Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Titanfall 2

lukaszek

the determinator
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
12,618
deterministic system > RNG
 
Last edited:

Soulcucker

Savant
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
235
Lets make a sequel to a multiplayer game whose servers were empty month after launch.

Then lets release the game just as two biggest franchises in the same genre are also launching their new games.

What could possibly go wrong.

I don't think it was Respawn's call to launch when they did, I think EA really wanted to have Battlefield surpass CoD in sales this year. From the sales numbers of Battlefront last year, knowing that neo-Infinity Ward would be developing the next CoD, and the growing discontent in the CoD fanbase this was the best year to try and defeat CoD. The release of Battlefield 1 and Titanfall 2 seem to be a one-two punch strategy, where TF2 is used to additionally divert marketing/press attention and sales away from CoD thus enabling Battlefield to finally outsell CoD. Respawn might have been willing to take the hit given that EA threw them a bone with a Star Wars game, Respawn's history with Activision, and that the budget of the game is likely a lot lower than other AAA titles meaning that Respawn has a good chance to recoup it with long tail revenues.
 

Soulcucker

Savant
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
235
is it worth it the price though?

If the player-base stays stable or grows then yes. Though I am guessing that the game will be discounted very soon, probably around the time when additional maps are released for free, so you might be better off waiting.
 

LESS T_T

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
13,582
Codex 2014
http://www.glixel.com/interviews/qa-titanfall-2-creator-on-what-makes-a-great-shooter-w450709

On top of that, Titanfall 2 was released right after Battlefield 1, a historical military shooter, which is a genre you helped pioneer.

If the question was, "Would I rather have this window to myself?" Well, of course. I'm not foolish. I'm not foolish that way, anyway. In other ways, probably.

But you knew who you were going up against when you chose this window.

Yes. The exact timing, we didn't know.

Do you think you're getting enough support from Electronic Arts? Respawn owns Titanfall, while EA owns Battlefield. You once suggested you were concerned that publishers would put more of their muscle behind the games they own.

It's always a concern. That's what I'll say. Especially when you have two games on top of each other.

[...]

Will you make another Titanfall game?

We don't know yet. The game is, critically, a huge success. We're really happy with all the reviews and the positive sentiment. Sales, it's too early to tell. We'd definitely like to tell more of the story and the universe. I think it's pretty safe to assume that we'll explore more of it. EA might have announced more. Devin?

[Devin Bennett, a publicist for Electronic Arts, interjects, "What we've said is we're committed to the franchise."]

So, whatever the fuck that means.
 
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
399
Bought it and finished the single player. It's very derivative but it doesn't detract from the experience.
That time travel section when you follow in Anderson's foot steps and the factory level are probably the best bits overall
The campaign plays best when you actively try to combat enemies whilst charging around slaloming off walls like a madman - the pilot sections of levels are surprisingly well set to facilitate this. Playing regulation ADS cover-to-cover style is just boring (which I'm sure is fairly self evident). Hardest difficulty is the only one worth playing.

Pleasantly surprised overall, I really wasn't expecting a game from a studio headed up by two former CoD developers to embrace dynamic movement in the way Titanfall 2 does. Dynamic movement by modern standards anyway.

Haven't touched the multiplayer yet. It seems to be built on the same loadout-based skinner box levelling crapfest foundations as nearly every other current multiplayer FPS, is the grind bad?

Not worth the current ÂŁ41.99 on GMG for just the single player - too short. However will be definitely be perfect spring sale fodder in a few months time.

N.B. Can't help but feel even a basic map editor at launch would have been a real winner here, but I suppose there's no way that would ever have happened under EA's auspices.
 
Last edited:

Talby

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
5,507
Codex USB, 2014
This must have flopped pretty hard, I didn't even know it was out until I saw it for sale at half price. What is it with multiplayer focused shooters falling flat lately? First Evolve, then Battleborn, now Titanfail. I guess Overwatch took the wind out of everyone's sails and CoD and Battlefield are still marching on. The market can only sustain so many of these games at once.
 

DemonKing

Arcane
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
5,958
This must have flopped pretty hard, I didn't even know it was out until I saw it for sale at half price.

Idiots at EA launched it in the week between BF1 and COD 2016 edition and it flopped despite glowing reviews. They probably would have been better holding off to February 2017 when people are looking for a change/the kiddies have finished off their Xmas pressies.

I'll probably pick it up when it hits deep discount as I heard the Single Player is worth a look but I have far too may other games to keep me occupied up until Xmas.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,228
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Good post, not just about Titanfall 2 but about cinematic shooters in general:

This Dumb Industry: Why Doesn’t Titanfall 2 Work?
splash_this_dumb_industry.jpg



Everyone just expects that this is how things will be: A big budget multiplayer-focused shooter has a single-player campaign that nobody cares about and nobody expects anything from. Reviewers play it, shrug, and then say “Sure, it’s not great, but this game is all about the multiplayer!”

Which is true enough. But it’s sort of baffling how reliably these stories come up empty. It’s clearly not for lack of budget. Millions of dollars are spent on these campaigns. The acting talent is there, because you’ve usually got big-name voice performers in the lead roles. The story isn’t undercut by glitches, harmed by lack of exposition (quite the contrary) or bogged down by an impenetrable plot. It’s usually aiming to be a bombastic action movie, and yet these games never seem to connect with the audience even on that basic level. They can’t even attain the brute-force emotional engagement of (say) Guardians of the Galaxy, District 9, or the Bourne Identity, even though none of those movies had particularly lofty goals.

So what’s going on here? Developers are trying so hard to imitate the language of cinema. Why do their stories keep striking out?

I think Titanfall 2 provides a pretty clear answer to this question. It seems to have all of the ingredients of a typical action blockbuster, and yet after five hours of lavish spectacle it comes up feeling empty and shallow. Let’s look at why…


The Story


tdi_titanfall_farm.jpg



Titanfall 2 takes place in a far-flung space-future where the IMC (the bad guys) are fighting the militia (the good guys). It’s a pretty standard remix of space marine stories of the past, except that in this universe there are a small number of super-capable soldiers who get to become “pilots”. They form a neural link with a two-story robot buddy. Even without the help of their pet robot, a pilot can usually single-handedly dominate a conventional battlefield. They can drive the mech around and blow stuff up, or they can get out and let the robot fight autonomously while they parkour their way through enemy forces like a mix between the Prince of Persia and Neo.

In the game you play as Jack Cooper, a lowly rifleman. Pilot Lastimosa has taken Cooper under his wing, sure that Cooper will make for a great pilot someday. Lastimosa teaches Cooper in his off-time, even bending the rules to make sure that Cooper gets the training he needs.

In the first mission of the game, Lastimosa is mortally wounded. Just before he dies, he makes Cooper a pilot by handing over control of BT, his robot-buddy. So half-trained Cooper has to team up with the overly literal BT to complete the mission. Along the way they uncover the plans for a doomsday weapon that can destroy their homeworld. Their job is to stop the IMC from using this weapon before time runs out.

Is this cliche? Sure. But I don’t think that hurts the story. In fact, the plot itself is one of the few things the story has going for it. Heck, this story is half Star Wars, which was itself a bundle of already-existing cliches and tropes. The world loves Star Wars despite the extremely familiar story template, and Titanfall 2 could have worked just as well if it hadn’t fumbled on some of the basics.

Intensity Fatigue


tdi_titanfall_dead.jpg



The game is in such a hurry to get started that it doesn’t even stop to set up the stakes of the story. We’re supposedly fighting to save a planet, but we don’t have the name or face of a single person who lives there. We never visit it. The closest get we is a shot of an empty field during VR training. Is that moment really is supposed to sustain our entire attachment and represent everything we’re fighting for? It’s like an action movie where the hero spends the whole time trying to rescue a girlfriend he never talks about and who never appears on-screen.

But Shamus! Star Wars blew up a planet without ever showing it to us!

The emotional punch of destroying Alderaan doesn’t come from the explosion, it comes from Leia, a firmly established character who the audience cares for. Titanfall doesn’t have any characters that can do this for us. We experience the destruction of Alderaan through Leia’s eyes, and her anguish is what makes us hate the Empire and care about the rebellion. Later, we get a secondary dose of pathos when Ben Kenobi reacts to the same event. Oh, and speaking of the mentor character…

Lastimosa shouldn’t have died on the first mission. You don’t kill off the mentor character in the opening action scene, because it’s too abrupt. It’s like one of those clumsy revenge stories that kills off the wife / kids / village right after the opening credits instead of letting us get to know them and build an emotional connection to make their death meaningful to the audience.

You’d need at least one “regular” mission to establish the status quo before you upend it. We needed one more scene of them palling around before Cooper was thrust into greatness. Yes, I know the game designer was worried about making the player wait too long before giving them their mech, and that’s a valid concern. But the introductory mission wouldn’t have needed to be very long, and it would have gone a long way to giving us the proper emotional setup. Half-Life 2 made us wait over half an hour before we got our first firearm and it was one of the most memorable and talked about sections of the game, so I think Titanfall 2 could have safely waited until the second mission to put us in the driver seat of an off-brand Jaeger.

Yes, that’s a small quibble. But it’s indicative of the larger problem that the storyteller has no sense of restraint. They think every moment needs to be intense, hurried, epic, frantic, and exciting, which means that the whole thing blurs together into an indistinguishable roar of sound and fury. Crysis 2 had the same problem. I can’t get excited as everyone screams at me to hurry up and stop the super-weapon before it goes off, because people have been screaming at me to hurry for the last four hours.

Titanfall 2 isn’t as bad as some games in the genre, but it still suffers from an overabundance of urgency. George Wiedman already made the definitive video on this topic, but the gist is that the action scenes can’t seem exciting unless they’re contrasted against quieter moments. And just to be clear, we’re not talking about times when you stop playing because it’s a non-interactive cutscene.

If you play the (free) Lost Coast level for Half-Life 2 with developer commentary turned on, you can hear them talk about the need for these moments. In a gameplay sense, it’s good to let the player explore a space and get to know an area and appreciate the scenery before you open up the mook spigot. In a storytelling sense, it gives the player time to stop and reflect on what’s already happened, and wonder what’s going to happen next. It builds a sense of anticipation.

These moments don’t even need to be long. In fact, they shouldn’t be. It should just be an area to explore where nobody is shouting at you over the radio. You don’t force the player to stop and reflect, you just need to allow them to do so.

Titanfall 2 has a few semi-slow moments, but not nearly enough to break up the long sections of unrelenting action. These moments should be a regular part of the rhythm of the game. There’s nothing like those quiet moody intervals we saw in Half Life 2 during the Nova Prospekt chapter, where the lights were low, there was some slow haunting music playing, and we were allowed to feel a sense of mystery and apprehension.

Almost No Characters


tdi_titanfall_thumbs_up.jpg



This is a game no real characters. Sure, there are people in it that seem like characters. They have names and voices and character models. They copy the style of cinema. Sometimes someone makes a joke, and they sometimes react to big events, but they don’t actually fulfill the duties of a character. Ask yourself: What’s the big motivation for these characters? What’s driving them to do the things they do? What’s their character arc?

Titanfall 2 repeats the mistake of Fallout 4 by giving us a main character who is voiced, yet not characterized. Cooper doesn’t really have any given ambitions aside from the things related to the mission and his direct survival. He doesn’t have any amusing quirks, interesting history, odd opinions, hobbies, hang-ups, or dreams. It’s the worst of both worlds. We don’t get a mute onto which we can project ourselves, and we also don’t get a memorable character. The writer refuses to fill in the protagonist, and yet they forbid us from doing the job ourselves. Yes, Cooper gets a tiny bit of buddy-banter with BT. But that doesn’t make him a character and it doesn’t make him interesting. (Especially since the few glimmers of humor come from BT.)

Lastimosa gets a tiny slice of characterization. He says at one point, “I’m not even supposed to be training you.” That’s a pretty good hook, but they never hang anything on it. That’s an interesting start, but the idea is dropped the moment it’s introduced. Just think of all the interesting angles you could explore with that idea. Maybe he thinks the existing pilot program is too slow. Maybe he thinks they’re choosing the wrong people to be pilots. Maybe he had a crush on your mom back in the day. Maybe he feels like he owes a favor to one of your parents. Maybe he’s haunted by some mistake in his past and as penance he’s trying to save you from repeating it.

I’m not asking for a ninety-minute drama here. We just need one or two short conversations to establish why he’s training you and what he hopes to accomplish. The conversations can even be optional for the player. It’s only a couple of minutes of screen time, which is nothing in a game this size. It would make all the difference. The player could inherit his motivation (avenge some wrong, prove that the pilot program is flawed, whatever) when Lastimosa dies.

But no. He dies pretty much as soon as the game starts without the writer ever investing in him. His death means nothing and we feel nothing.

BT is probably the most thoroughly characterized person in the whole game. Which is a problem, since he’s deadpan, stoic, and overly literal. That kind of character works best when attached to someone loud, vibrant, or manic. He needs someone to play the clown to his straight man shtick, and Cooper is too empty to make that work. (Note how Portal inverts this, making the player the straight [wo]man and the robots the clowns. That way we’re not leaning on the stoic to do all the heavy lifting in terms of characterization.) Yes, BT is occasionally fun. But compare him to other robo-buddies and robo-foils like GLADos, Wheatley, G0-T0, Shodan, Legion, Claptrap, and HK-47. Love them or hate them, you at least feel something towards these robots. BT is supposedly the high point of this game, but I’m betting he’s not going to turn into a meme like those others. He’s not a great character. He just seems that way compared to everyone else in Titanfall 2.

Also note that BT barely has any motivation aside from his programmed directives. GLADos was deeply and disturbingly obsessed with testing. Wheatley had a crushing inferiority complex. G0-T0 had a enormously ambitious plan to save the galaxy through subtle manipulation. Legion was a prototype, the emissary of an entire race, and a Commander Shepard Cosplayer. Heck, even annoying Claptrap’s one-note struggle to make someone like him is more interesting than BT’s simplistic drive to “complete the mission”.

Again, that’s fine if BT is an understated character. Not every fictional robot needs to be a malfunctioning nutjob. The problem is that BT is supposed to carry the emotional weight of the story and his character design isn’t equipped to do it.

You might argue that BT and Cooper share a character arc. At the end the story sort of pretends they bonded. But it’s not like they started off at odds and learned to work together. They didn’t have ideological differences to overcome. They didn’t have any emotional baggage to deal with. They didn’t start off in a state of mutual distrust. They didn’t bicker at first. They didn’t suffer a bunch of setbacks because of problems with their relationship. They didn’t have clashing personalities. They began their partnership realizing they needed to work together, and then they did exactly that for the rest of the game. Neither of them really changed. That’s not an arc, that’s a five-hour status quo[1].

For contrast: Consider Wreck-It Ralph. In that story, Sergeant Calhoun has a traumatic past that haunts her and interferes with her budding relationship with Felix. In the story, she overcomes this event, transcends it, and begins a new life. What I’m talking about here isn’t the main character or the main plot. This is an arc between two side characters that happens far in the background of a breezy 100-minute children’s movie. And yet BT and Cooper can’t even establish an arc that simplistic in the five hours they spend together as the central characters of Titanfall 2.



tdi_titanfall_villains.jpg



I guess I should mention the bad guys. Or rather, the one bad guy template that keeps popping up over and over:

  1. Who are you? It doesn’t matter. I’m too busy being evil to trifle with a lowly pilot like you.
  2. Hello Cooper. I’m just calling to remind you that you have no skill and I don’t care about you.
  3. I guess I underestimated you. Perhaps you are a worthy adversary after all. Now I look forward to killing you. But first, I will send waves of mooks at you for some reason.
  4. Ha ha! Now I will kill you because I am so stro-OH NO HOW DID I LOSE?!
I forget how many enemy pilots you meet that follow this same pattern. (To mix things up, sometimes the writer has them skip step #3. And the last one does something unexpected.) Although to be fair, I guess it does qualify as an arc. I mean, a character announces a goal (kill the player) and this desire is resolved when they fail (because you kill them) so it does sort of qualify as arc-ish. But it’s completely uninteresting because you know how it will end the moment they call you for the first time, and it’s made that much worse through repetition.

Stories Require Emotion. Emotion Requires Characters.


tdi_titanfall_faceless.jpg



I suppose I should do my usual disclaimer: This game isn’t terrible. I actually really enjoyed it. It’s one of the better examples of the genre. The people praising it are no doubt comparing it to the other games in the genre. Which, fine. Titanfall 2 is Shakespeare compared to the average Battlefield. But that’s like saying “this guy is the best singer in professional wrestling”. It doesn’t mean he’s a good singer.

Sure, BT is kinda fun, the parkour really makes the gunplay more lively, and stomping around in a Titan is gleefully empowering. I complain about this game not because it’s bad, but because it could be so much better.

I find these kinds of games to be kind of frustrating. The cinematic presentation makes it feel like it’s trying to be a movie, but it’s not. It copies the tropes and presentation of the modern blockbuster, but it’s completely unable to connect and make us care about things beyond mowing down the faceless dudes on the way to the next objective marker. You think you’re about to eat a banana split, but when you dig in you find out it’s just a big pile of whipped cream with a cherry on top. Sure, none of tastes bad, but it’s also strangely unfulfilling and leaves you wishing all the ingredients were present.

It’s a shame. The money is there. The cinematic talent is there. The voice acting and animations are there. But the writing isn’t, and I doubt this is going to change anytime soon. The developer would need to recognize this problem and decide to aim higher. Given the fact that sales are usually good and review scores are high, they’re likely to assume this stuff just doesn’t matter to most people.

And maybe they’re right. But I think they’re underestimating the value of careful pacing and solid characters. Maybe they’re happy to make something vapid and forgettable, but I think they’re squandering the opportunity to make the kind of game we’ll still be talking about a decade from now. Get the gameplay right and you get a fun action game like Doom. But if you can do that while also getting the characters right, you’ll have a classic like Half-Life 2, Uncharted, or Last of Us.
 

Gerrard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
11,922
Wait what, how the fuck is it on sale for half the price already?

Also the MP looks like trash because of the dumb CoD-level TTK.
 

Freddie

Savant
Joined
Sep 14, 2016
Messages
717
Location
Mansion
Good post, not just about Titanfall 2 but about cinematic shooters in general:

Everyone just expects that this is how things will be: A big budget multiplayer-focused shooter has a single-player campaign that nobody cares about and nobody expects anything from. Reviewers play it, shrug, and then say “Sure, it’s not great, but this game is all about the multiplayer!”

Which is true enough. But it’s sort of baffling how reliably these stories come up empty. It’s clearly not for lack of budget. Millions of dollars are spent on these campaigns. The acting talent is there, because you’ve usually got big-name voice performers in the lead roles. The story isn’t undercut by glitches, harmed by lack of exposition (quite the contrary) or bogged down by an impenetrable plot. It’s usually aiming to be a bombastic action movie, and yet these games never seem to connect with the audience even on that basic level. They can’t even attain the brute-force emotional engagement of (say) Guardians of the Galaxy, District 9, or the Bourne Identity, even though none of those movies had particularly lofty goals.

So what’s going on here? Developers are trying so hard to imitate the language of cinema. Why do their stories keep striking out?

[...]

It’s a shame. The money is there. The cinematic talent is there. The voice acting and animations are there. But the writing isn’t, and I doubt this is going to change anytime soon. The developer would need to recognize this problem and decide to aim higher. Given the fact that sales are usually good and review scores are high, they’re likely to assume this stuff just doesn’t matter to most people.

And maybe they’re right. But I think they’re underestimating the value of careful pacing and solid characters. Maybe they’re happy to make something vapid and forgettable, but I think they’re squandering the opportunity to make the kind of game we’ll still be talking about a decade from now. Get the gameplay right and you get a fun action game like Doom. But if you can do that while also getting the characters right, you’ll have a classic like Half-Life 2, Uncharted, or Last of Us.
Very good read but there might be a factor Shamus is missing here. What if the model from cimema also means making games shallow on purpose?

There's lot of happening in all those superhero films what I have seen, but it's terribly difficult to find anything really memorable from them. If you control the entire franchises of these, it might actually make sense to produce them this way on purpose. When there's little which grips attention for long, there's very little comparison, just need for these action roller coaster entertainment, which is always satisfied by seeing the next film.

Producers may actually try to find a perfect balance between what offer to publishers (who want stuff that looks good and looks good for investors) these forgettable rides have all the action, special effects, and for depth, story (kinda), cast may have some big names (which might explain what Shamus noted in story), everything to look good for investors and press. The rest just might not really matter, because there's always something coming up. Okay, messing up the launch window was pretty bad, but in the end, some other title will fill the place. Investors don't really care either, because of the same reason and the whole investment strategy might be throwing wet paper notes to wall ans see which ones stick.

Sucks for gamers and for studio personnel though. It's sort of a big picture where they don't matter.
 

Soulcucker

Savant
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
235
Shamus tilts too hard to the storyfag side for my liking, but even so I don't think his criticism of the story is very precise here.

He is right about the story not having much outside of BT, but the primary problem problem is not structure but the lack of information given to the player. The story gives little to no information on the motivations of the various characters, no strategic goals or ideological positions of the various factions are established, and little of understanding of the game's universe can be derived from what is given. Unlike a WW2 game or a game set in modern times little can be projected by the player to fill in the blanks. Forcing characters into various arcs or making them foils could work, but it is not necessary in a game where the purpose of the story is to contextualize the player's motivations and provide information about the game's world. There is also an assumption in his critique that the sole purpose of having cinematic elements is for conveying narrative which is way off the mark, has this guy never played an Ace Combat game?

I have no idea what he is talking about when it comes to pacing, the game is paced excellently in terms of switching up mechanics, proving new equipment, and even in providing down time between engagements. Only the last three missions have breakneck pacing, though it makes sense given the context of what is happening.

Also I don't think Respawn had as much time or money as Shamus assumes for the singleplayer given that many of the voice actors are members of the studio and that the studio is still small for the size of a game that Titanfall 2 is.
 

HoboForEternity

sunset tequila
Patron
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
9,172
Location
Disco Elysium
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
kinda sad the devs actually pushing for no DLC/micros. but then it will flop, and EA will blame "you should put CLC/micros there!"
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,228
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
He is right about the story not having much outside of BT, but the primary problem problem is not structure but the lack of information given to the player. The story gives little to no information on the motivations of the various characters, no strategic goals or ideological positions of the various factions are established, and little of understanding of the game's universe can be derived from what is given. U

Maybe not emphasized as much as you'd like, but it's there:

Shamus said:
The game is in such a hurry to get started that it doesn’t even stop to set up the stakes of the story. We’re supposedly fighting to save a planet, but we don’t have the name or face of a single person who lives there. We never visit it. The closest get we is a shot of an empty field during VR training. Is that moment really is supposed to sustain our entire attachment and represent everything we’re fighting for? It’s like an action movie where the hero spends the whole time trying to rescue a girlfriend he never talks about and who never appears on-screen.
 

Tehdagah

Arcane
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
9,234
Shamus Young said:
But if you can do that while also getting the characters right, you’ll have a classic like Half-Life 2, Uncharted, or Last of Us.
Lol.

Also the comparison with Leia is flat, she isn't a "firmly established character" when Alderaan is destroyed since this happens in the beginning of the movie.
 
Last edited:

Soulcucker

Savant
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
235
Maybe not emphasized as much as you'd like, but it's there:

The crux of his argument is about creating an emotional connection via character arcs. Giving the player expository information is a lot lower on his priorities and it is in the service of a 'higher' purpose, it is not something in itself. I don't see character arcs as necessary, flat character work fine for this type game. The story of Titanfall 2 fails at providing relevant information for the basics. His Screenwriting 101 approach may or may not make the story much better, though the primary purpose of a story in a game like this should be to contextualize the player's immediate situation. I also I don't get why he shoehorns Half-Life 2 into this argument. That game did not have great or even dynamic characters, unless he considers the environment a character.
 

Ezeekiel

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 19, 2016
Messages
1,783
Wouldn't mind this sort of movement as a natural evolution of the old UT/Quake etc way of doing things. The rest of the game can go die in a fire with most of the modern shooter trends and concepts though.
 

LESS T_T

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
13,582
Codex 2014
EA added Respawn to their kill list: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/...pawn-entertainment-creators-of-titanfall.aspx

Electronic Arts Acquires Respawn Entertainment, Creators Of Titanfall

After years of working together on Titanfall, EA announced it has acquired Respawn Entertainment, the creators of Titanfall.

Previously only a EA Partner with Titanfall, Respawn was founded by Jason West and Vince Zampella, two of original creators of the Call of Duty series. The two were fired by Activision after the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, and after founding Respawn Entertainment signed a publishing deal with EA for the Xbox One launch title Titanfall. They followed it up with Titanfall 2 in 2016, a critical darling that didn't meet sales expectations, most likely because it released directly between the launches of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare and Battlefield 1.

During their most recent earnings call, EA reminded investors that Titanfall 2 sold below expectations, but "still sold very well," according to CFO Blake Jorgunsen. It is possible EA had been preparing investors for news of the acquisition. Respawn is currently making a Star Wars title, the next entry in the Titanfall series, and a VR title.

EA summarized the details of the acquisition:

Under the agreement, EA will pay $151 million in cash, and up to $164 million in long-term equity in the form of restricted stock units to employees, which will vest over four years. In addition, EA may be required to pay additional variable cash consideration that is contingent upon achievement of certain performance milestones, relating to the development of future titles, through the end of calendar 2022. The additional consideration is limited to a maximum of $140 million.

Sources tell us that the studio is divided about the acquisition, with many people not happy about being under a large publisher again. Separate sources have also told us that founder Vince Zampella plans to stay.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom