Titanfall pre-orders will be $60 USD, even on PC

EA, never shy of pinching a few pennies, are wanting a lot of money up front for Respawn's Titanfall.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
majiebeast1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

Get pucked EA 60$ for a multiplayer only game is a ripoff especially on PC.

Muerte24941689d ago

I'm sorry this game isn't worth $60 just for multiplayer. Sorry, not when people can get a similar experience with COD: Ghost and get a single player experience. This is coming from someone who was genuinely interested in this game, and doens't like COD.

dedicatedtogamers1689d ago

$60 on PC? When they're gonna drown the game in DLC? They've already confirmed that the game will have cosmetic DLC and weapon/map DLC.

No thanks. The game does look cool but I'll just pick it up on Steam sale. Oh wait! It's on Origin, meaning it'll be years before it goes on sale...

pixelsword1689d ago

Behold; the beginning of the collapse of the games industry.

thorstein1689d ago

@ Pixelsword Try the beginning of the end for X1. Hear me out first: Titanfall (and I am a SONY "fanboy") looked to be an interesting game. I was very intrigued and thought, X1, one day... because I wanted games like Titanfall. Granted, I will get it on my PC, but the one thing I liked about MS's E3 were the games.

So... this really sticks in my craw.

spaceg0st1689d ago

Battlefield would be worth $60 alone for just multiplayer. The amount of hours and play time would be well worth it... So it IS conceivable. Gamers are so fking whiny these days... If you don't like it, stfu and don't buy it

JokesOnYou1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

Well MAG was a full $60, for a multiplayer only game, right? Should we blame sony for contributing to this standard?...or do I sense a double standard?

I think it depends on the title, if there is enough compelling content there then it could be worth every penny. Why is it not a problem to pay $60 for SP game that lasts 10-12hrs but not a game like Titanfall which looks like it will deliver countless hrs of playtime such as games like COD or Battlefield? I never even thought it wasnt going yo be $60 on X1. As for $60 on pc thats unfortunate but I was always getting it on the X1 anyway.

Muerte24941689d ago

MAG was 40 vs 40 (5x8 man squads) players at the same time on one huge map. This is only 7 v 7.

spicelicka1689d ago


lolwat, that doesn't mean anything. MAG was a pretty bad game, having 256 didn't make it much better or worth the price. I'm not justifying Titanfall's price here but what you said was just dumb.

JokesOnYou1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

Muerte2494 are you seriously suggesting that player count makes a better or more compelling game thus justifying why one multiplayer only game is worth $60 and the other is not? So what if I make a terrible, broken game with stick figure graphics and throw in 300 players multiplayer only does that make it worth $60(not saying MAG is terrible but you see why your logic is flawed)....I mean whats next should we distinguish between one has mechs and the other doesn't= NO, they both fit the multiplayer only category, so the question is, is the content offering overall worth it, frankly Titanfall looks like a superb multiplayer gamer, poised to even outdo the ccurrent industry giants, its won more game critics awards at E3 than any other game in history, yet you're actually saying MAG is worth it but Titanfall is not? Wow, you really exposed yourself with your comments on this post. Nothing against MAG but its not really considered among the best shooters...if you love it thats fine though, I just think your reasoning is laughable at best or were you just kidding? lol please tell me you were just messing with me.

bsquwhere1689d ago

Actually when MAG came out people on here raged and MS fans came out the wood work. So its only fair the same thing happens now. MAG sounded promising and was decent. Problem: not COD(amongst other things.). I Titanfall is as good as it looks then buy it. In general though I do believe MP only doesn't justify $60.

badz1491689d ago

It's already been awhile since pc games started to cost $60. Not that I am here to justify the price but it's already too late to bitch now as big publishers already price their pc games $60. Just look at Steam

GrownUpGamer1688d ago (Edited 1688d ago )

@ Muerte2494
I'm sorry this game isn't worth $60 just for multiplayer. Sorry, not when people can get a similar experience with COD: Ghost and get a single player experience. This is coming from someone who was genuinely interested in this game, and doens't like COD. "

"MAG was 40 vs 40 (5x8 man squads) players at the same time on one huge map. This is only 7 v 7."

Hey Muerte... Judge



+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1688d ago
6DEAD6END61689d ago

They're charging too much for a multiplayer only game. It should be $40 tops just like the Socom: Confrontation was.

jukins1689d ago

Online games require more post release maintenance, balancing, and overall work especially nowadays. Im not sure why ppl think if its online only it should cost any less because even if it is online only it still require not only the initial investment but as a said before more post release investment.

Muerte24941689d ago

actually a perfect match for Xbox One. An overpriced game for an overpriced console. As if the console needed anymore help not selling. This is the "One" game people wanted but it severely overpriced. I guess the "power of the cloud" comes at a premium.

6DEAD6END61689d ago

It's all about the cloud my friend that's where their heads are at in the clouds.

jeffgoldwin1689d ago

Troll alert. Really cant just comment on the game itself without foaming at the mouth and drooling out fanboy comments?

MRMagoo1231689d ago


Ill do that for you in a none fanboy kinda way

IMHO from the direct feed pics of titanfall it looks like a 360 game not next gen at all, if i do get it it will be on pc and i hope to god it doesnt look like those screens they showed yesterday cos otherwise COD beats it on this gen consoles in graphics.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1689d ago
fermcr1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

60€ for the PC version (witch you can't resell, unlike the console version). No thank you very much. I'll wait until the price goes way down. No rush. EA really like to f*ck people in the b*tt.

Muffins12231689d ago

Technically you paid 60 dollars before for just multiplayer...battlefield of duty...we all know the only time their played is during multiplayer titanfall is just smart and its dropping that bullshit single player experience that no one sure great games like halo need a single player and bioshock....but guess what...THEY DONT SUCK...cod and battlefield single player is shitty.

Imalwaysright1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

Even if the single player component of those games were crap they still cost money to produce which made that €60 price tag justifiable. This is nothing but greed from EA. They killed online passes most likely thinking that MS and Sony would force DRM down our throats and now that they can't bring online passes back they'll do anything to nickle and dime us in every possible way. I can tell you right now that most PC gamers won't support EA greed.

adorie1689d ago

Your argument is strawman. The fact that you even mentioned those games having single player, already removes the rug from underneath it.

If "no one wants" single player? Why charge 60 bucks? What makes this game worth *more* than other games?

You played a recent build?

Kanzes1689d ago

They should've look Valve's Team Fortress 2 as example.. It's multiplayer only, it's an awesome game, and most of all, it's free! you pay only if you want customizations

MidnytRain1689d ago

Team Fortress 2 was released with a price in 2007, then went free-to-play in 2011. It had almost four years to rake in money from it's initial buying cost. Combined with the fact it was very popular over that time, and still continues to be, it's in a much more comfortable position that Titanfall is; a new IP which has the very possibility of failing.

joe901689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

haha, nice try EA, ill just change my IP address to russian and pre-order it from your russian Origin store for 1,000 Ruples (£20) the same way i buy all my EA games.

JsonHenry1689d ago

I will get it on a Steam sale for around $20. :)

M-M1689d ago

They know very well that multiplayer only games are supposed to be cheaper. Only one explanation, EA.

aceitman1689d ago

60$ for for online only is bull no matter what platform or pc.

the worst1689d ago

lololoollolololol ea think this is the new call of duty

kewlkat0071689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

Quick to forget Platystation's M.A.G..

Remember when that came out..was it $20 game?

Belking1689d ago

And it wasn't even worth that.

adorie1689d ago

This is an EA game, which probably won't make it to Steam. For 60 bucks, they can shove it. As for ORIGIN? 'Ain't nobody got time for dat.

guitarded771689d ago

Wow, yeah. Totally agree. This is just a lame attempt to cash in on the hype behind the first game from the guys since leaving IW. Pathetic. First they sell out to make it console exclusive (for whatever time period), now they're jacking up the price by $10 for the average PC game. I'm taking a pass. I wasn't as impressed as most when they showed the E3 demo. I think there are many better looking MP games coming out, like Destiny and The Division.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 1688d ago
Smoovekid1689d ago

Multiplayer only for $60... no.

CrimsonStar1689d ago

M.A.G says hello .

Gamer > Fanboy

ginsunuva1689d ago

How is he being a fanboy?

MidnytRain1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

That's the one thing. There have been games, like MAG, that do just fine at justifying a $60 price tag as a multiplayer only game. In addition, from a business perspective, it makes much more sense to charge full price for the mode the company knows people will spend the most time playing anyway. For instance, CoD is primarily played for its multiplayer component by it's millions of players. And those millions of players seem perfectly happy with paying $60 without ever touching the single-player!

6DEAD6END61689d ago

I'll get it when it's on sell for $40 for PS+ members for the PS4, cause we all know its coming :p

Belking1689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

You mean on "sale" guy...geeez

That will be about 3 or 4 years Titan Fall2 will be almost out by then,

6DEAD6END61689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

No just no young padawan, it's coming out late 2014 to Feb 2015. Mark my words.


That's what I've been trying to tell people since the game was announced, it's Mass Effect and Bioshock all over again.

MRMagoo1231689d ago

From the looks of titanfall i doubt there will be enough interest to warrant making a sequel the games graphics are this gen not next.

Muerte24941689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

multiplatform. This game is using Source engine and one of the reason's for that is because it ran so great on PS3. So Belking, this is more than likely a timed exclusive. Good thing Microsoft bought all the ps4 copies of this game in advance, because that's the only way this game was going to sell. Even then EA is going to find a way to get out of this deal with Microsoft. I wonder how much of that went to securing TitanFall?

HugoDrax1689d ago

It could end up multi-platform, well that's what PS4 only adopters are hoping for. After Titanfall won 10+ E3 awards, and Microsoft having deep pockets, I'm sure they may try everything in their power to secure this title as an exclusive (XB1/X360/PC). Only time will tell, but $60 for PC is a bit steep...

Belking1689d ago

I know the game is a timed exclusive but ps4 won't get it till 2015 or later. The game doesn't even release until this time next year so how is it gonna be on PS4 on 2014 too. They don't even have enough people to even do the 360 version.

Muffins12231689d ago is only on pc and 360 to begin with lol

Funantic11689d ago (Edited 1689d ago )

I doubt it'll come to PS4. Maybe PS4 will get a Titanfall 2. MS will just extend their exclusivity for Titanfall and money talks. Plus this games relies on the Azure cloud heavily according to Respawn themselves. Respawn actually went to Sony and Microsoft and told them about the desire for dedicated servers. Microsoft was the only one that responded with an answer. This company relies on dedicated servers that they can't afford themselves. MS is charging them a price to rent servers at a unbeatable rate that Sony can't match. Plus Respawn is a team of only 60 people. They don't have the manpower to make a PS4 version not relying on the Azure's computation and still work on other projects at the same time. Their team is too small to even make a story mode for Titanfall which is ok for me because multiplayer has the replay value. The version that the 360 will have will be watered down and a port by a whole other company. PS4 users wouldn't want to play a lesser version than X1's version. I read many facts about Respawn and the cloud straight from their website. People said Dead Rising and Saints Row would come to PS3 and they were right but only part 2 and after of both of those only.

Muerte24941689d ago

now at this price. There are similar experiences elsewhere with a compelling single player to boot. I was going to buy this game on PC, but I'm losing interest as time passes. I'm a Killzone2/Battlefield fan myself. Socom is primed for a new release too. I think I'll have enough shooters to where I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything.

PSN_ZeroOnyx1689d ago

Respawn already said PS4 is in consideration, so yeah, timed exclusive if that.

ginsunuva1689d ago

or for $48 on Newegg like every game on earth before release.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1689d ago
syrinx1689d ago

Yeh it's damn expensive. Can't believe the PC version is expensive too.

6DEAD6END61689d ago

Well the cloud is not going to pay for its self.

CrimsonStar1689d ago

lol u need to watch the new fanboy video at gamespot. While you just troll every Xbox Article now till the future I'll be sitting back enjoying my PS4 and Xbox1.
Gamers> Fanboys.

DaCajun1689d ago

That's because EA only cares about EA not gamers.