480°

Titanfall Alpha build using 25% of the final game's texture resolution.

Respawn employee commented on neogaf on game textures and resolution by saying:
"All textures in this Alpha Test build are at 25% of the final game's resolution. So if you're staring at a 256x256 texture, that's actually a 512x512 texture in the real game. 512? That's a 1024. It's a huge, huge, huge difference. Especially on terrain, weapons, cockpits, hands, effects, etc.

There's a reason the build is under NDA. It's not for showing off, or giving people a fair idea of what the game looks like, or for pixel counting. You'll still have your chance to scream "lolz pixels lazy devs Goldeneye N64 lololololol", but now is not the time.

(Well; menu images are probably full res.)"

Lalanana4169d ago

Pfft.. resolution does not matter.. This game looks pure fun from all the demos and clips..

Studio-YaMi4168d ago

Then let's play our games in 144p then? don't make me laugh,resolution IS important and gives you more detail and crisp to the visuals of the game.

That being said,Titanfall DOES look fun to play,the game is being hated on for obvious reasons(mostly because it's exclusive to X1 consoles-wise)can't wait to try it out for myself when it's released.

XB1_PS44168d ago

Well, Resolution does matter, but it shouldn't be the main point of a game. 1080p would be preferable, yet I will buy it if it ends up 720p.

MysticStrummer4168d ago

@Studio - "the game is being hated on for obvious reasons(mostly because it's exclusive to X1 consoles-wise)"

No doubt there is some cross console hating going on, but people also hate on CoD every year and watching the TF videos it's clear that the short description "CoD with jet packs and mechs" is accurate, though I guess it should really be "CoD with jet packs, mechs, and bots". If someone doesn't like CoD's style of play there's a decent chance they won't like this. Luckily for the devs, millions of people love CoD.

dantesparda4168d ago (Edited 4168d ago )

"Titanfall Alpha build using 25% of the final game's texture resolution."

Stupid move on their part, you know the game is going to be judged in this state

tommygunzII4168d ago

Resolution doesn't matter, but small arena multiplayer games like this are usually the best looking.

LAWSON724168d ago

@tommygunzil
I dont think this exactly a small arena shooter considering maps have loads of ai soldiers and mechs

I love how graphics matter so much on consoles now. If resolution mattered so much shooters would only be played on PC and COD would not sell better on last gen and sell almost just as well on Xbone as on PS4. I am starting to think casual gamers at least play games for one reason and that is fun, while the core gamers are a bunch of sad people that need pretty visuals to feel satisfied when playing a game.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4168d ago
dedicatedtogamers4169d ago

I find this hard to believe. They're two months away from launch, but they're only using 25% of the final texture resolution in the beta (don't be fooled: it's not an alpha. You don't run an alpha 2 months prior to launch)?

Again, I find this hard to believe, unless they're trying to tell us "the extra textures are floating in teh cloudz"

Bundi4169d ago Show
dedicatedtogamers4169d ago

@ Bundi

Ah! So you're saying that game developers usually add 75% of their texture density to a game in the last 2 months of development? Please do tell. I'm very curious.

In all fairness, Respawn opened themselves up to scrutiny when they launched the beta (er, "alpha"). They did it to drum up hype, which is what most devs do. Nothing wrong with that at all. But with that said, when you put your game out there, people are going to judge it in its current form. No need to make BS excuses.

Kayant4169d ago (Edited 4169d ago )

Am pretty sure the game is quite ready already.... They said this is just meant to be a server test and nothing more it only runs until sunday apparently so it fits perfectly with what they are saying. They could easily be using old code for this seeing as its just a server test for the weekend. No one really knows. Anyways we will know soon enough when the game comes out but that won't matter too much because it's the gameplay that is getting people excited for good reason.

Bolts-N-Rays11094169d ago

How did you end up with so many bubbles?

Team_Litt4169d ago

What he may be saying is that the alpha has been stripped of all that texture density not because it is not yet complete, but rather for the purpose of stress testing the "skeleton" of the game.

It may be easier/more efficient to conduct an alpha with whatever parameters they have set in place for this specific build. The actual beta may have preexisting assets that have been stripped from this build.

My knowledge of these things is limited, but I see no reason for them to lie and although Bundi is more passionate about it, I agree that you probably don't know enough about making a game to have your doubts carry any real clout to anybody else except maybe those that bear your agenda(the clouds quip was a dead giveaway.)

lastofgen4169d ago (Edited 4169d ago )

@dedicatedtogamers
do you not know the real reason why companies hold closed alpha/beta tests sometimes?
It's primarily for server tests and info collection on other more important things so that they can ensure a smooth and stable launch. It's not to show off textures.

And I'm not fooled. If it's an alpha test, then it's an alpha test. I don't care what they call it as long as they hold some kind of test to test stability. And how on earth do you know if it's some sort of "BS excuse??" You don't work for Respawn. I'd rather take their word about something regarding THEIR game over someone like you who has no history of development for titanfall.

MasterCornholio4168d ago

Maybe they will end up delaying it.

That's just a prediction of mine based off what you said.

jackanderson19854168d ago

or you know the final file will be more than 4gb which is what the people who have it are reporting.... Respawn and EA have said it's to test the network and considering how bad BF4 was it's a good call on their part

TheKayle14168d ago (Edited 4168d ago )

they just need to copy the other asset ...same filenames....what is hard to bealive? lol is done to prevent ppl to see how the final game will look ...as he said nda...is an alpha version to test the gameplay...

they prob will need like 30 secs to upgrade with the new final version hi res textures pack..lol

ic3fir34168d ago

i play bf4 alpha 3mounths less, this is not a test alpha game, its a server test only

christocolus4168d ago

Lol..Why are you so interested in what respawn has to say? They have told you its 25% of the final build and you think there is a conspiracy...You obviously stopped caring about titanfall since it was confirmed to be an xbx exclusive,so why bother about what respawn has to say?

n4rc4168d ago

Team litt.. That's exactly what it means and I'm pretty sure he knows that..

Just trolling

glenn19794168d ago

did you ever make a game? or do you work for a game company?

Gunstar754168d ago

So what, are they telling porkies???

My understanding was that they did it for 2 reasons....

1 - download speed
2 - They didn't want final quality images leaking

Either way, the videos I have seen make it look fun and different enough to most FPS that it has my interest.

BallsEye4168d ago

@dedicatedtogamers

How silly are you?? They clearly said texture quality is reduced to 25% to REDUCE DOWNLOAD SIZE! Of that 40 gig games we download now for next gen, most are textures.

H0RSE4168d ago

It could be the last week of Alpha just to verify their netcode is solid before they lockdown and go into Beta.

headblackman4168d ago

just for the alpha tester. not for the final game. there's not telling how far along they could be with completion. they could be as far as 60% done or 90% done. who knows, but if they say that it's alpha and that that the finished product looks better than the 25% alpha that was released to the public, than that's what it is. it's not too much longer before we see whats what. and the AI will be greatly improved so lets not worry or whine over stuff we have no understanding of. lets also not allow a fanbot mentality to fester.

ambientFLIER4168d ago

They lowered the rez of the textures to make the download size as small as possible for people. It ended up being something like 3.8 gigs. The reason it's called Alpha is because it's a network stress test and does not actually reflect the state of readiness of the retail game. Any more idiotic comments?

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 4168d ago
Play2Win4168d ago

I will play it on my PC. Looks like real fun gameplay and a nice twist from all those standard military shooters. PS4 owners really got slapped big time for not having this game on their consoles.

Mikeyy4168d ago

What twist???? This looks and plays just like COD, Titanfall is a pretty standard fps...

That's fine enjoy it!! But don't act like its revolutionary...

Play2Win4168d ago

No, it does not play like CoD. Just because you have a rifle an and other guns? Yes, it's a Shooter with soldiers. And it looks to be as responsive and sweet like CoD and its 60FPS but the gameplay looks to be far more dynamic and faaar more unpredictable. Really I can't wait

MasterCornholio4168d ago

What makes you think that PS4 owners can't own a PC, Xbox 360 or an Xbox One?

I think you meant people who only own a PS4 and don't have a PC capable of playing this game.

Kingthrash3604168d ago

lol ps4 owners got slapped?
how? this is great for gaming..its competition..this will be a great game for the pc and the x1. just like uncharted, infamous, rime, the order, MLB the show (baseball is exclusive ps3,ps4,psv only at the moment)deep down...i can go on and on. titanfall is a great game but by no means slaps the ps4 only gamers.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4168d ago
Volkama4168d ago

12 agrees for the "dat maths...". Yet all the maths in the article is simple and accurate.

Or are you just saying you like to see the actual numbers?

Evilsnuggle4168d ago

Titanfall looks last gen it's no Killzone Sf. I want to see the 360 version of Titanfall if it doesn't look a lot better it well hurt xbone sells.

H0RSE4168d ago (Edited 4168d ago )

Graphics aside, odds are this game will receive better ratings than KZ:SF did. As for sales, I can't possibly see how this game could hurt sales. It might not contribute to future sales, but that is not the same as hurting them. Whether on 360, X1, or PC, MS wins either way.

Anonagrog4168d ago

What about the maths?

Double a square texture's length/width, quadruple the texel count.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4168d ago
GamersHeaven4169d ago ShowReplies(1)
Christopher4169d ago

That makes no sense. The only way it makes sense is if they are cutting up textures into smaller portions and will be combining them into larger textures at some point.

Why? Because the game has been seen running at least at 720p. No way is it going to get above 1080p (or even 1080p) by release.

4168d ago Replies(4)
ambientFLIER4168d ago (Edited 4168d ago )

cgoodno -

It makes perfect sense to those that actually understand how these things work. This is basically BF3 with and without the high-res texture pack for the sake of smaller downloads. It's still 720P either way, just like BF3 was.

The alpha is for the purpose of a network test and is lacking the high rez texture pack. The retail game will have the pack included. What is so hard to understand, especially for someone that claims to know about programming and having all this game experience???

Christopher4167d ago (Edited 4167d ago )

Note that they said 25% of resolution, not texture quality. Two distinct things.

Hicken4168d ago

I'm with you on this one.

Now, I obviously haven't heard of everything, but this is the first I've heard of a game having an alpha so close to launch.

Anonagrog4168d ago (Edited 4168d ago )

"You don't have a beta with reduced graphics. You'd lose more file size through compressed audio than that."

Cutting down texture sizes won't give you "reduced graphics" if you're running with the same number of resources at run-time as you would in the release version of the game. Granted, it may not look as aesthetically pleasing as it could, but the effects are minimal in terms of testing the s/w. The resource management side of things will function just about the same considering these are art assets. It'll just use up less memory (or stream in more potentially usable textures off of the media - depends on their strategy) and lower some of the rendering costs, but it doesn't mean the rendering pipeline itself will function any differently.

Also, regarding the audio, that really isn't going to be the case in most games. This will especially be so now more than ever as we move towards more varied and open environments that demand more by way of art and less of audio. Between this generation and the last we'll certainly see changes in audio asset sizes, that's a given, but the relative increase in art asset sizes in comparison will be much more.

The majority of most game's total resource sizes will be consumed by art assets, and it's long been the cause of headaches when contending with limitations with media sizes. It's a trend that's unlikely to change any time soon.

Christopher4167d ago (Edited 4167d ago )

***Cutting down texture sizes won't give you "reduced graphics" if you're running with the same number of resources at run-time as you would in the release version of the game.***

I'm going to assume by texture size you mean quality. But, the person was specifically quoted as saying texture resolution. And, specifically mentioned resolution sizes, not texture quality.

If he meant texture quality, then that's one thing. But, by all intents and purposes, this reads as resolution.

Edit: Please note, this is after me having seen "alpha" build elements which are not at the resolution he specified. I think he may have not explained it well or something. At least not to me. OR! This is specific to Xbox 360? I have not seen "alpha" build elements from that version of the game.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4167d ago
yesmynameissumo4168d ago

I love the amount of people that cling to the word "alpha" like some childhood security blanket, all the while not having a clue what an alpha is and ignoring "this game in alpha" is releasing in weeks.

Gamer-404168d ago

Cool. Titanfall one best new FPS of 2014.
I wait.

Show all comments (103)
150°

Titanfall head responds to Helldivers 2 crossover pitch, and fans are already cooking

In a simple and concise post on Twitter, head of Respawn Entertainment Vince Zampella responded to fan requests for a Titanfall x Helldivers 2 crossover two love heart emojis, praising the idea.

90°

15 Underrated FPS Games You May Want to Try

Popularized by Doom in 1993 and still making video game haters gnash their teeth today, first-person shooter games are the best thing to happen to gamers since pizza rolls. So here are 15 underrated first-person shooter games you may have missed.

Read Full Story >>
ghettogamer.net
Jiub1012d ago

Although the late 2000s Turok wasn't my favorite, I would love a new entry. Open world survival with shotguns and dinosaurs. Not sure how we'd get the fusion cannon, but that would be pretty sweet too.

MadLad1012d ago

Lol

All of these games are pretty much universally praised. Outside of Timeshift I literally own all of these.

Venoxn4g1012d ago (Edited 1012d ago )

XIII, The Darkness 2, Far Cry: Blood Dragon, Timesplitters: future perfect, Bulletstorm are awesome games

gurp412d ago

I played them all, they are all good in their own way
I used to be obsessed with FPS games

60°

An ode to Titanfall: The last twitch shooter I'll probably ever enjoy

Windows Central: "Titanfall 1 is being sunset, taken off storefronts by EA. While the servers remain live for now, one has to wonder just how much time it has left. I look back and pay tribute to the last "twitch"-styled shooter I ever truly loved."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com