Titanfall

[Ed Oscuro]

Played it and I like the whole lack of any single player mode. If anything I think it is still a bit story heavy [...] if you really want a story it's there for you, but if not just dive in

Sounds like it's workable.

Agree with the people above getting KAI the business for pretending that Japanese mecha games haven't been the same thing over and over since ZOE (or possibly even the very first Armored Core), stylistically. The Titanfall screenshot doesn't look terrible - glitches aside, not a masterpiece of design composition, but looks like it's probably okay to look at. Just more of the same CoD / Borderlands (or even Unreal Tournament 2004 / 3, actually) junk aesthetic really.

I've said before that I think that a lot of the overly aggressive picture quality improvements are due to reviewers, but probably it's more broad - the tightly-knight community including also marketing and developers. That said, there were times when frame drops may well have been the better choice (i.e., some N64 games, arguably). Likewise, it probably is much harder to profile games for consistent framerates now than in the old days. Even so, now that game budgets have exploded beyond reason and the new machines are still capable enough to saturate 1080p TVs with detail that most people won't see, maybe we'll start to see some ground back for consistent framerates.

That depends on "disruptive new technologies" and their processing demands, though, or how much system processing needs to be dedicated to Social Media functions. :L

About adaptive VSync - I almost swallowed Friendly's propaganda whole there, but then I remembered how Adaptive VSync typically works:

If frame rate is more than or equal to 60Hz, cap at 60 and enable VSync.
Otherwise, if frame rate is less than 60Hz, disable VSync.

It's no great surprise that a game which is struggling to reach 60Hz on its platform will have tearing below 60Hz. PC gamers have been dealing with this for a long time. The alternatives probably would have been:
Stutter (duplicated frames, i.e. missing an entire frame and coming back for the next go-round);
slowdown (and slowdown, of course, isn't an option in a multi-client game);
a lowered frame rate cap all the time (duplicated frames are this in miniature, as I've defined it).

Tearing is one of the less invasive options for dealing with inadequate performance. For a game like Titanfall, it's probably the best answer of the possibilities. None are really good though. A 30Hz cap would only make sense in the case of a slower-paced game that requires precision movement or visuals, but since when did a PaRappa-style game push even the Xbox One? 60Hz with duplicated frame stutter would be awful here because that totally ruins movement speed and fluidity.

Depending on how Titanfall deals with its out-of-step frames (i.e., only part of a frame rendered in the time nominally allocated to one frame, 16ms) you should get more-or-less accurate movement - so while the slowdown might be evident, the timing of your movement and aiming should be the same; you're just getting your input ticks in on a slower basis and of course the visuals are jacked up somewhat. This is bad, but probably less bad than skipping out on a whole frame.

Edit: That being said, Eurogamer mentions "judder" in Titanfall on Xbox One, which I take to mean that you don't get easily predictable frames, or portions of frames, dropped in. This would be expected with the framerate-limited tearing if performance requirements from moment to moment are varying wildly. The question therefore is really how often the system deals this badly with moments, or maybe that's "periods," of poor performance.

I'm not sure how reliable Eurogamer's wording is here, because here's a quite from their closing:

By and large, when you need the signature twitch-levels of response, Titanfall delivers, but it does so at a price - eye-rending screen-tear.

This suggests that frame (or frame-bit) pacing is still acceptable even when the actual frame rate drops.

[Astraea FGA Mk. I]

Eventually when only a small portion of the current player base remains how will this game be played?

[ryu]

Eventually when only a small portion of the current player base remains how will this game be played?

not at all, the servers will be shut down

[Astraea FGA Mk. I]

Eventually when only a small portion of the current player base remains how will this game be played?

not at all, the servers will be shut down

Exactly.

I see the situation with these new consoles as madness, both the developers and players have lost their minds.

[Krooze L-Roy]

Eventually when only a small portion of the current player base remains how will this game be played?

not at all, the servers will be shut down

Exactly.

I see the situation with these new consoles as madness, both the developers and players have lost their minds.

See, I'd be willing to dish out full price for an online-only game if I felt like it would be treated as more than a mere stopgap before the inevitable sequel. The relentless cycle of "pay 60 bucks, then $15 for more maps, then $15 for more maps, then $15 for more maps, then kiss all the old maps goodbye and pay another sixty for the sequel," is just too brutal. Unless you're solely dedicated to that one particular series, the overall value (as measured by hours of entertainment per dollar) of chasing that dragon is horrendous.

For me, the primary enjoyment of playing an online FPS is in becoming intimately familiar with the maps, and getting to the point where you can pull off clever tactics within the framework they provide. When I get the hankerin' to shoot some fools, I want to slip into something familiar and comfortable (which is why I always end up defaulting back to CS or TF2). The business model used by Guitar Hero/Rock Star - where all previous songs automatically migrate to the sequel - is a bit closer to sanity, but I'd like to see a business model where there aren't sequels, and all new content is released (and at a slower pace/lower cost) as DLC. In other words, treat the game as a platform.

The "cash and burn" business model is still a rip-roaring success, so I don't foresee any of the major players going this route, but I think a less aggressive business model would pay off. Sure there's a sucker born every minute, but there's also an increasing number of people who have been spoiled by Steam sales and are highly value conscious; market to them. I'm willing to be someone's cash cow, but only if they go easy on the teats.

And hell, you'd think the mere existence of Nintendo would clue people in on the power of cultivating brand loyalty. Yet few companies even make an attempt.

[HydrogLox]

I see the situation with these new consoles as madness, both the developers and players have lost their minds.

No - the influx of mainstream consumers and cash may have kicked off what some called the "golden age" of video games - but the volume of cash also ultimately attracted a different type of business. In previous (console) generations video game developers/publishers were primarily "product oriented" - in order to make money they had to repeatedly put new product on the market that people were willing to pay for. Games with more "play-value" were more desirable but the per-unit profit didn't change whether the customer played the game for minutes or hours (ignoring the profit damage potential of a used game that is quickly resold). Now we are seeing many developers/publishers that are more "service oriented" - they want to see more money coming in if players keep playing the game. A game is shut down when the cash flow from it diminishes (an approach that doesn't tend to work for niche genres or games).

In a sense we have come full circle. In the past arcade operators have offered video games as a service (for "the credit"). When customers stopped playing on a cab it got swapped out (i.e. the game "goes away") for a more lucrative one. So what we are witnessing here is just on a grander scale - confused by the fact that there is the "initial admission fee" of the console and game "purchase".

We aren't that far away from a monthly fee gaming service where you get unlimited access to 5 games of your choice (configurable monthly) and you pay extra for your time on other games. Games that don't pull in sufficient revenue (compared to their operating cost) get retired.

[Teufel_in_Blau]

We aren't that far away from a monthly fee gaming service where you get unlimited access to 5 games of your choice (configurable monthly) and you pay extra for your time on other games. Games that don't pull in sufficient revenue (compared to their operating cost) get retired.

You know, I would honestly subscribe to a service which would provide me with a constant stream of CAVE shmups and some other arcade style games like Burnout or Catherine (It's a fantastic puzzle game at heart with an enjoyable story) but not for those playable movies or online multiplayer stuff.

[HydrogLox]

You know, I would honestly subscribe to a service which would provide me with a constant stream of CAVE shmups and some other arcade style games

The issue is that a games-as-services business aims to realize certain economies of scale that require COD/Battlefield/Halo/etc. size audiences (which is where Titanfall wants to be) - so games developed by a "boutique developer" that have a comparatively low volume distribution in the market probably won't get a shot. Which basically means that the arcade style fix would more likely come from outfits like PopCap Games.

[Teufel_in_Blau]

From a realistic POV you are probably right, HydrogLox.

Also, it hurts me to see cheap cash-ins for the braindead getting called arcade games, it's like people have no fucking idea what an arcade game even is today, which makes me feel old, which makes me even more angrier, a vicious cycle. But then I think how the Wii/360/PS3 gen turned out with tons of great games even though we had shit like DLCs etc. The new gen is still very young and I try to stay optimistic.

/e
I kind of realized that we are drifting away from the topic and it's partly my fault too. I wish everyone who enjoys FPS MP games to have fun. I heard that the core game from TF is pretty solid and fun.

[system11]

We aren't that far away from a monthly fee gaming service where you get unlimited access to 5 games of your choice (configurable monthly) and you pay extra for your time on other games. Games that don't pull in sufficient revenue (compared to their operating cost) get retired.

Hopefully this doesn't come to pass - it will inflict death warrants on any game on the service. Also I doubt it would sufficiently fund AAA games, it would just be shovelware.

[HydrogLox]

I kind of realized that we are drifting away from the topic...

You are correct when it comes to "Titanfall - the game". But there is also the issue that Titanfall is somewhat different from similar games before it (i.e. it is more costly to operate than other MP FPS that came before it).

Also I doubt it would sufficiently fund AAA games, it would just be shovelware.

But "AAA games" are the ones that are fueling this transition. They are the ones that created these behemoths that require significant funding to keep running. In the long view we are looking at a monthly subscription fee equivalent to a "AAA" release if games are no longer purchased outright.
With Titanfall the dynamics between service and developer seem to be shifting. XBL wants to retain and grow their subscriber base so they beef up their infrastructure in return for an exclusive futuristic COD-style game. Respawn Entertainment acts as the content provider. As far as Respawn is concerned XBL already has a large subscriber base and given that they don't have to manage the game servers and the server code is vendor-locked anyway, exclusivity isn't a big deal. But for the time being they are still getting their money through the traditional charge model: game and DLC purchases.

• The service needs a large base of paying subscribers. The subscription fee would have to be substantially higher if games and DLC are no longer purchased outright. To retain a sufficiently large subscriber base the games portfolio needs to be attractive - i.e. it needs to include a good number of AAA titles.
• A AAA title developer would only want to publish on a service with a large subscriber base in order to capture a lucrative revenue stream when the title places in the top 5 titles on the service (unless the title is financed by the service directly).

The challenge for the service is to offer a content provider profit-sharing funding formula that will attract AAA titles.
The avalanche has already started...

[Udderdude]

So the 360 version finally came out. I can't possibly imagine why they delayed it's release ..

http://i.imgur.com/xKYFrJ2.jpg

[austere]

Titan fall... [in frame rate and resolution].