[H]Titanfall just 6v6

[VashHT]

I turned vsync off, the tearing wasn't too bad and I didn't feel like my aim was off. I tried turning vsync on with triple buffering but I got really bad stuttering there so I didn't bother with it.

 

[The Alias]

personally it shouldn't matter whether or not there are unlocks. As long as no weapon is unfair, then it's all gravy .

 

[cmdrdredd]

The unlock style is different than the arena shooter manner of pick-up weapons, but is one REALLY better than the other? With the CoD setup, it essentially becomes a situation where everyone goes out there with his preferred guns, the ones he is best with. Everyone fights from a perspective of being in the best position possible to succeed. It doesn't take long to level in the game, and once you get there, you're never able to get into a position where you complain that the other person had a better gun than you did. You know what you like and you get it every time, so no excuses about how someone got to the Rocket Launcher before you.

If you want a game that is strictly competitive then yes one is most definitely better than the other. If you have to unlock items and weapons then it is not going to be a very good game for competition and tournament play. You need to start on an even level and only your skill should matter.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Actually, I had some problems, it felt like my aim was a bit off compared to other shooters. I didn't use the mouse smoothing option (disabled in windows as well) but I saw some fairly bad screentearing so I enabled vscync (double buffered). Input lag from that might have caused it.

Or maybe I should have adjusted sensitivity. Or I'm just more used to BF style burst shooting atm. It felt like some weapons like the smg worked better while just full auto firing. Not sure what different platforms can offer, does the xbox let you change settings like vsync?

No the XB1 will be all locked settings, locked resolution, and a locked framerate most likely with vsync enabled as well. Mouse smoothing and mouse acceleration really annoy me in a game where you need to be able to aim precisely against other people. I don't mind a bit of tearing if the control improves. I don't use vsync to begin with in order to maximize the performance of a game. I find that a higher framerate trumps a little bit of screen tearing. That said, if the game has inherent problems with mouse control, it won't feel right to me and I could easily enjoy the game on a controller just the same.

It doesn't appear that the two versions look vastly different visually except for a little bit better LOD at distance on the PC and higher levels of AA. That isn't necessarily enough to sway me because the game will not have a server browser, no user hosted servers etc. It's not going to have the things that make it a standout difference from that perspective. I have the option for either and other than the potential mouse issues I may have, I kind of feel like the XB1 community will not only be bigger but will have more longevity than the PC. I almost get the idea that a lot of people will treat this game as they do CoD on the PC and won't support it very long and it'll simply be a bigger game for the console.

Any thoughts on that from anybody?

 

[Lil Frier]

If you want a game that is strictly competitive then yes one is most definitely better than the other. If you have to unlock items and weapons then it is not going to be a very good game for competition and tournament play. You need to start on an even level and only your skill should matter.

Maybe, maybe not. I get your point for competitive play, but I can't help but wonder when that actually applies. When are folks playing CoD competitively without everything unlocked? I don't know how competitions work, so I just don't know how this stuff goes, in those instances.

With the arena shooters, where the guns spawn statically, it can still be iffy. Unless a map is 100% symmetrical, and the spawns are 100% consistent (read: spawn camp-prone), it can often be simply about which side of a map you spawn on or how far you spawn from a gun that matters.

But like I said, balance can be a bit relative. Is balance when everyone has the same gun, or is it when each person has his preferred gun? I can see the defense for either definition, but I lean a bit more towards letting each person claim "his" gun, and letting people go at it. If someone is a long-distance fighter in CoD (uses snipers and assault rifles), I would not necessarily say someone is better than him because he lost an in-close gun fight against a person with an SMG or a shotgun.

The Unreal/Quake setup guarantees potential balance, I'd agree. But I also like the idea of variety in CoD. I'd say that I like the Halo/CoD style of weaponry more, but I like the Unreal/Quake style of gameplay (fast, lots of jumping, mostly-symmetric maps) more.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Maybe, maybe not. I get your point for competitive play, but I can't help but wonder when that actually applies. When are folks playing CoD competitively without everything unlocked? I don't know how competitions work, so I just don't know how this stuff goes, in those instances.

With the arena shooters, where the guns spawn statically, it can still be iffy. Unless a map is 100% symmetrical, and the spawns are 100% consistent (read: spawn camp-prone), it can often be simply about which side of a map you spawn on or how far you spawn from a gun that matters.

But like I said, balance can be a bit relative. Is balance when everyone has the same gun, or is it when each person has his preferred gun? I can see the defense for either definition, but I lean a bit more towards letting each person claim "his" gun, and letting people go at it. If someone is a long-distance fighter in CoD (uses snipers and assault rifles), I would not necessarily say someone is better than him because he lost an in-close gun fight against a person with an SMG or a shotgun.

The Unreal/Quake setup guarantees potential balance, I'd agree. But I also like the idea of variety in CoD. I'd say that I like the Halo/CoD style of weaponry more, but I like the Unreal/Quake style of gameplay (fast, lots of jumping, mostly-symmetric maps) more.

Hint: The best Quake players could kill you with any gun on the map. You take the Rocket Launcher and they'll rail you from across the map. Or bounce grenades around the corner and out the door into your face when you are chasing them with the Plasma gun. The reason it was good for tournament play was because you could host a dedicated server and your skill in the game determined the outcome, not the fact that your gun didn't have the upgraded scope. Everyone had just as much chance as anyone else in the match. You just had to learn the ways around and where the various weapons would spawn at.

 

[smackababy]

Don't must COD tournaments use the default set ups? That would make it just like Titanfall. No leveling up or customization needed. Default loadouts only.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Don't must COD tournaments use the default set ups? That would make it just like Titanfall. No leveling up or customization needed. Default loadouts only.

No idea on that. I'm not a CoD player.

 

[sweenish]

I don't buy the competitive play argument.

CoD and Halo are in all the big FPS tourney's, and they all have unlocks. The people who play at a competitive level have it all, or loadouts are predetermined. It's a moot point.

 

[Lil Frier]

Hint: The best Quake players could kill you with any gun on the map. You take the Rocket Launcher and they'll rail you from across the map. Or bounce grenades around the corner and out the door into your face when you are chasing them with the Plasma gun. The reason it was good for tournament play was because you could host a dedicated server and your skill in the game determined the outcome, not the fact that your gun didn't have the upgraded scope. Everyone had just as much chance as anyone else in the match. You just had to learn the ways around and where the various weapons would spawn at.

With CoD, a scope also isn't required. For example, I don't touch the Dual Band scope on my XPR-50, I take the Ballistics CPU. I don't touch the Target Finder, I use the Hybrid Sight with my SCAR-H. From that perspective, Quake isn't a good comparison, since the weapon styles aren't comparable. Yeah, a good Quake player can beat me with any gun, but I could say the same about a good CoD player. Even though my primary class is SCAR-H and S12, I do well using an XPR-50 and PDW-57 class. I can pick up most guns and succeed, it's why I have the Diamond camo on the Assault Rifles, Sniper Rifles, and Shotguns (which requires mastering each gun of a given class).

When you say you're not a CoD player, it's hard to take your opinion and put any weight to it, just because I'm not sure how knowledgeable of the situation you actually are. I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm dying to see Unreal and Quake get new installments. Quake 4 was the first game I got on the 360, and Unreal Championship was the first Xbox LIVE game I played (back on the original Xbox). I love those games, but to say that CoD can't work competitively because it is different isn't fair.

Remember, a lot of people consider Counter-Strike the gold standard for a competitive FPS. In C-S, you don't have weapons on the map, and early success can throw off the game balance because of the buying system (where winning the first round or two can give you money for significantly-better equipment than the competition might be able to get).

 

[cmdrdredd]

In most counter strike matches...if you die, you're dead. That's it...you wait until it's over. That's hardcore and most of the people who play CoD would probably rage quit because of that. It's just such a different game. One mistake and you're done. No chance for revenge. Sorry dude you blew it.

That's why I can't play CS, I'm not good enough to stay alive. I do like games that reward you for acting as a team, but I'm not hardcore enough to not get shot before I shoot the other guy lol. Also as it pertains to CoD a lot of the maps have no elevation and the ones that do aren't popular...I like games that reward you for taking the high ground and getting the birds eye view.

 

[DigDog]

i'm not really feeling here that i can give any more input. we have differenty opinions on how games should be, and while i think quake has its merits, it's not the be all and end all.

however, it's notworthy that TtF's "only 6v6" thread has 500 posts in it; some good some bad, but there's surely more interest in it that in the quake threads.
This game is going to be big - maybe hype, but regaldless, its gonna be big, and i want to be in it, skill or no skill.

I mean, after all, shaolin kung-fu is much more pure, hard and effective - and takes dedication - than your old run'o'the mill soccer game, but which one is the better game?
QL and TtF are the same - one might be better according to the definition which, well, got defined by people playing it. The other's just better.
(not trying to imply any circular logic here.)

 

[sze5003]

Well I'll be probably buying it for PC I just hope the PC community is decent. Because I enjoyed the beta a lot.

 

[coffeejunkee]

No the XB1 will be all locked settings, locked resolution, and a locked framerate most likely with vsync enabled as well. Mouse smoothing and mouse acceleration really annoy me in a game where you need to be able to aim precisely against other people. I don't mind a bit of tearing if the control improves. I don't use vsync to begin with in order to maximize the performance of a game. I find that a higher framerate trumps a little bit of screen tearing. That said, if the game has inherent problems with mouse control, it won't feel right to me and I could easily enjoy the game on a controller just the same.

It doesn't appear that the two versions look vastly different visually except for a little bit better LOD at distance on the PC and higher levels of AA. That isn't necessarily enough to sway me because the game will not have a server browser, no user hosted servers etc. It's not going to have the things that make it a standout difference from that perspective. I have the option for either and other than the potential mouse issues I may have, I kind of feel like the XB1 community will not only be bigger but will have more longevity than the PC. I almost get the idea that a lot of people will treat this game as they do CoD on the PC and won't support it very long and it'll simply be a bigger game for the console.

Any thoughts on that from anybody?

Ok, well like I said I think it was input lag caused by vsync, but I couldn't play long enough to really draw conclusions or test different settings.

Don't must COD tournaments use the default set ups? That would make it just like Titanfall. No leveling up or customization needed. Default loadouts only.

I think only cod4 was played competitively on pc and they use a mod called promod which limits perks and weapons. Actually, only 3 weapons are used: ak-47 ar, ak-74 smg and the m40 sniper. Not sure if you can choose others but it would be suicide because the weapons I mentioned are the best.

In most counter strike matches...if you die, you're dead. That's it...you wait until it's over. That's hardcore and most of the people who play CoD would probably rage quit because of that. It's just such a different game. One mistake and you're done. No chance for revenge. Sorry dude you blew it.

That's why I can't play CS, I'm not good enough to stay alive. I do like games that reward you for acting as a team, but I'm not hardcore enough to not get shot before I shoot the other guy lol. Also as it pertains to CoD a lot of the maps have no elevation and the ones that do aren't popular...I like games that reward you for taking the high ground and getting the birds eye view.

Competitive cod4 on pc is only search & destroy, same as cs. Might be different for consoles though (there are some competitive console players too). I don't think we will see a competitive scene for Titanfall on pc though. Too much randomness.

 

[sushiwarrior]

I think only cod4 was played competitively on pc and they use a mod called promod which limits perks and weapons. Actually, only 3 weapons are used: ak-47 ar, ak-74 smg and the m40 sniper. Not sure if you can choose others but it would be suicide because the weapons I mentioned are the best.


Competitive cod4 on pc is only search & destroy, same as cs. Might be different for consoles though (there are some competitive console players too). I don't think we will see a competitive scene for Titanfall on pc though. Too much randomness.

M4 was seem occasionally too! But yes, they cut the weapons list down into almost nothing. Promod was really as close to CS as you could get with the COD4 engine, same cutdown weapons, same game mode, similar weapon types (big emphasis on headshots and more recoil than other standard guns).

 

[dguy6789]

Don't must COD tournaments use the default set ups? That would make it just like Titanfall. No leveling up or customization needed. Default loadouts only.

CoD tourneys allow players to use their own custom loadouts. Tourney series do tend to look at perks and weapons and decide if they need to be banned from play or not but aside from those people can use any loadout they want.

 

[Lil Frier]

however, it's notworthy that TtF's "only 6v6" thread has 500 posts in it; some good some bad, but there's surely more interest in it that in the quake threads.

The comparison there's not fair, seeing as Titanfallis about to launch and there hasn't been a true Quake game since 2005 (Quake Wars was 2007). I mean, if I was told that we'll get a Quake 5 as soon as an AT forums thread about it hits 500 posts, I'd be posting non-stop for the next 2 days to make that happen.

 

[EDUSAN]

a friend told me that the full titanfall game will be roughly 50gb

the beta was 20... thats... kinda... a lot

 

[sze5003]

I bet if I buy the disc for PC it will still try and download like 40gb

 

[smackababy]

a friend told me that the full titanfall game will be roughly 50gb

the beta was 20... thats... kinda... a lot

Well, the Xbox One version was reported by Zampanella to be 48gb installed, so the PC version is probably around there.

 

[Clinkster]

a friend told me that the full titanfall game will be roughly 50gb

the beta was 20... thats... kinda... a lot

Hey if it's got tons of content, that's fantastic.

The space has to be used for SOMETHING, right?

 

[Dankk]

Titanfall's PC download size will be 21GB. The full, uncompressed install size will be 48GB. This is according to the developer's twitter feed.

https://twitter.com/VinceZampella/status/437980161263153152

A lot of people are freaking out and wondering what all of those 48 gigs actually contain. The game is multiplayer-only, so there's no singleplayer content to worry about. So what could it be?

Let's look at it a little closer: The game is releasing with, I think, 15 maps. IMO that's a considerably higher number of maps than your average modern multiplayer shooter gives you these days. So that's definitely part of it.

Another part is the textures. According to the developer, the textures were compressed for the beta... to be exact, the texture resolution was compressed to only 25% of their original size for the beta. (Although I may be confusing the alpha with the beta). The full game should look nicer and feature higher resolution graphics than the beta.

The biggest factor, however, is the audio. Audio cannot be compressed in the same way graphics can be. Ask any developer and they will say that high-quality audio takes up a lot of space. From what I've heard, in the 12GB PC beta download, 8GB of that was purely audio. And Titanfall uses a lot of audio. It's hard to tell when you're actually playing, but if you pay attention, you'll notice there's a ton of audio being used in this game. Sound effects, environment noises, solider chatter, weapon fire, music, etc, etc. The game is really aurally complex and there's a ton of high-quality sound they need to use to achieve that.

All these things combined would plausibly explain the space requirement.

 

[Randum]

Holy storage space! I don't mind it because storage is so cheap now - and I also did not realize there is no single player component - I am totally fine with that considering the multiplayer component looks to be pretty awesome.

I mean my personal play habits, if it has a multiplayer "focus" I don't touch the single player - I'm looking at you BF4 and COD titles!!!

 

[BrightCandle]

Maybe its those insane textures that:
a) Don't look any better than the high ones
b) Take up an absolute tonne of space

 

[coffeejunkee]

Holy storage space! I don't mind it because storage is so cheap now - and I also did not realize there is no single player component - I am totally fine with that considering the multiplayer component looks to be pretty awesome.

I mean my personal play habits, if it has a multiplayer "focus" I don't touch the single player - I'm looking at you BF4 and COD titles!!!

Storage is more expensive than ever, at least if you use an ssd (well, ok not ever).

Those 25% compressed textures for the beta could explain why some stuff looked so last century, like the inside of the dropship and titans.

Also, considering most people can't hear the difference between cd and 128kbps mp3, I would have preferred some middleground. Then make a high quality sound texture pack available for the audiophiles.