Titanfall is Yet Another Game Rushed Out the Door By EA

CraveOnline: "Battlefield 4, Warhammer Online, Mass Effect 3, and Titanfall all have something in common. Can you guess what it is? Well, not only were they AAA titles published by EA, but they were pushed out to market before they were ready to walk."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
n4gamingm1502d ago

very true i love titanfall but it is very obvious it wasn't fully optimized yet. frame rate drops whenever in a titan down to the 20fps...but i'm still playing the [email protected] out of it lol.

XBOTTOX1502d ago

dude framerate drops into the 20s WHENEVER you are in a titan is bit exaggerated

n4gamingm1502d ago

Saw it in the digital foundry fps test

PERK7NS1502d ago

Im not even botherd about frameratr drops! ........STAND BY FOR TITANFALL!

TomShoe1502d ago

It works fine on my PC, but here's how it runs on my laptop:

XBOTTOX1502d ago

Oh yea, but i mean on the actual console. When your in a titan it doesnt dip to 20 frames every single time. Maybe if it gets too crazy

Septic1501d ago

The frame rate is no where near as bad people are making it out.

Razmossis1501d ago

I have never played an EA game the felt finished

1501d ago
HollowedSoul141501d ago

nubes, nubes and more nubes everywhere i look on any xbox article, ms really knows how to suck in the nubes that are dense enough to praise a game with bots and auto aim pistols lol 0_o will never understand how majority of xbox fans support such nube friendly games.

i played the beta for pc and ran it on ultra and it looked garbage lol compared to bf 4. bots made the game feel detached couldnt get into it competitively when 85 percent of the players i was killing were mindless bots and the auto aim pistols such a joke.

id rather die in bf 4 over and over again then to waste time killing mindless bots over and over. game is arcadey and weak. killzone with mechs was way better imo.

enjoy the nubefest when you get you're heads out of ms ass i'll see you in killzone shadowfall and bf4.

Skips1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

- "Titanfall is Yet Another Game Rushed Out the Door By EA" -

lol, pretty much...

buttclown1501d ago

I had one instance where the framerate went to crap when about 5 titans all went nuclear at about the same time. Other than that I haven't noticed any big drops that cause me to notice.

legionsoup1501d ago

Frame rate drops are one thing, but when a game doesn't have all of the modes it SHOULD have because they wanted to get it out the door faster, that's a problem.

There should be a lot more gaming modes. Now I see why there's no single player. Because there are just the bare bones in terms of multiplayer.

Push games back until they are finished. Killer Instinct wasn't finished. Neither was this.

fr0sty1501d ago

Framerate drops in an online shooter can get you killed. It isn't just some minor annoyance, it can actually have a negative effect on the gameplay other than just making the game look like a slideshow.

Ezz20131501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

as it seems story,graphics,resolution and frame rate dont matter any more to gaming media
because this game is lacking on every part of those

Boody-Bandit1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

This is why I barely read reviews any more and say they are completely irrelevant. Those of us that own an X1 and don't wear blinders were saying how bad the frame rates and tearing was in the beta. Some of us were willing to give Respawn the benefit of the doubt for exactly that reason. It was a beta.

Now the game is released and it's identical to the beta performance. Now it's either one of 2 things. This game was rushed to market or the X1 hardware is insufficient to handle games like this. You can't have it both ways. Although a certain segment of MS fans will try to have it both ways. "I mean I can't see any of these issues at all / it runs fine for me." Now not all of them are full of it. There honestly is some people that just aren't affected by performance issues / don't notice them.

TitanFall has serious potential. Respawn left Activision because of Kotick and who do they have publish their new franchise? Activisions separated at birth equally evil / ignorant / greedier than all hell twin brother EA.

This game should not have been released until Fall 2014. To the journalist that rated this game and 8.5 or higher? *facepalm* With the exception of Sessler. He would give Hanna Montana a 5/5 if it was an MS exclusive.

When you're a supposed journalist writing a review for a anything you should have the ability to have personal bias, business interest and swag / advertising dollars not influence your bottom line. Most of them do one or all of the above.

You can't go to many sites without having their main pages completely covered with TF advertisement. Do you think these sites put them on the pages for free? No. It's how they get their revenue. But MS even takes it further. They literally open their checkbooks and try to get reviewers to sign waivers to give them favorable reviews and articles.

That is how they get by with rushing games out the door. This is the 4th exclusive rushed to market for the XBOX ONE and it's only been out 4 months.

XBOTTOX1501d ago


are you saying that because the game LIKE ALL GAMES, hase framerate dips it doesnt deserve the score it has?
Hella people complaining framerate this and resolution that, why dont we compare this game to KZSF resolution and the framerate in that? what about how bad the SINGLE PLAYER AI in that game was??
Its really P$ FanBoys on here starting riots over this game because its not on their console.

It really isnt that bad for one and two nobody cares because NO CONSOLE games come with a true locked framerate, so while everybody is bashing this game for dropped frames. Ill be sitting bck enjoying this wonderfully balanced, highly competitive FPS and hang around to rag on the frame dips that will happen in infamous and the order loooool

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 1501d ago
thezeldadoth1502d ago

I've yet to see these mythological framerate drops caused by titans.

thezeldadoth1501d ago

^ That is a shame but i play it on PC and haven't seen that happen.

HacSawJimThugin1501d ago

Me too and I play 4-5 hours daily.

Flutterby1501d ago

That's the thing , you play on pc lol the frame drops are X bone exclusive.

MetaReapre1501d ago

If you play it on pc it's fine but on consoles is where all if not most complaints are coming from.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1501d ago
JBSleek1502d ago

What is your CPU and GPU?

Activemessiah1501d ago

How can someone disagree with a question?... never understood this aspect of N4G.

WalterWJR1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

Because the question is unrelated. The framerate dips ppl talk about are a custom to Xbox one which can get as low as 5fps.

Charybdis1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

At the moment they said, at the day after release, that they would work on 900 and 1080 p patch it was pretty obvious the game was rushed. It still is a very enjoyable experience but it could have even be better, given more time for both xb1 and pc versions

Matt6661501d ago

it because idiots go when will we be released I hope it soon or I won't buy it geez just let the game developers work on the game at there pace (as long as they don't take the mick) and then the game would be a lot better

dale_denton1501d ago

lol if killzone's frame had that much drop, bots would be all over it.

Bigpappy1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

There is no frame rate drop problem on the X1 version. The game runs very, very smoothly. Done even try and bring KZ in to this conversation. The is just a far superior game in every way except graphic resolution.

dantesparda1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )


All this frame drop son:

"There is no frame rate drop problem on the X1 version. The game runs very, very smoothly."

Congrats, on saying one of the dumbest things here. And KZ has 12v12 (24players) and custom preset modes and no tearing, whereas TF is only 6v6 and bare bone modes and tearing up the ying yang. Also, if you just do a 6v6 game on KZ, it runs at a solid 60fps and as you said, it has better graphics. So no, TF is not superior in every way.

BX811501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

I wanna love it but the screen tears and lag are making me get the same feeling I had with bf4. I'm tired of putting $60 on games that can't fix lag. What is the point of playing when the field isn't level for every one?

Gozer1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

Maybe you should upgrade your internet. Obviously, I don't know your situation as far as the internet goes. But these games have dedicated servers, you are experiencing the most lag free internet environment possible for an online game. Might be time to upgrade.

BX811501d ago

Lol. My internet is fine it's theses clowns running around with one or two bars popping around the screen and my net won't fix the screen tears.

Eddie201011501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

One they use the source Engine, which is a resource hog and is nearly a ten year old engine. Valve is the only developer that has been able to get the most out of the engine, every other developer that used the source engine have had poorly optimized and buggy games. The game was obviously rushed by EA and Microsoft. EA has a hard time letting there developers finish a game and most times the customer pays $60.00 to beta test for them. Another thing it's a multiplayer game where most of your combatants are bots, there is not many game modes, no single player.
Reaks of being rushed to market, EA and Microsoft are both probably at fault for it being rushed. All of Microsoft's Xbox One games seam to suffer the same fate of being rushed to market.

showtimefolks1501d ago

its EA not surprising yet just like BF4 none of the gaming media members have the guts to call out EA

ma1asiah1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

Dude where do you get your 20 fps dip (hell someone is even saying 5 fps like WTF), I have been playing the shit out of it over the past 3 days and have never encountered any such dip in frame rate.

Also you state that you play yet quote a digital foundry article when hit up about the frame dip. Do you not trust your own eye sight in order to answer the question without quoting another source to back up your point.

From someone that is actually playing the game, the game runs silky smooth on the Xbox One, it is a tonne of fun, in fact I would go as far as saying the best First Person Shooter I have played in a bloody long time.

If I was to critice any thing about Titanfall it would be its tacked on multiplayer campaign or story mode otherwise the game is top notch at least in my opinion.

This is weird, it is like some of us are playing two different games. Some actually agree with the frame dips etc....apart from the odd bit of latency (when switching to a server that places me at one bar compared to the normal five) I am not encountering any dips in frames not even when the action on screen is at its most chaotic.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1501d ago
-Alpha1502d ago (Edited 1502d ago )

What do the dinosaurs have to do with "rushed out the door"? They are there in the backdrop, there isn't anything to suggest they were supposed to be anything more.

It's a new IP and the focus isn't going to be on making Halo 3-level content. Those things take time and come with sequels. A new IP focuses on getting the core mechanics to work, and that likely takes a lot of time. Not sure why this article is complaining about a lack of co-op, it's unfair to expect that or cite it as a sign of a rushed job.

New modes would definitely be nice, and I'm sure they will be added through the lifetime of the game. You really can take any new IP and ask "Why isn't there more content", but a lot of the times, that potential is realized through sequels or patches, after your core mechanics are already nailed down and you focus resources on other things.

It's very dramatic to compare it to Battlefield 4's rush job. That game is a whole different level of disaster. Titanfall isn't "ready to walk"? I really don't understand the hyperbole.

porkChop1502d ago (Edited 1502d ago )

The first in-game screen shot that Respawn ever released, that very blurred one, seemed to have a monster/dinosaur in it. And now that I see what the monsters look like, that's definitely what it was. So they were in fact in the game at one point, then were taken out, and are now apparently going to be sold as DLC.

I do agree though that Titanfall cannot be compared to BF4. That game was completely broken on release, and is still broken in many ways.

-Alpha1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

What picture? I think I recall, but that does not mean a) it was ever planned to be a core concept of the game, b) that it wasn't what it already was: a scene in the backdrop of the maps.

Nowhere in development was the game hinted to have dinosaurs play a major role in the game. That only came with the beta leaks, which got hyped by people. I also don't recall any suggestion that they would be DLC.

This does not prove a "rush" job. It's an incredible desperate nitpick by the author.

1501d ago
badboy7761502d ago (Edited 1502d ago )

EA+Micro$oft= We don't give a Damn

esemce1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

Yep once they get your money first that is, EA + Microsoft what a beautiful marriage made in hell.

And Xbox one owners do you think you will ever get great polished games when you lap up, praise and defend shoddy workmanship?

Gozer1501d ago

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the X1s worksmanship. The X1 works great and plays great games. I wouldn't even attempt to compare sony and MS or PC and MS. They are all out to make money. You are coming off as a troll.

Rachel_Alucard1501d ago


"There is absolutely nothing wrong with the X1s worksmanship."

At least attempt to google or read more before you sit down and decide to write "intelligent" comments like this.

PSVita1502d ago

"It's a new IP and the focus isn't going to be on making Halo 3-level content. Those things take time and come with sequels. A new IP focuses on getting the core mechanics to work, and that likely takes a lot of time. Not sure why this article is complaining about a lack of co-op, it's unfair to expect that or cite it as a sign of a rushed job. "

New IP or not that doesn't give you a pass to release a half assed game. Being that it's online only and still $60 it should have everything if not more than a game with a campaign too like halo 3. "Wait for the sequel" "wait for Ryse" "wait for E3" "wait for Halo" "wait for Black Tusks new game" "oh wait nevermind wait for the new Gears instead" "wait for the cloud" "wait etc etc etc"

Frankly I'm tired of waiting.

-Alpha1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

So you expect a new IP to somehow match everything an IP that has had 3 iterations to perfect has? And you judge the game on stuff like lack of co-op, when it was never advertised to have such a thing?

Any game that doesn't have a set list of features is "rushed"? "Unfinished"? Just curious, because a number of games would fail to reach this arbitrary list of demands. If a complete list of features like Halo 3 is your standard, then nearly all games fall short.

These articles that criticize co-op, dinosaurs, and whatever else are really grabbing at straws. I can understand complaints about a lack of modes or not feeling the overall package is worth $60, but it seems really silly to call the game rushed and compare it to Battlefield

Kribwalker1501d ago

Funny how it's 90% PS4 fanboys in here complaining about it. Not many xbox fans insight. Prolly cause we are all to busy playing Titanfall. I'm only on here because I am on the can, back to titanfall once I'm done 😉

PSVita1501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )

@-alpha- my complaint is about it being $60. If it had been $30 I wouldn't expect as much from it as I would a full priced game. Not saying it a game bad or anything like that but it should be top notch. The gameplay honestly looks great but overall its not worth $60 IMO. It doesn't matter what system it's on I'd say the same if it was a PS exclusive or multiplatform. As next gen title it has no excuses seeing as they were able to solely focus on multiplayer and had plenty of other game to go off of and improve on.

Same goes for KZ:SF it's a great looking game, has a fun multiplayer but GG needs to talk to ND about their storylines because it was a mess and that killed it for me personally same with KZ3. Those games have so much potential...

@kirbwalker- check your facts I'm nothing near a fanboy. Maybe next time you reply to a comment you can actually put something that contributes to the conversation.

Kribwalker1501d ago

Not calling you a fanboy, or anyone, just said sony fans, and it was just a general reply to the article and everyone, not just you.

-Alpha1501d ago

Fair enough, I can understand the $60 complaint and can side with you on that. I just don't think it's fair to call it rushed, or pick the game apart for not having something like co-op.

mydyingparadiselost1501d ago

That's why I wait for price drops, wait for reviews, wait to hear other people's experiences, wait for GotY editions, wait for the patches to be released, wait, and wait to see what's bullshot. I'm tired of waiting too, the industry does nothing but hurt itself when it cuts content or pushes games out early for the sake of profit.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1501d ago
corvusmd1502d ago

I don't like it when people write reviews without playing the game. "Xbox On...go to Titanfall"

Summons751501d ago

So because they don't like it and point out it's faults and how it's a bad know the TRUTH. They clearly didn't play it, great logic /S

Take off the rose colored glasses and see the game as it is, a mediocre rushed game.

kevinsheeks1501d ago

it isn't mediocre at all still a great game put on your glasses and go read some reviews instead of taking one article and trying to push your own agenda

Summons751501d ago


I have played the beta and rented the full game. It's mediocre, it's not a bad game but it's too easy taking no skill to accomplish anything and it's just rehashed boring COD controls. It gets boring after a few hours because you don't get a sense a sense of accomplishment having everything nearly done for you.

I don't need to read reviews because most feedback from sponsored sites is fake and a lot of people are disappointed in it because of the 'making it easy for casuals'.

I'm not saying it's a bad game, it's perfect for the COD crew who don't understand how to play real games and can learn to get better, but because they have poor design choices for that reason it makes it much less than a great game.

Flutterby1501d ago

The lack of interesting modes makes it average at best , and that's ignoring all the other issues such as frame drops ,awful graphics and worst A.I I have ever seen. I really don't understand all the hype , this game will be forgotten within a couple months and all the zone owners will go back to cod and bf.

Pinkdolphinyfg1501d ago

Lmao a bad game. The whole fuxking internet disagrees with you. But thats ok because the media is paid off so its all an illusion. Lol the only person hiding fromthe truth is you my friend. We all know you didn't play the game so shuuut upppp.... Lol

moparful991501d ago

@kevinsheeks Face the facts that this game isn't the world stopping "omg" exclusive that Microsoft has hyped it to be.. Its currently sitting at an 86 on Metacritic..

I know a few people that have played the game some love it the rest had meh reactions to it.. There is a lot of shooter fatigue anymore and aside from the Mech/pilot mechanic this game literally does nothing new or exciting.. Once the awe of seeing the Titan fall from space this game becomes tedious very quickly.. If this game had a single player or co op component I would be thrilled about it but an online only competititve shooter that is lacking features and having framerate issues despite "the power of the cloud" is dissapointing..

Gunstar751501d ago

I've been playing games for 30 years and Titanfall is far from mediocre

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1501d ago
EZMickey1502d ago

Titanfall had minimum 3 years in development, that game wasn't rushed. It was a new studio building a new, engine building and a new game- it was badly optimized, not haphazardly put together in an unreasonably short amount of time.

If you open up a studio and get a publisher like EA to fund your game, 3 years is more than reasonable especially considering they're taking on all the financial risk. Any longer and your game just isn't going to earn what it cost to make.

People must seriously get over thinking EA is this literally evil corporation that loves pushing out flawed products almost as much as it loves killing kittens, 'cause at the end of the day we're still left with an extremely playable and highly rated game.

stuna11502d ago

TitanFall was in development for 4 years, the engine is a modified engine, not a new engine. And we're talking the makers of Call of Duty 4 here! At least that is the reason so many were saying why Respawn should automatically be considered trustworthy and infallible. There are thing about the game that weren't achieved that should have been achieved! Especially after all the hype surrounding it, and now there are some out there giving the full picture of how things really are.

DevilishSix1501d ago

I find it concerning that it took 4 years to come up with multiplayer only game with 15 maps and 5 game modes and it has some frame rate issues. I am fans of these developers from their COD days, but the time in development vs the content received doesn't add up. Something happened during development we are not being told. I know Jason West left half way thru development, which makes me wonder if original development on this game was scrapped and they restarted.

Hellsvacancy1502d ago (Edited 1502d ago )

Ouch, it hurt me reading that, someone actually DEFENDING EA?

Besides you lost me when you said Respawn built a new engine, I knew then you don't know what you're talking about

djplonker1502d ago

Titanfall uses a heavily moddified source engine that is from 2004 so it was never going to be a graphical powerhouse or have a high player count like bf4

Surley if titanfall had used frostbite 3.0 then it could have been epic!

Pandamobile1501d ago

Try 2011. It's using the Portal 2 version of Source, not the Half-Life 2 version...

Eddie201011501d ago (Edited 1501d ago )


You have seen portal 2 not a graphics powerhouse by no means, In fact Half Life 2 looked much better than portal 2. If you are trying to make an excuse it's a poor one. If you are saying it's updated version (Not a completely new engine in 2011) and you think it still looks sub par, then I would agree. Although compared to portal 2 (A last gen game) Titanfall slightly looks better.

Pandamobile1501d ago

Lol, are you seriously implying that Half-Life 2 looks better than Portal 2?

Christ, some of you guys are seriously out of touch.

Z_-_D_-_31501d ago

I dunno about that one there, Freddy. Don't get me wrong, EA did a good thing scooping up the core CoD team and funding their project, but the way they handled it was just annoyingly seedy, deceptive, and downright dumb on their own part. Their little exclusivity deal with Microsoft was just wrong, and the entire industry knows it. The fans, other developers, media publication, EVERYONE - has voiced their distain with the exclusivity. EA even shot their own damn selves in the foot, losing a massive amount of profit that could have been gained on Playstation platforms.

This in-turn forced Respawn to prioritize the X1 as its flagship version which we all know had botched dev kits thanks to Microsoft along with terrible ES ram. They limited their reach, wasted marketshare, signed a deal behind their backs and f*cked it up for everybody except Microsoft and their fanboys. It's actually pretty hilarious they did all of this to these guys after they had just been stiffed by Activision.