Titanfall (Respawn shooter)

[TedNugent]

It actually looks gorgeous. Apart from the menus, I wouldn't have guessed it uses the Source engine at all. There's a ton of technical and artistic detail in the environments I've seen so far, and the skyboxes are probably the most detailed I've seen in a shooter. Funny how it does run like shit on a system it was formerly designed exclusively for, I think, but it looks the part for something that could bring shitty hardware down to its knees.

Wut? This game looks like shit (Xbox version):

Do you have any screens from the beta running on your PC version to prove what you're saying isn't total hogshit? Actually, I'm curious. Post some of your screens. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-07-05-titanfall-tech-gallery

And before you start huffing and puffing, take a look at this:

The Xbox One version compared with the PC beta running at maximum settings, 1080p. Outside of a marked improvement in the resolution department, the actual effects, shadow quality and textures appear largely like-for-like. Note: these images were taken before Microsoft revised its Xbox One hardware scaler.

 

[sexbad?]

I didn't take any screenshots, but I don't know what you're smoking. Despite the low resolution of the images, even those screenshots look really great and detailed.

I did the titan fights mode (not sure what it's really called), and I kind of like it, because it involves actual combat. The only time players aren't in their suits is when they have to eject from their robot before it explodes, so it's just robots fighting robots. It makes me want to try Hawken, though, because that's free.

 

[Baron Dupek]

The only good thing about engine and looks - it's clear ( I can see enemies before they shoot me yad yada), compared to BF and CoD engine where effects annoys me.
FFS visibility is one of the first things on checklist when you do multiplayer game. Shiting up with effects is retarded and annoying.

 

[Whiran]

Wut? This game looks like shit (Xbox version):

I don't understand why you think the game looks bad.

I think it looks great.

But, before I judge, what games DO you think looks good?

As an aside, I have a spare beta code for the PC if someone wants it. Edited to add - taken, sorry! Hope it is enjoyed.

 

[TedNugent]

I didn't take any screenshots, but I don't know what you're smoking. Despite the low resolution of the images, even those screenshots look really great and detailed.

I think you've been playing too much 640x480 legacy shit, bro.

This is nothing compared to a Metro and to be honest this doesn't look any better than the last Call of Duty game. The IQ is muddy as fuck and everything looks dithered. Texture resolution is blurry to the point where you can't even read text on some of the wall textures on the Xbox version.

The only good thing about engine and looks - it's clear ( I can see enemies before they shoot me yad yada), compared to BF and CoD engine where effects annoys me.
FFS visibility is one of the first things on checklist when you do multiplayer game. Shiting up with effects is retarded and annoying.

Visibility in terms of a lack of post-processing, which is a good thing to be sure, but there's other shit that you have to take into account:

These are issues that aren't solved by the PC route, even on maxed settings. Right down to the geometry LOD pop-in, many of the Xbox One version's foibles are still present on relatively unbounded hardware. Making a quick dart forward makes it very easy to catch pop-in across rocky formations and vegetation, even on PC, while physics-affected debris on the floor fades in metres away.

Geometry pop-in means the game literally doesn't draw an object past a certain distance, so it jarringly "pops-in" when you walk close to it. That's a lot worse in my opinion than aggressive bloom usage, and it's up there with motion blur in terms of killing your ability to scan horizon lines for detail. It's literally saying that parts of the environment don't exist past a certain distance.

Another thing I'm interested in is how big is the actual drawbox. I was just playing Insurgency on Steam and since that's also a Source engine game it has problems with a square drawbox. Literally, you can see more at the corners than at the front of your screen, and the draw distance is so short that on larger maps you can't see into the distance because it becomes overtaken by an aggressive mist they put in to obscure the problem.

Although because this is a corridor shooter, the developers have likely built the maps so that you don't experience that limitation, but in that case, why do you care about visibility?

 

[sexbad?]

It doesn't look as good as Metro: Last Light, so it isn't good looking? Texture resolution is perfectly crisp on my end, and even in those screenshots you've posted. I can see all the cracks in the floor and details in the gun just fine in this PC comparison shot:

I'm not sure what IQ is, but nothing looks grainy to me. I also didn't notice any pop-in, probably because it doesn't affect anything critical to gameplay. If it's limited to small rock details and bits of vegetation, believe it or not, that's fine.

The fact that you think this is a corridor shooter leads me to believe that you actually don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

In the wake of the Evolve announcement this game kinda seems.... pointless? But then again most games are kinda pointless.

 

[sexbad?]

I thought Evolve was supposed to be quite different. What are the similarities?

 

[Siel]

Pretty late to the party but :

- Is there going to be a SP campaign?
- Is it Origin only?

 

[sexbad?]

No singleplayer, fortunately. It's the very least they could do to say they actually have some kind of focus, because all the Codclone singleplayers suggest otherwise.

Origin only.

 

[Siel]

No singleplayer, fortunately. It's the very least they could do to say they actually have some kind of focus, because all the Codclone singleplayers suggest otherwise.

Origin only.

Thanks. Might consider buying it when on sales anyway.

 

[Baron Dupek]

Pointless? Not for publisers that want their share in multiplayer territory.

 

[Average Manatee]

So basically Quake degenerated into CS, which degenerated into CoD, which has now degenerated into Titanfall. I didn't think it was possible, but they have in fact dumbed down CoD. Titanfall is the new DotA of MP FPS.

 

[TedNugent]

I'm not sure what IQ is, but nothing looks grainy to me.

Yup.

Enjoy your

 

[Deleted member 7219]

£44.99. Way too expensive.

Will wait for it to be on sale.

 

[sexbad?]

I'm not sure what IQ is, but nothing looks grainy to me.

Yup.

Enjoy your

You don't even know what a corridor shooter is, fag. Searching for IQ obviously yields other results.

 

[you know what time it is]

So this is a thread where scrubs are hating on q3 ?

Well fuck you too then.

 

[Metro]

Oh, this is just some derpy multiplayer shooter? Why the fuck was it getting so much hype?

 

[sea]

I think Titanfall looks good, visually. It's not melting my eyeballs out but I'll take a game that runs super-smooth over one that looks like the lovechild of Crysis and Battlefield.

As for gameplay itself, I admit the focus on free-running, jetpacking, verticality etc. is really neat and brings some old-school qualities back to the game. But the continuance of Call of Duty style weapons handling and shooting mechanics is not something I am too excited about. I won't be picking it up but it's at least nice to see something a little different mechanically, especially out of EA.

 

[Metro]

Need more emphasis on 'little.'

 

[Black]

After watching a minute of it on twitch it looks like some futuristic CoD with not even proper mechs but power suits ala Heavy Gear. And maybe with more mobility.

 

[sexbad?]

I did some more of the robots-only game mode, and it's pretty nice, but it's probably the game's only saving grace. Since the robots have some health that isn't completely gone in the blink of an eye, the people in them will actually put up a combat challenge rather than a boring display of twitch skills. I think it's still pretty limited, though. The maps are large comparative to CoD4, but only when in infantry mode. In robot mode, they don't consist of much more than glorified CoD4 map design. It's still okay, but another sign of sorely missed potential.

What I do like is that even in robots-only mode, when your robot is about to explode, you can still eject and run around as an infantryman. You don't get another robot, and you only have one life, but you can run around and cause havoc with the guys who are still in robot suits.

 

[DeepOcean]

Well, I saw quite a few ugly textures and blocky models on the streams I watched. The maps look larger and more important, the wall running isn't only a gimmick as I thought. There are windows everywhere and you can easily access them them and the roofs to ambush enemies. The Titans, there aren't anything all that interesting that you can do with them (maybe when other types are revealed this gets better but I doubt), just shoot and shoot some more until the other guy dies but, at least, they reduced the twitch intant death over and over again, you tend to last some time between each death what makes the game flow better .

It is still CoD 1.5 on the way that it is a shallow game that hides behind a progression system. The shooting continue to be a no brain stuff, no recoil, super accurate, hit scan weapons with big targets like the titans it is even more of a no brainer. They really need some different types of titans to make the Titan fights more than pure spectacle because I could see myself getting really bored with it pretty quickly.

 

[sexbad?]

I can run it at 45-60 FPS with everything maxed apart from anti-aliasing on a 7870, which isn't excellent but still miles above most console ports.

 

[Metro]

Clearly you are a paid agent of EA.