Top
1020°

Respawn Entertainment Responds To Fan Reaction Over Player Count (Slightly Insulting)

Dylan Z of iGR Reports: "Just this evening, Vince Zampella of Respawn Entertainment confirmed that Titanfall would have a maximum player count of 12. That being said, there's a lot going on otherwise at any given time. A member of the studio took to NeoGAF to respond to the harsh fan reaction to Titanfall's player count."

The story is too old to be commented.
PSN-JeRzYzFyNeSt2720d ago ShowReplies(15)
Concertoine2720d ago (Edited 2720d ago )

"Oh, and I keep seeing people thinking we’ve got “bots” when we talk about AI. Thats not how they are. The AI in Titanfall are not replacements for human players. Our playercount is not 6v6 because of AI – AI play their own role in the game and are a different class of character in the game."

Clearly the game doesn't function conventionally, maybe we should let them explain the game before we judge. For all we know, the way the game is designed could be more fit for 12 players than 24 or 32 or so on. Just saying, don't judge a book by its cover, people.

Kingthrash3602720d ago ShowReplies(24)
frostypants2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

"I literally have to stop playing every few rounds because my heart just can't take it some times."

This guy sounds like an egotistical schmuck. The CONSUMER will tell you if your game is fun or not. And if he's having heart attacks from playing a video game, he needs to put down the Cheetos and go lift some weights or something.

Moz2719d ago

Your right that the consumer will decide but he's allowed an opinion and after playing the game at EGX I would have to agree with him. It's a very intense game and it left me grinning from ear to ear can't wait to play more.

UltimateMaster2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

Let's make a comparison.

Starhawk:
Starhawk had 32 player count which also included Jetbikes, Jet packs, Assault ATVs, Dual Heavy Tanks, Starhawks that transforms into Mech while on the ground and Smaller faster Mechs (Grizzly) with their own fire power.
On top of that, you can spawn buildings like walls, turrets, AA defenses or buildings that spawn vehicles Anywhere on the map all in real time.

MAG:
MAG was capable of 256 player battles combined with Tanks, Armored Vehicules, Army Jeeps, Bunkers, Combat Helicopters and Paratroopers.
On top of that, Squad Leaders, Platoon Leaders and Commander in Chief had the ability to command strikes with either Air Strikes or Motars on the enemy. All done by 100% dedicated servers, no lag and no bugs.

Granted, Titanfall is graphically enhanced compared to these 2 PS3 games, but then there's Planetside 2.

Planetside 2 has over 2000 units per maps with numerous vehicles, exclusive to PC and PS4 and the PS4 will have all of the Ultra High Settings the PC has.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
I know from my experience, once you go over that 32 player mark, you never want to go back to lower.
What I enjoy is innovation and a more immerse game play experience. Titanfall is innovative, when you compare it to Call of Duty, but it's not the first shooter games with Mechs in it.

Still going to be a pretty good game and I do recommend you to buy it if you plan on getting or have an Xbox One.

UltimateMaster2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

That's just my preference, I really really loved the high player counts in these games.

Titanfall is still a much better and looks like a hell of a lot more fun than Call of Duty. Much Better graphics that Call of Duty too.
Having that said, I do recommend you get that game and tell your friends to get that game over Call of duty.

Me? Probably be playing Planetside 2 or other games. I will have to pick up Titanfall on the PC just for the fun of it.

classic192719d ago

lol, yeah right bf3 runs 12v12, on 360. bf4 runs 32v32 on x1. im sure 12v12, was in site but, these are the old cod guys so 6v6 is them. that said it's dissatisfying.

Moz2719d ago

One you play it you'll understand 6v6 is just right the players are the elite soldiers who get to pilot the meks more then 6 meks a side would be too many. The Ai soldiers then flesh out the ranks but they are very much like single player Ai enemies rather than multiplayer bots and add a nice extra layer to the game play.

StrangerX2719d ago

Gears of war was 4vs4 and Gears 3 was 5vs5 and was very amazing so for me it just depends on the level layouts. So that for me doesnt matter.

Gh05t2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

"Don't judge a book by its cover."

I am so sick of this saying. All this information is to make a judgement. Judging it based on the name and picture is where that would apply but this information is like turning the cover over and seeing the plot and offerings... that's all meant to make a judgement.

When you watch a trailer for a movie or game or read information about it that is all meant so you can make a judgement of whether to buy it or not.

I'm not picking a side on this issue I just have a problem with your premise of telling people not to judge When this is exactly the information one makes a judgement on.

I don't know about you but I don't have to watch a horror movie or play a sports game to know I'm not going to have fun.

And especially don't say this unless they offer a demo because lots of people don't have $60 to see if it's fun 6v6.

Again it may be super fun 6vs6 to some and it may suck for others but that information is totally allowed to be judged.

Edited phones auto correct.

Concertoine2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

You might be missing my point. Im saying people are ASSUMING 6v6 will falter the game when it's clear that they specifically designed it this way for a reason, and that increased player counts didnt work as well. A lot of people don't realize there is actual REASONING behind this choice, and they judged this situation by the title of the article. People judged the game's AI assuming it was bots, and judged the premise of a 6v6 shooter in 2014 because it was odd. They can judge the game all they want, if 12 players is an inherently bad concept to them no matter the reasoning, then whatever. But when some of the biggest concepts of the game are unknown, you shouldn't draw conclusions.

Skizelli2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

"When you watch a trailer for a movie or game or read information about it that is all meant so you can make a judgement of whether to buy it or not."

That has to be one of the dumbest comments I've read on N4G today. Do you know how many movies I've seen with horribly bad trailers that actually turned out to be quite awesome, and vice versa? PR is designed to spark interest. Sometimes it fails to do that, but that doesn't always mean whatever they're trying to sell is going to be bad. If we used your logic, critics wouldn't have to actually play a game or watch a movie before reviewing it since they could simply come to a conclusion based on info and trailers at hand.

People are blowing this 6v6 thing out of proportion. More players doesn't make a MP game better. Period. There are plenty examples of that. Judge the game after it comes out.

Gh05t2719d ago

@Concertoine

So your ASSUMING that the majority of people just think they decided 6v6 for no reason even though this article SAYS that they decided 6v6 for a reason. I assume the people have read the article. That still doesn't mean that they have to agree with the decision just because it was made for a reason. That's called having an opinion.

Your saying don't have an opinion until its out. I am saying that with games opinions need to be made before they are purchased because you cant return it and if you think that 6v6 will not be fun and you were hoping for more to express that isn't a bad thing. I mean what are comments but mostly opinions anyways?

I do agree with that whole drawing final conclusions until all information has been revealed but consider the opinion a work in progress based on the information at hand. I see more bitching about it and not very many people saying "That is it I'm not even going to give this game anymore thought to win me over EVER." I for one am one of these people and would greatly like more information but this news has put a damper on the game in my opinion. That doesn't mean I cant be brought back around when more information is released but based on what I do know I can say I don't think its going to be good. That is how opinions work.

Gh05t2719d ago

@Skizelli

"That has to be one of the dumbest comments I've read on N4G today."

Glad I could make your list of dumb comments.

I think you missed a step trying to call my argument illogical.

"Do you know how many movies I've seen with horribly bad trailers that actually turned out to be quite awesome, and vice versa?..."

No i don't know how many you have seen. However, I never said a bad trailer meant a bad movie or a good trailer meant a good game/movie. All I inferred is its trying to persuade you into purchasing or watching hence making a judgement.Which is exactly what marketing is so to call that dumb I would say you need to read a business and marketing book. Purchasing an item means making a judgement. You inferred more than I stated. People are allowed to change their opinions that's just making another judgement after gaining more facts.

"...critics wouldn't have to actually play a game or watch a movie before reviewing it since they could simply come to a conclusion based on info and trailers at hand."

In order to call it a "REVIEW" yes they would have to watch or play it.

"People are blowing this 6v6 thing out of proportion. More players doesn't make a MP game better. Period. There are plenty examples of that. Judge the game after it comes out."

This has nothing to do with my comment as again I left out my personal opinion (Originally) about the whole situation. I was only disagreeing with the premise that people shouldn't be allowed to make an opinion until they play a game (Don't judge a book by the cover) and that is incorrect.

Unless you believe that everything must be tried in order to form an opinion of which I would say there are many things that does not apply to, suicide for one. How about people in general, I bet you have already judged me based on what I said but what if I had changed my mind as I am a work in progress. You would have fallen victim to your own crappy argument.

People judge based on the information given and since we are left WAITING for information rather than just being ignorant of it since it is being withheld and not public knowledge we judge based on what we have. Everyone does it (Fact) and it is one of the worst saying ever conceived (Opinion).

Since when is it wrong to have an opinion and disagree with something based on the information given? I wish it was more than 6v6, I may end up being wrong it may be less fun but based on the information I have now, I still wish it... What is so wrong with that?

Skizelli2719d ago

"Glad I could make your list of dumb comments."

Perhaps I was a little blunt. ;)

"I think you missed a step trying to call my argument illogical."

I think my counter argument is pretty valid. It's no secret that everyone has an opinion and judges things and people prematurely. That's why the saying exists in the first place.

"Unless you believe that everything must be tried in order to form an opinion of which I would say there are many things that does not apply to, suicide for one. How about people in general, I bet you have already judged me based on what I said but what if I had changed my mind as I am a work in progress. You would have fallen victim to your own crappy argument."

You're comparing apples to oranges here. I think the best way to decide something for yourself is by playing/watching it for yourself. Forget about what you read or hear. If I listened to half of the things people tell me about any particular game or movie, I wouldn't know any better. Different strokes for different folks (another good saying).

"People judge based on the information given and since we are left WAITING for information rather than just being ignorant of it since it is being withheld and not public knowledge we judge based on what we have. Everyone does it (Fact) and it is one of the worst saying ever conceived (Opinion)."

Yes, and I never argued against that, hence my comment about PR. That's their job. How many games have we seen prior to release that looked amazing only to be a dud? That's because the PR people did their job. Sometimes the information is incomplete, misleading, or flawed, and doesn't paint a complete picture. That's why it's easy to judge a book by its cover.

Gh05t2719d ago

@Skizelli

I disagree with a few things but at the same time I see a few things I believe we are arguing the same point from two different views.

Thanks for the comments as this is my last bubble and I won't be able to respond so I won't rebutt any remarks.

classic192718d ago

lol, im not judging but come on, 10v10 could have been done i might have been fun. i just rather get killed by a real person. all hell the clouds..

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2718d ago
quenomamen2719d ago

You couldn't be more right that's why im judging this game on its Devs track record of rinse & repeat gameplay coupled with low end graphics engine and lack of dedicated server support. Oh yea but I'm sure the cover of the retail box will look great !

saywat2472719d ago ShowReplies(2)
extermin8or2719d ago

....... if the AI are fighting,in a multiplayer game and can kill you and be killed by you. Then they are bots.... they are serving the same function as human players?

Gozer2719d ago

I don't think they can kill you. They are just there to enhance the games presentation is how Ive understood it.I also recall a lot of the gaming media really liking Titanfall and they never played more than 6v6.

Moz2719d ago

But they're not the same as human players they are weaker and behave in a more predictable manner. They work in the same way as enemy AI in any single player game.

Consoldtobots2719d ago

sorry but this is PURE fail from Respawn.

The excuse of massive multiplayer being a mess is a SORRY excuse to stand on. It is up to the developer to provide the framework and conduits where a massive game is fun to play. THIS is a perfect example of developer laziness. 5v5? This is 2014 not 2002.

Moz2719d ago

Why should every game be massively multiplayer? Bigger isn't always better. 6v6 gives you the opportunity to play with a team made entirely of friends, it's alot easier to communicate and coordinate your strategy.
What do you gain from it being 32v32 it unlikely to change the number of people fighting in your vicinity.

Massively multiplayer can be fun, but personally after a while I start feeling insignificant. While in Titanfall you feel like youbmatter to the outcome of the fight.

HarryB2719d ago

Yeah thats fine and dandy. But why say it now??? And why the hell wont they announce whos developing the xbox360 version especially since more people will buy it on 360 than xboxone.

YodaCracker2719d ago

I highly doubt that, considering the Xbox One version has four times as many preorders as the 360 version:

http://www.vgchartz.com/pre...

RedSky2719d ago

More =/ better. Not every game has to be Battlefield sized player counts.

Edsword2719d ago

I'm not an xb1 owner, nor am I interested in Titanfall, but this really seems like a non issue. 6v6 is a low player count by today's standards, but it sounds like the game is being built around the lower count. Just wait and see what you get, you are giving in to preconceptions of every other Fps out there. Maybe, just maybe, this is something new.

avengers19782719d ago

Lmao, this game was and is only hype. This is pathetic at best. And people give shit to KZSF for there player count.

otherZinc2719d ago

I hope Respawn & M$ disregard every negative word on this site, as the negative comments are coming from people that won't have Titanfall releasing on their respective console. They're pissed!

Make your game Respawn, it sounds like a system seller.

Day 1 purchase.

bradleejones2719d ago

Not saying 6v6 can't be fun because it obviously can be. You would just expect a new current-gen game to have a player count higher than that as an option. Shooters from PS2 era were 32v32 so you would expect a couple gen later to have more than 6v6 as an option at least. Again, not saying 6v6 can't be fun cause it can be. MAG was a lot of fun with the huge player counts but i am not expecting 100 person multiplayer or anything. Its a lot to follow. Just 6v6 is awfully surprising to me really...

wastedcells2719d ago

It's ok guys titan fall 2 on ps4 and x1 will be much better.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 2718d ago
KingDadXVI2720d ago ShowReplies(2)
MrPoopyPants2720d ago

The solution is to just wait for Titanfall 2!

annus2720d ago

All the people hating on the game have to wait for Titanfall 2 anyway, since Titanfall isn't coming out on PS4.

Seriously, 6v6 and under are the best for competitive play, I don't see what the big deal is. ALL of the competitive games (and I mean proper competitive) have small teams in their tournaments.

FunAndGun2720d ago

Please stop with this competitive play.

If there are bots/A.I. then it is NOT competitive team play. Name one other anything (game/competition) that uses stand-in computer controlled combatants?

MRMagoo1232720d ago

Yes its def just PS4 owners that care lol , there are plenty of ppl that got excited about the game and are now saddened at how under whelming it is. 6V6 at 720p with AI bots, tiny maps, and def not next gen considering its on the 360 as well.

annus2720d ago

Just because a game CAN have something, doesn't mean it will ALWAYS have it.

Hell, Counter Strike has 'stand in' bots in some servers till a player joins, it doesn't mean it will be used in competitive. Also, the bots in Titanfall are NOT stand-in.

Good-Smurf2720d ago

And just look at all the competitive players out there it clearly not that many...
Plain bad excuse man.

kopicha2719d ago

I remember seeing some people who queue in line for xo saying the reason xo over ps4 is according to him, XBL is where real competitive play is at. While this can be a touchy and subjective comment since personally I do not agree, this game just moot his whole competitive point. 6v6 with AIs is not something competitive at least in my view regardless how the game design is going to be. Guess I will just play this on my PC/360. I thought this might make me get a XO. But i guess not so anymore. Kind of a fail to me.

Gh05t2719d ago

I know people are going to complain and disagree with me and I can already hear the arguments but...

Dota2 is 5v5 and has peon bots that have basic see and attack ai. And since only players can call in the Titans they are similar to the heros...

It's not a great example but the statement was to name one game.

Now I only make this statement since not enough information about these bots are known and if the bots aren't used in a basically similar way then having the bots is just what they are saying it isnt. A stand in for the lack of teams.

I mean maybe it wasn't fun with over 6v6 because the lag was too bad. Didn't say it was that but they also didn't say it wasnt.

oof462719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

I really don't get all the hate Titanfall is getting because it's 6v6. The Last of Us has awesome multiplayer and it's 4v4. My friends and I had many hours of fun playing the different Fight Nights/Knockout Kings and those games were 1v1.

Does tentpole game + next gen mean there has to be a higher player count?

CrusRuss2719d ago

@FunAndGun I guess you havent heard of DOTA?

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2719d ago
mcstorm2719d ago

This site is just becoming a site to bitch about pointless stuff. Ok you don't like 6v6 its simple don't buy the game. I have never bought a GTA game as I don't like it but you don't see me botching on every post about gta. Let people enjoy the games they want same with the console they want. We all have different tastes and that is why we have choice. Gaming is becoming a hobby for spoiled brats who have to go on and on about how what they have is better then what everyone else has.

People on here really need to grow up and stop being s negotiate all the time.

Lucifun2720d ago

He did say that they used a lot of player counts, but whose to know? Well, I do like their enthusiasm, for all it's worth.

SkippyPaccino2719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

Its probably EAs fault...
Can we have a smooth running 64 players map? : ea looks at battlefield...nope
Can we have a smooth running 32 players map? : ea looks at medal of honor...nope
Can we have a smooth running 24 players map? : ea realizes that 24 people tried playing simcity at once...nope
Whats the best we can have on your servers? : EA 6X6? will that do? (Respawn crawls in a corner and starts crying)

quenomamen2719d ago

Yea im sure EA forced to them use the same tired engine they used for COD, just like they forced DICE to make their game 64 players full of vehicles anf destruction. Dope

vmartin122719d ago (Edited 2719d ago )

Quenomamen, Titanfall runs on the Source engine.. Not the Quake Engine.

SkippyPaccino2719d ago

First of all... What I said was intended as a joke... Secondly remember to never eat the yellow snow... (Milhouse) can I eat the yellow snow? (homer) sure knock yourself out