Four-hour campaign? Disappointed but I kind of expected that.
Four hours is honestly inexcusable given how hard they were pushing the campaign
4's the shortest I've heard out of all the reviews. Most peg it around 6-8.
Still short, but there ya go.
Multiplayer looks awesome though, its just the first game but with more. Exactly what I wanted out of it.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51255060]Four hours is honestly inexcusable given how hard they were pushing the campaign[/QUOTE]
I'd take a stellar 4-6 hours campaign over a padded out 8-12 hour campaign any day of the week.
[QUOTE=Pandamobile;51255440]I'd take a stellar 4-6 hours campaign over a padded out 8-12 hour campaign any day of the week.[/QUOTE]
I remember Binary Domain was a really fun game, but the ending at around 10 hours in tried to be MGS and had some really complicated scenes and the final missions were just setpieces. If Titanfall 2 can make for a fun, adrenaline-pumping, and decent written campaign, then 4-5 hours is good enough for me imo.
I don't think I've ever seen review gameplay from such a well known news source with such a good player showcasing the gameplay
4 fucking hours? Like do game developers even bother with singleplayer campaigns in FPS games anymore? What the fuck is the point.
[editline]25th October 2016[/editline]
I was gonna get this on release aswell but fuck that, I'll wait for it to be discounted like the first, it's honestly fucking bullshit that it's so short.
[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;51257850]4 fucking hours? Like do game developers even bother with singleplayer campaigns in FPS games anymore? What the fuck is the point.
[editline]25th October 2016[/editline]
I was gonna get this on release aswell but fuck that, I'll wait for it to be discounted like the first, it's honestly fucking bullshit that it's so short.[/QUOTE]
Quality over quantity. The game got a fucking nine...
The first one didn't even have a campaign.
[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;51257850]4 fucking hours? Like do game developers even bother with singleplayer campaigns in FPS games anymore? What the fuck is the point.
[editline]25th October 2016[/editline]
I was gonna get this on release aswell but fuck that, I'll wait for it to be discounted like the first, it's honestly fucking bullshit that it's so short.[/QUOTE]
Why does it matter? If the campaign was 10 hours, you'd still be spending the vast majority of the time playing multiplayer. If you're going out to get something like Titanfall 2 to mainly play its singleplayer campaign then what the fuck are you doing.
The length of the single player on a shooter like this isn't too important.
However, sad to hear that the single player doesn't provide much closure - but at least it is more of a thing than TF1 had for sure, being standalone and not some hamfisted multiplayer pseudostory.
snip
they were probably coasting through on the easiest difficulty, this is the only review saying the campaign is only 4 hours
[QUOTE=RichyZ;51258851]the idea is that now we have a 4 hour presumably shitty campaign taking budget away from the part of the game that we're ultimately going to be spending tens to hundreds of hours playing depending on the player[/QUOTE]
Except the campaign is apparently good despite the length? And the multiplayer has been near universally praised and considered an improvement?
[QUOTE=RichyZ;51258851]the idea is that now we have a 4 hour presumably shitty campaign taking budget away from the part of the game that we're ultimately going to be spending tens to hundreds of hours playing depending on the player[/QUOTE]
So you would rather have the Titanfall 1 issue of people bitching about no campaign at all again? It's a catch 22 of nobody winning, so they chose the path of least resistance which is a quaint campaign (which is actually about 6-8 hours which is fine) on top of a very robust multiplayer. It's the easiest shot at appeasing all parties.
Maybe it's 4 hours because the reviewer played on the easiest mode available so he could finish it quickly and put out a review.
What I wanted to know is whether or not they went back to the gameplay of TF1 because I heard that they slowed everyone down and made titans a killstreak reward in the MP test
[QUOTE=Dr.C;51259719]What I wanted to know is whether or not they went back to the gameplay of TF1 because I heard that they slowed everyone down and made titans a killstreak reward in the MP test[/QUOTE]
They fixed that and more. Titans are now earned the same way as TF1 and the game is [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOc1vp-Qtao]much faster[/url] than in the tech test. There have been a LOT of positive changes.
The new maps they've shown look much better, the orange glow on enemy pilots is pretty much gone, attrition is back, titans are more mobile, etc. I think the big things that may hold people back are the way titan loadouts are handled now and the new battery/rodeo-ing mechanics, but frankly your mileage may vary. I actually really like those two changes.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51255060]Four hours is honestly inexcusable given how hard they were pushing the campaign[/QUOTE]
Why would they push the campaign for what is usually a multiplayer game though?
I really don't get it when devs do this. But then again, there used to be great SP and MP games.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;51260009]Why would they push the campaign for what is usually a multiplayer game though?
I really don't get it when devs do this. But then again, there used to be great SP and MP games.[/QUOTE]
Because the last time they pushed the multiplayer for their multiplayer focused game (Titanfall 1), everyone complained how there wasn't a real single player campaign. Though it also doesn't help that they charged $60 for the original game + however much the season pass was for additional content.
With Titanfall 2, it's $60 for the main game, which now includes a proper single player campaign (albeit short, but what FPS campaigns aren't short these days), as well as all content related updates (maps, modes) being free. Hopefully, this means that the game's playerbase won't fall off the face of the earth in 6 months like last time. At the very least, the PS4 version will probably live on for awhile.
RE: 4h campaign
I only ever care how long it is for an average player to complete a campaign on the harder difficulties, and even then, the question is still 'is it fun' first and foremost. One thing I remember vividly when I'd play halo 3 and reach online, was that it seemed to be a weird common thing for dudebros to brag about how short and easy the campaign was, including saying it was only 4 or so hours and you can walk right through it. You check their profile, and it shows they've beaten it on easy or hadn't even completed it
still even having a campaign is a plus, I remember how salty I was to find out the campaign in the first one was essentially just pre-determined multiplayer battles
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
