Titanfall's First DLC Map Pack Launches in May - $10 for 3 Maps

[Mahorfeus]

$10 is really not that much. It could pay for what? One-third of a lunch at Panera? I don't own this game (yet), but frankly I'm not seeing the problem. The content will at least add longevity in the long run. And if you're not willing to pay that much, well, you didn't need it in the first place.

Its not much, you can only buy 2 games on steam for that. Oh, wait, what was that, 3 maps? definatelly "Worth it".
Also what is Panera?

Panera Bread is a cafe/bakery/foodplace. Probably overpriced, but it's better than fast food and cheaper than sit-down-and-wait restaurants.

Frankly, if there were two games on Steam that I wanted that I could get for that cheap, I'd just buy them. But at that price, chances are I either already have them or that they just don't have much mileage. Or they could just end up like 75% of the Steam and Humble Bundle games I own and never even get installed.

On the other hand, if there is a game I already genuinely enjoy playing for days on end, then 10 bucks is not too much to ask for. Hell, maybe I could just get the map pack and those two Steam games. Or I could just buy four $5 Steam games. Or two $10 ones. Or one $15 game and yadda yadda yadda.

 

[Denamic]

Haha, nope!
I was waiting for this. I didn't buy the game at launch because I wanted to see how they handled 'map packs'. I'll just be ignoring this game from here on out.

That's sad, you're actually missing out on a decent game. Titanfall (360 version) is the most fun I've had with a FPS game since Unreal Tournament.

I don't doubt it's a good game, but I refuse to support this business practice.

 

[XDSkyFreak]

Yes, now give me some actual evidence that they claim to be.

Fine. For the record i only went after CoD here.

To enhance the realistic feel of the game, the development team attended a live-fire exercise at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, a training facility in the California desert.

from the development section of wiki for CoD 4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty_4:_Modern_Warfare and is the earliest claim to realism for the modern part of this shooter series.

Thanks to the new engine, the cod: ghosts guns have received huge upgrades and are like their real-life counterparts

from a short description of CoD Ghosts from http://www.cod7blackops.com/ claiming your guns are just like real life. I'll go ahead and asume it's claim to realism for this modern shooter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNxh7umVOZ0

this the live action trailer for ghosts with the tagline "there is a soldier in all of us". When you make a live action trailer for a video game with that tagline you want to send one message as a marketing department "our game is so realistic you won't even know your playing a game, it will feel just like real life". So again, this series claims to be a realistic depiction of modern warfare. And Ghost ain the only one: Blops 2 has one, MW3 has one. Blops has a commercial with the tagline. Yeah ... this counts as the games claiming to be realistic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pblj3JHF-Jo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wIZp_E2CxQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuzaxlddWbk

As does the choice of subject and weapons. I mean if they just wanted to make a multyplayer shooter why not only do that? Why specificaly choose to focus the theme of everything on modern real life military hardware and procedures going so far as having your devs study real life guns and vehicles and ordnance and bringing in military experts to help you with your game (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9PUmif9g5I this guy was a military advisor for all cod games until that point)? Why brag about all this if you are not claiming indirectly through these things that your game is an accurate and realistic depiction of realistic modern warfare?

There. Here is your proof. Here are part the claims to realism this game has. Now exercise some open-mindness and understanding of what marketing is transmiting for the rest of the games that fall in this genre and maybe do your own research next time.

 

[XDSkyFreak]

So god only knows how many years ago this one little game called Counter Strike comes out and you get to pick what map you want to play in every game and you get to create your own maps and you can make dedicated servers with your own rules that you and your friends can play on and you can play on LAN to avoid all the lag of connecting to company servers.

and the result was: everyone was playing de_dust.
The reason you dont get to choose maps is usually simple: community hates most maps. does not mean the maps are bad though. just disliked because instant gratification players.

Well ... idk where you got that but let me tell you: out of i'd say thousands dedicated servers of CS 1.6 and now CS:GO that i have regulalrly played on at some point in my life all of them were de_dust marathons ... oh wait, no they weren't. They were servers with map list of at least 100 maps that cycled after each game with a randomization factor and which didn't allow for the same map to appear twice in a cycle.
And it wasn't even de_dust. The most popular map for CS was de_dust2, and even that was not spam played on servers I spent my time on. Not even my OCD CS playing friends were obsesed with that map, the prefered the fy_, awp_ and aim_ type maps because those were, in their opinion, true tests of skill for players.

 

[Rodolphe Kourkenko]

You very well knew what they were saying back then, dont try to twist their words.

By your logic then if I buy a digital game then its a micro-transaction. Or an expansion pack like the ones in GTA IV or Red Dead Redemption.

Nope, i don't twist their words. They said "no microtransactions", an extansion pack isn't a microtransaction, if you look just under my post, you'll find the very definition of what is a microtransactions: this map pack is a microtransaction, period.

 

[josemlopes]

-snip-

Yes, clearly it's all a matter of nostalgia and there's not a whiff of objectivity to be found.

It's not like we can go back to look at popular expansion packs from the 90s and early 2000s and compare them to this map pack....oh, wait, we totally can.

Please, try to compare either of Blizzard's expansion packs for Diablo 2 and Starcraft 1 to this map pack and try to explain to me how the map pack isn't significantly less content for its asking price. I would absolutely enjoy you trying to make that argument, considering both featured a significant revamping of the original game and made dozens of changes to be enjoyed on your own OR with friends for around $35, and this map pack is literally 3 extra PvP maps (and nothing else) for $10.

Hell, compare it to Diablo 3's expansion pack, if you please. Because that's arguably overpriced for what it offers, and yet it still features an additional campaign, a level cap increase, several dozen new items, a new class, a new game mode, as well as additional "end-game" content for $40. And this map pack, again, is three maps (and nothing else) for $10.

Much as I dislike Blizzard for various things, I find it hard for anyone to argue that their expansion packs don't look likea hell of a lot more bang for your buck (considering their average longevity is around a decade or so) than a few extra maps on a shooter that you probably won't be playing in two years anyways. That's not a problem exclusive to Titanfall, mind, that's a problem with most shooters in general. They sell you individual maps on games that, rather often, lose a huge portion of their player base within a year because the next title is out by then.

But go ahead and keep pretending it's "nostalgia" that makes me think expansion packs are so much better, and not the massive breadth of content they provide for your money when compared to "map packs". Doesn't really bother me that you don't have any standards to speak of.

This isnt a well priced map pack, I'll give you that, but "back then" it wasnt all that better either in terms of what they tried to sell you as extra content for a game.

Spoiler

It may look like a lot but all it is is a lot of shit.

Doesn't really bother me that you don't have any standards to speak of.

And how is the Escapist the place where most comments are filled with passive agressive insults? Is it because we cant insult using real offensive words? I mean, you are clearly bothered or you wouldnt have took the time to reply and you clearly insult me by saying that I dont have any standards so what is the point? Are we pretending that we are more polite then the other forums since we dont call eachothers names?

All in all, you have good expansion packs and you have bad expansion packs, the same goes with DLC (Red Dead Redemption and Mass Effect 3 for example) and even microtransactions (Mass Effect 3) so get off your high horse, back then it was the same as it is today but with different business models.

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

I bought the season pass for the discounted amount and I hope they chuck some new weapons in along with the three maps. I can understand why they don't add in more titans, as it could break the finely tuned balance.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Why were people so hyped about this game again?

Were they really expecting something different?

To be fair, the core gameplay does look like a lot more fun than the generic military shooters that keep getting spewed out. I was actually considering picking it up on 360 (no way am I buying a new system just for this thing when the 360 version plays exactly the same but looks a bit worse -not that this game looks amazing to begin with) but the lack of content and now them charging this much for stuff that probably should have been in the original game (I'm not usually against map pack, but when a game has so little content to begin with... ugh) has swayed me from doing so.

I guess people were psyched about the core gameplay and the fact that it's being marketed as Xbone's flagship. Had they added enough content to actually make it worth the price tag, it may have lived up to (or at least gotten close) the hype. Looks like it's just gonna be another cow that will end up over milked by EA. I'm actually sad because the game does look fairly innovative.

 

[josemlopes]

snip

Am I talking to a wall? How is it not nostalgia to say that "that expansion packs generally offered a better value for your money than any modern map pack ever has". You are right if you go by EA and Activision standards but for a lot of other cases you are wrong. My point is that there are good examples and bad examples and you still hammer that back then things were generally great and now they are overcharging things without considering thing, just GTAV and Team Fortress 2 shits all over your mentality with a shit load of free content that keeps being added (even Bad Company 2 had free maps, latter on they released an expansion about Vietnam where everything was new but the engine and game mechanics for 15$).

You cant just look at the bad stuff now and compare it to the good stuff back then, you know, nostalgia.

And I am not asking you to be civil, I am asking you to be direct.


Also 50 levels of shit isnt better then 3 good multiplayer levels that you will be playing multiple times, imagine a multiplayer game with 50 shitty levels and then realize that in multiplayer there are usually servers that rotate the same levels over and over because they are that good. Do you really just go quantity over quality?

As I said before, this isnt a very nice deal but things certainly havent changed all that much.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

I spend 10 dollars each day on lunch, and I'll get quite a few hours entertainment out of this so I'm perfectly happy to pick this up.

Plus I want to support this game considering it's the first actually good multiplayer game to be released in quite some time.

This thread is full of blind hate. DLC maps are nothing new, just MORE things added that don't do anything wrong.

I don't think I've seen anything but blind hate for this game. I don't get it... Titanfall is so much fun it's ridiculous.

 

[Strazdas]

Panera Bread is a cafe/bakery/foodplace. Probably overpriced, but it's better than fast food and cheaper than sit-down-and-wait restaurants.

Frankly, if there were two games on Steam that I wanted that I could get for that cheap, I'd just buy them. But at that price, chances are I either already have them or that they just don't have much mileage. Or they could just end up like 75% of the Steam and Humble Bundle games I own and never even get installed.

On the other hand, if there is a game I already genuinely enjoy playing for days on end, then 10 bucks is not too much to ask for. Hell, maybe I could just get the map pack and those two Steam games. Or I could just buy four $5 Steam games. Or two $10 ones. Or one $15 game and yadda yadda yadda.

so its sort of a minie restaurant. and it costs 30 dollars to eat lunch there? jesus. i eat perfectly fine luch for 4 dollars at a local restaurant here if/when i bother going there. and its not a fast food place.
see, the point here is not that you rich and can affort spending money on games but the value fier your buck here when you can buy two games for the same price as 3 maps in a game you already paid 60 dollars for.

Well ... idk where you got that but let me tell you: out of i'd say thousands dedicated servers of CS 1.6 and now CS:GO that i have regulalrly played on at some point in my life all of them were de_dust marathons ... oh wait, no they weren't. They were servers with map list of at least 100 maps that cycled after each game with a randomization factor and which didn't allow for the same map to appear twice in a cycle.
And it wasn't even de_dust. The most popular map for CS was de_dust2, and even that was not spam played on servers I spent my time on. Not even my OCD CS playing friends were obsesed with that map, the prefered the fy_, awp_ and aim_ type maps because those were, in their opinion, true tests of skill for players.

while such servers did indeed exist they were in far minority and wast majority played de_dust2 (i just shortened the name and i dont know why, bah, i was never invested in CS that much anyway). Im not saying that choice of maps is bad though, im saying that locking soem of thme behind a paywall means that once those maps get popular its hardly optional.

 

[XDSkyFreak]

while such servers did indeed exist they were in far minority and wast majority played de_dust2 (i just shortened the name and i dont know why, bah, i was never invested in CS that much anyway). Im not saying that choice of maps is bad though, im saying that locking soem of thme behind a paywall means that once those maps get popular its hardly optional.

Hit the nail on the head here mate. I'll give it that maybe I just got lucky with my servers and that maybe having the game decide the map that gets played isn't as bad because all maps get chosen at some point. Fair game. But even if we ignore the bullshit value for money scam this game pulls on it's players and the total lack of agency of it's gameplay, when you make guns and maps and lock them behind a paywall, then it becomes mandatory to buy them. Because if the majority of players unlocks the paywall then those who don't will simply become isolated from those who did, as it is no longer fair game to play with people that use guns you don't get to use and you certainly can't play on the maps they play. Basicaly if all the blind 14 year olds with 0 understanding of value for money decide getting scamed like they did with this DLC is ok then tough shit sensible person who thinks extra payment for content in an already starved for content 60 dolar game is a tad bit stupid, if you want to keep having a stable amount of players to enjoy the game with then fork out the cash.

 

[Mahorfeus]

Panera Bread is a cafe/bakery/foodplace. Probably overpriced, but it's better than fast food and cheaper than sit-down-and-wait restaurants.

Frankly, if there were two games on Steam that I wanted that I could get for that cheap, I'd just buy them. But at that price, chances are I either already have them or that they just don't have much mileage. Or they could just end up like 75% of the Steam and Humble Bundle games I own and never even get installed.

On the other hand, if there is a game I already genuinely enjoy playing for days on end, then 10 bucks is not too much to ask for. Hell, maybe I could just get the map pack and those two Steam games. Or I could just buy four $5 Steam games. Or two $10 ones. Or one $15 game and yadda yadda yadda.

so its sort of a minie restaurant. and it costs 30 dollars to eat lunch there? jesus. i eat perfectly fine luch for 4 dollars at a local restaurant here if/when i bother going there. and its not a fast food place.
see, the point here is not that you rich and can affort spending money on games but the value fier your buck here when you can buy two games for the same price as 3 maps in a game you already paid 60 dollars for.

Precisely.

If I'm hypothetically invested in Titanfall's multiplayer, then I am more than likely to play those DLC maps quite a lot over the next year or so. If I do, I am getting more value for my dollar than I would with a cheap Steam game that I would either play once or never play at all. That isn't to say that there aren't good cheap Steam games - oh, there are plenty. Just none that would necessarily be worth the price.

The DLC's development is the only problem I really have. Being put out so close to the game's release makes me wonder how far along the content already was to being finished. I can understand paying more for content that was developed post-release, but having to pay extra for content that just needed polish is a bit much.

And yeah, Panera is expensive, but then again I usually pay for two people. But lunch there is something I could easily skip out on.

 

[josemlopes]

snip

At one point you say that you are comparing this map pack (something that I already said that it wasnt all that great) to classic expansions and at other points you say that you are just comparing to old expansions, what? Were all old expansions classics? Do you know why music from other generations sound great? Why the 80's seemed like fucking awesome? Because all everyone remembers are the good parts or the extremely bad. People remember Oblivions horse armor, Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine, the rest in between no one remembers. What I showed you for Quake existed for a shitload of other games and they were all crap, Quake got two good expansion packs out of all those that werent even all that long (2 hours each).

You still have big expansions like in most Bethesda games and Bioware games (with Mass Effect 3 all the DLCs would be around the same price as an expansion pack offering the same or more amount of content). And the free content can be compared because back then you didnt get quality free content from the devs and now you do, how does an expansion pack compare to that? Both offer content except one is free and the other isnt.

 

[petercortijo]

Can someone please explain to me why most of the commentators here are skipping over half the original post and are focusing all their attention (and resentment towards EA) on the dlc news? Yes, the dlc seems (and is) overpriced and i bet EA had a hand in it but why focus so much on the negative when just a few lines down there is some truly awesome news about upcoming updates which are FREE (just in case some people missed that). Maybe its just that I'm new to the Escapist and this is just how the community here is...hope not.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

Can someone please explain to me why most of the commentators here are skipping over half the original post and are focusing all their attention (and resentment towards EA) on the dlc news? Yes, the dlc seems (and is) overpriced and i bet EA had a hand in it but why focus so much on the negative when just a few lines down there is some truly awesome news about upcoming updates which are FREE (just in case some people missed that). Maybe its just that I'm new to the Escapist and this is just how the community here is...hope not.

The majority of people here irrationally hate EA and Titanfall. Given the amount of hate it gets, you'd think the game killed their dog or something.

Welcome to the Escapist by the way.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

while such servers did indeed exist they were in far minority and wast majority played de_dust2 (i just shortened the name and i dont know why, bah, i was never invested in CS that much anyway). Im not saying that choice of maps is bad though, im saying that locking soem of thme behind a paywall means that once those maps get popular its hardly optional.

Fair game. But even if we ignore the bullshit value for money scam this game pulls on it's players and the total lack of agency of it's gameplay,

Ok I want to see an explanation for this one. How does the gameplay possibly lack player agency? That's a freaking ludicrous assertion.