It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Titanfall won't have a single-player campaign(43 posts)(43 posts)
(43 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 22, 2013
A little surprised, but not shocked. A little disappointed, but not devastated.
So many games to play, and a few to look forward to in the next year or two.

Their theory is solid. Why take so much time on a really short SP campaign, when the real draw is the MP. Makes good sense to me.

I don't play competitive multiplayer. So I'll skip it. I'm sure people who do play MP will like it. It is a great team of developers.
Posted June 22, 2013
Wow, surpriseds to see people asking for bots.

I mean I never got the appeal of having bots. In MP Games like CS/Red Orchestra I avoid servers with bots on them like the plague.

They have seen with CoD how the majority of players go for the MP (plenty of them don't even touch the sp side of the game, just straight to mp).

As a smaller studio now and this being their first game it would have been a tremendous waste of their money and resources to build some epic big single player campaign that the majority of players coming into it wouldn't really touch/finish and would most likely spend their time in mp.

I never saw the appeal of single player in the CoD games, they are so damn linear in nature, just the same old thing over and over and over, run up to scripted point, fight waves of enemies, along with some AI squad members that are ZERO help and do nothing. IT was boring as hell and got old after the first CoD wher eit was actually something new/different back then.
Posted June 22, 2013
Can't say this was much of a surprise, looked very multiplayer oriented.
Posted June 22, 2013
Not a shock as moving to MP only/always online is where most AAA games are heading to stop piracy and used games.
Posted June 22, 2013
It is a shame that so many developers think Single Player is antiquated. Then again their is always Far Cry, Elder Scrolls, STALKER, Metro, Dishonored, State of Decay, Fallout, etc... etc...

Clearly these excellent franchises spell the doom of the immersive experience that is single player. Then again Respawn Entertainment is a EA partner studio publishing primarily for next gen consoles. In which publishers cry wolf over used games and piracy. Of course it was always going to be multiplayer only. Anyone else watch E3? With all the talk about "connected" experiences...
Posted June 22, 2013
I'm not really surprised, but it's still disappointing.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
C17: It is a shame that so many developers think Single Player is antiquated. Then again their is always Far Cry, Elder Scrolls, STALKER, Metro, Dishonored, State of Decay, Fallout, etc... etc...
http://elderscrollsonline.com/en/
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
C17: It is a shame that so many developers think Single Player is antiquated. Then again their is always Far Cry, Elder Scrolls, STALKER, Metro, Dishonored, State of Decay, Fallout, etc... etc...
avatar
Pheace: http://elderscrollsonline.com/en/
True they are making a online version. However it would be foolish to think we won't receive a sequel to Skyrim, which was their best selling elder scrolls title. Online will never see those kind of sales.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
Pheace: http://elderscrollsonline.com/en/
avatar
C17: True they are making a online version. However it would be foolish to think we won't receive a sequel to Skyrim, which was their best selling elder scrolls title. Online will never see those kind of sales.
Sales perhaps not, making the same amount of money is certainly not impossible
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
C17: True they are making a online version. However it would be foolish to think we won't receive a sequel to Skyrim, which was their best selling elder scrolls title. Online will never see those kind of sales.
avatar
Pheace: Sales perhaps not, making the same amount of money is certainly not impossible
I am certain that on name alone it will get at least in the beginning 1 million subscribers at probably around $15 monthly for maybe a year. But the Elder Scrolls series has generally been more about the individual players shaping their own game worlds than wanting to join up with friends and go on a quest.

Which is why the whole Elder Scrolls online doesn't make much sense, who asked for this game? Of all the players who have spent hundreds of hours playing these games, how many could recite the events of the various campaigns?

This being said, of course I realize their are many elder scrolls fan who want this game. But I have my doubts they represent the majority. And I also doubt this game will truly differentiate itself from World of Warcraft.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
Pheace: Sales perhaps not, making the same amount of money is certainly not impossible
avatar
C17: I am certain that on name alone it will get at least in the beginning 1 million subscribers at probably around $15 monthly for maybe a year. But the Elder Scrolls series has generally been more about the individual players shaping their own game worlds than wanting to join up with friends and go on a quest.

Which is why the whole Elder Scrolls online doesn't make much sense, who asked for this game? Of all the players who have spent hundreds of hours playing these games, how many could recite the events of the various campaigns?

This being said, of course I realize their are many elder scrolls fan who want this game. But I have my doubts they represent the majority. And I also doubt this game will truly differentiate itself from World of Warcraft.
Of course, it's fun to be the asshole going around putting pans on people's heads and stealing everything, or robbing their clothes to have them go around town in their underwear as if everything is normal.

But it sounds fucking awful to have someone else be that person in our game.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
Neobr10: At least they're focusing in just one thing and being honest about it.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Yeah. I don't play multiplayer but it's good they're focusing on the game they want to make. Also nice to not hide it behind a so-called "singleplayer" mode so I can go ahead and ignore it.

Different strokes for different folks and all that.
Indeed. If they're not going to take the SP experience seriously, then it's probably for the best that they don't bother at all. At least that way, folks like me won't waste our money on it, and they can focus more of the development money on the MP game that they want to make.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
DaCostaBR: Of course, it's fun to be the asshole going around putting pans on people's heads and stealing everything, or robbing their clothes to have them go around town in their underwear as if everything is normal.

But it sounds fucking awful to have someone else be that person in our game.
That sums up my thoughts about it word for word. Nicely put.
Posted June 22, 2013
avatar
Stiler: Wow, surpriseds to see people asking for bots.

I mean I never got the appeal of having bots. In MP Games like CS/Red Orchestra I avoid servers with bots on them like the plague.

They have seen with CoD how the majority of players go for the MP (plenty of them don't even touch the sp side of the game, just straight to mp).

As a smaller studio now and this being their first game it would have been a tremendous waste of their money and resources to build some epic big single player campaign that the majority of players coming into it wouldn't really touch/finish and would most likely spend their time in mp.

I never saw the appeal of single player in the CoD games, they are so damn linear in nature, just the same old thing over and over and over, run up to scripted point, fight waves of enemies, along with some AI squad members that are ZERO help and do nothing. IT was boring as hell and got old after the first CoD wher eit was actually something new/different back then.
all the original cod games even up to mw1 were pretty much singleplayer games and pretty decent as well.its only when the mw1 multiplayer too off (I found it quite enjoyable if u ignore the hackers) when it became more multi and sp went down down.
really pretty much all fps shooters are scripted....
Posted June 23, 2013
Kind of bummed-out they won't do a SP.

But, really - they're trying to do a persistent MP/MMO here and something bigger, from the looks of things.
Whatever - I just won't be spending a fortune on it, since it isn't a offline game.

I prefer games to be built like say Borderlands 2, Diablo 2, Hellgate: London (before Flagship fell), Test Drive Unlimited 2, and Torchlight 2. I like games built like these - where it's up to the player however and whenever they want to play the game's campaign, which can be played either....
OFFLINE (without anybody at all or w/ NPC's/bots to help you)
OR ONLINE (w/ a select few friends or w/ lots of players online MMO-style).

This way, if the online portion is down for whatever reason on the game company's end; or something's wrong on my end; or something's wrong on my ISP's end - I just can always go play offline and not have to worry about anything.
Post edited June 23, 2013 by MysterD
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Titanfall won't have a single-player campaign(43 posts)(43 posts)
(43 posts)