fanboy to calm down since he said something like "I fucking hate console users they ruin everything etc." and he stalked my videos until he found one which had my steam name in it, then he proceeded to look me up on steam and spam my wall with insults. After blocking him, he then got 6-7 of his friends to spam my wall along with voting down and insulting all of my workshop submissions and posting rude comments on all of my videos. To hell with people like that.
EDIT: wall of text
You reasonable cannot draw that conclusion. You do not know how many bugs were or were not fixed between the beta and release.
I work on MMO's so I don't know how it goes in shooters but we can track a lot of statistics about a players experience. If the beta shows a lot of people dropping out at the same point in the storyline it means we may have a difficulty spike to address or perhaps they are getting exhausted by seeing the same scenery for a long time.
I've seen shooters employ "heat maps" where they can visualize where the players are dying on their maps and adjust layout, weapon placement, etc... to tweak the game flow.
thats actually pretty cool
I saw an article in 2007 about Halo 3 that talked about Bungie using heat maps to evaluate trouble spots. Maybe it's common practice now? Any FPS devs want to chime in?
Edit : sure were
http://vividgamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/CODE_14.png
http://www.feedingedge.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SafariScreenSnapz001.png
But you can get heatmaps from small matches of internal testing also, surely they'd start play testing them at the earliest block in.
@NegevPro I also dislike the AI in the match, I feel so much more insignificant as a player. The titans help "balance" this, but I still have issues with maps feeling too small when in a Titan. The parkour is amazing and feels so great but why do it when everyone is just gunna be in a Titan. And if you're not in a titan you're using your anti titan weapon....
Would think most MP games these has some sort of data tracking & analytic backend stuff, whether its public or not. They most likely have a ton of awesome stuff for Titanfall to help them manage and tweak/hone the game.
why not? heck, we didn't even bake light maps on Warhammer until right before release.
But that bake button is so tempting, how could you stop yourself? I probably waste tons of hours baking too early on personal projects XD
I had so many issues with EA, their support, Origin, getting a refund, etc. I like that there's competition against Steam, but I'm never a fan of locking games into a piece of software. I hate it when Ubisoft does it with titles like Assassins Creed, I hate it with games for Windows live, but at least you have choices where to buy those games. I just see it as market fragmentation more than anything.
It's pretty easy to survive against most players at the moment because you can easily sneak up on them and do some major damage then you keep close to them and punch them over and over. I remember taking one Titan down with my fists without taking any damage just by strafe dodging.
Otherwise I seriously hate that counter to rodeo ;P Is there a visual sign? Cause it's been a gamble with me. I leap on, do some damage and BAM I'm shocked. Overall though it's been great fun but as it is, not worth 60 dollars. It will need a lot of content and variety in terms of customization to even come close to 40.
I dunn think the matches last long enough.. once you get into a groove the match ends. When there are a lot of titans around sometimes its hard to move... specially in that map where it has really narrow corridors.
The gunplay could be a lot tighter.. and the feedback from any action could be considerably better. Specially when you are shooting. I think the titan is better at doing this. They are pretty awesome.
Hmmm...The game looks ok... no issues running it.. but i feel it could have been a bit sharper... specially on the low poly geometry. its very blocky right now.
Still... great game, and i am excited to keep playing it.
I thought the movement/guns felt super solid, very fluid and easy to get used to, especially for parkour style shit which most games just fuck up horribly. I love the addition of the AI as it keeps you almost always doing something fun, like shooting, dodging, or whatever, and coming around a corner and head shooting 3-4 AIs with the smart pistol makes you feel like a badass.
with 15 maps I can easily see myself getting my 60 dollars worth with putting in 30+ hours or so, hell if I play a game for 10 hours I consider it worth 60 bucks. I dont get how people put such a chintzy value on games and then go spend 15 bucks to watch a 1.5 hour movie, or a lunch lol.
other than that the game is amazing the art style is great i just wish they put a little more effort into helping the user distinguish players more easily.
"This game would be so awesome with Frostbite 3."
But you do that and you're going to be cutting the FPS in half.
It would be 'cooler', for a start.
Sound engine and environmental destruction, for starters.
Not at all practical performance wise, unfortunately.
I was talking about this with a mate of mine and we both felt that they were extremely lack luster, and would benefit from greater customization and personalization. My main issue is on average you're able to call roughly 3 in every match, and they just end up being cannon fodder to gather points for you while you secure objectives and score kills.
How much cooler would it be if you named yours, built yours and customized it armoured core style, calling it into battle would carry a lot more weight. What if it's damaged? I liked the idea that if your titan was severely damaged in combat you'd have to leave it to repair for a couple matches. It would quite quickly feel like it's your titan as opposed to a random hunk of metal to be destroyed without consequence. I think this is where the COD comparisons are most appropriate, to me calling in a titan feels less like a game changing goliath you control, and feels more like what it is, a glorified kill streak.
All that said, I did find the combat itself rather enjoyable, so this is one of those probably purchases for me, I'll have to see what's on offer in the full game once it drops.
Also environmental destruction would have been so perfect for this.
All gamers have an indepth working knowledge of every game engine, it's uncanny!
As much as that doesn't fit in with the 'arena combat' aesthetic, I can't disagree with this at all. Titans have no weight in gameplay, as they're all too common and easily replaceable.
I enjoyed the game and can see myself getting 30 hours or so out of it. Probably will invest in the collectors edition after seeing some of the feedback of that badass titan statue