Quantcast
Why Titanfall is an Xbox One Exclusive

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Why Titanfall is an Xbox One Exclusive

@J_Allard:
Cheaper probably not... is MS charging for this to 3rd parties at all? More impressive though, most likely if the servers weren't windows based machines.



Talal said:
I will permaban myself if the game releases in 2014.

in reference to KH3 release date

Around the Network
Goatseye said:
pezus said:
 

Wii was significantly less powerful than PS3 and 360 was "hated" in Japan, so no, I'd say the reason that some Japanese devs snubbed them wasn't because of Sony's money. Lol @ writing Sony that way.

Are you comparing Wii support in Japan with Xbox's? What are some reason Japanese devs snubbed them?

Like I said...

Many devs are ambitious and wanted to see what they could do with significantly more power than the gen before. It's not easy to port a Wii game to PS3 or vice versa



VGKing said:

You are misinformed. The way that Titanfall is using the cloud is basically just as they would use dedicated servers. They're confirmed that themselves.

EA doesn't need to. They can just use Microsfots Azure servers for all platforms. Like I said before, these servers are available to use on any platform.

If they were using the cloud exactly as a dedicated server then they would just use EA's dedicated servers. In this video alone right here in this thread it's confirmed you're wrong, per usual. Maybe watch it?

You keep missing the point regarding other platforms. Could MS lease out Azure to EA so that they could make the game on PS4 and other competing platforms? Maybe. Would they give EA the same deal for PS4 use that they gave them for Xbox use? Hell no. Would EA still go forward with it at a higher price? Probably not, it's EA. And according to you they can do all of this on their own dedicated servers.



The trailer didn't impress me that much graphically and so it doesn't seem that hard to run on PC. Hopefully I will be able to run it with my PC at close to max.

The graphics somehow reminded me of CoD. I know, not very surprising.



VGKing said:
J_Allard said:
VGKing said:

Activsion is much better than EA at marketing their games and turning them into cultural phenomena.
EA pretty much are just copycats.

EA's answer to Tony Hawk = Skate
Guitar Hero = Rockband
Call of Duty = Battelfield(they tried with Medal of Honor but it didn't take)

EA just has too many games to market while Activison focuses on a few select few.

Both publishers do a phenomenal job of incrementally updating franchises and eventually running them into the ground. EA at least tries to spread around a bit. Activision focuses on what can make them the most money and just hammers away at it until nothing is left and then they move on. They are like the aliens from Independence Day.

By the way, your CoD part is hilarious considering

a. Both Battlefield and Medal of Honor came before Call of Duty
b. Infinity Ward, the team that made Call of Duty, was comprised entirely of people from the team that made MoH: Allied Assault. The game that really put Medal of Honor on the map.

I already know that. The MoH team made a niche game with EA that didn't really penetrate pop culture. With Activision the team was able to make a franchise that breaks entertainment records year after year and is the most popular video game franchise of all time.

I think this speaks a lot of Activisions power to create huge blockbuster franchises.

lol.. there was nothing niche about Medal of Honor. Either way sales are irrelevant, you listed two franchises as EA's "answer to CoD" yet these franchises not only existed before CoD but in the case of MoH, was even made by the guys who went on to make CoD. Clearly you had no idea what you are talking about and there's no point in continuing the discussion on my end.



Around the Network
binary solo said:
That "We're a small team and need to focus" comment would sound legit if the game really was XB One exclusive, but developing for the X360+PC+XB One sounds like a a pretty big ask. And given the similarities between PS4 and XB one hardware-wise I would think XB One+PS4 would be easier than XB One and X360.

I don't care that MS bought exclusivity, it's a legit business strategy. But I wish developers would cut the bullshit with trying to give any reason other than that they were paid to keep it in the [in this case] MS family. Just say MS wanted a great exclusive FPS experience for its new console and they brought us on board to deliver it.


Actually it does make a lot of sense since the team has a lot of experience on 360 and PC and there is only one new element which is the X1.  Throwing in the PS3, PS4 and Nintendo stuff would be a big challenge for a small team like this.

Also who is saying the dev is BSing.  They shopped around and MS paid the cash.  They were looking to release their game on one system and they found that MS had the resources to help them make what they wanted to do happen.  This happens all the time.  Sony has jumpped on games that developers have shopped around and so has MS.  Some developers look to make exclusives because its easier to make those games and even better if the console maker is willing to pony up some money.



J_Allard said:

lol.. there was nothing niche about Medal of Honor. Either way sales are irrelevant, you listed two franchises as EA's "answer to CoD" yet these franchises not only existed before CoD but in the case of MoH, was even made by the guys who went on to make CoD. Clearly you had no idea what you are talking about and there's no point in continuing the discussion on my end.

Medal of Honor and Battlefield never reached the success level that Call of Duty has. They never will. Just look at the latest Medal of Honor game. It's a complete joke. It doesn't matter which IP came first, Call of Duty, specifically COD4, completely innovated the genre and its the base for all FPS game made to this day. EA saw what Activision did with their "Medal of Honor clone" and tried to replicate that success. They failed becuase they're EA. That's the point here. If you can't see that, then you're delusional.

Tony Hawk, Guitar Hero, Call of Duty and soon Skylanders. There's a method to this "madness" or "milking" as you may call it. Activision knows how to handle their franchises. None of these can last forever so using Tony Hawk or Guitar Hero of how evil this company is for ruining these franchsies, just think for a little big. If it wasn't for Activision, these franchised would never have existed in the first place. If they didn't have yearly releases, they would never have been so popular and you might never have played these amazing games.

It may sound like I'm an Activision fanboy, but I'm not. I'm not buying this years Call of Duty. The franchise needs a shot in the arm and Ghosts isn't it.



kinect integration?



J_Allard said:
VGKing said:

You are misinformed. The way that Titanfall is using the cloud is basically just as they would use dedicated servers. They're confirmed that themselves.

EA doesn't need to. They can just use Microsfots Azure servers for all platforms. Like I said before, these servers are available to use on any platform.

If they were using the cloud exactly as a dedicated server then they would just use EA's dedicated servers. In this video alone right here in this thread it's confirmed you're wrong, per usual. Maybe watch it?

You keep missing the point regarding other platforms. Could MS lease out Azure to EA so that they could make the game on PS4 and other competing platforms? Maybe. Would they give EA the same deal for PS4 use that they gave them for Xbox use? Hell no. Would EA still go forward with it at a higher price? Probably not, it's EA. And according to you they can do all of this on their own dedicated servers.

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/pricing/purchase-options/

You can buy these Azure servers right now for any platform you want. We don't know if Microsoft gave EA a discount due to exclusivity, its unlikely I say since its coming to PC. What we do know is that the game is exclusive to MS platforms so that implies moneyhatting. Any other speculations is just that.....speculation.

@bold
They're using Azure severs because its cheaper. They offer a "Pay as you go" plan which means they don't have to worry about how many servers to have at launch or how many to cut in a few years once the game dies down. You pay for what you use, no more, no less. 

How does it feel to always be wrong? Maybe you should admit you have no idea what you're talking about.



VGKing said:

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/pricing/purchase-options/

You can buy these Azure servers right now for any platform you want. We don't know if Microsoft gave EA a discount due to exclusivity, its unlikely I say since its coming to PC. What we do know is that the game is exclusive to MS platforms so that implies moneyhatting. Any other speculations is just that.....speculation.

@bold
They're using Azure severs because its cheaper. They offer a "Pay as you go" plan which means they don't have to worry about how many servers to have at launch or how many to cut in a few years once the game dies down. You pay for what you use, no more, no less. 

How does it feel to always be wrong? Maybe you should admit you have no idea what you're talking about.

Respawn said MS made it cheaper than the alternatives. Again, maybe watch some of these videos? If Azure is that cheap by default, why didn't EA click on that link you gave years ago and just run their servers through there? All cloud/dedicated server providers I have ever seen provide you a pay as you go option and offer scalability. Respawn has also been on record as saying MS is handling all of this for them and how it's much different than what anyone else does. They also said they went to Sony and MS and MS was the only one with a solution for them. Maybe you should shoot Kaz a message and include the link? Then he can just give that to developers who come by LOL.

Somehow this is even funnier than earlier in this thread where you tried to tell us EA attempted to answer CoD with franchises that were around years longer than CoD and made by the CoD creators. In that case you were just misinformed and ignorant. In this case you have multiple videos posted on this forum letting you know these things I am telling you yet you're still denying them.

Thanks, but rather than a biased forum member, I think I will take the word of the people actually making the game.