Mystro-Sama said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
foodfather said:
Looks a lot better than I thought it would be. An 8 year old console has never had this much life in it. 360 is and always will be a beast. |
Dude...Titanfall isnt a demanding game. I've been saying this forever that its on par with COD Ghosts in graphics. Game looks essentially the same. They are old COD devs so their developmental style isn't all that different. Battlefield 4 has a much larger leap in graphics.
|
You can say it forever and as long as you want... it won´t make that less wishfull thinking... or does COD have maps as big as TF with multlevel verticalit and up to 50 "players" at the same time.
It´s your opnion, man. Others don´t have to agree.
|
Then you're just denying the obvious. Its not much of a debate anymore, bro( Sorry to say). The proof is there and everything I assumed was essentially correct. By setting my goals for the 360 version of this game based on previous work of the company I all I had to do was pay attention to their body of work to know how the next game would turn out. Bluepoint isn't a bad company either. They are actually one of the best porting companies in the industry when they made ports for Sony. I have an Xbone and trust me I have no issues with playing it, but MS is all propaganda as a company. They were dependent on outsiders to sell their console and hid the 360 version of the game, which I am sure was a stipulation EA added to maximize profits.
|
Maybe it's that oldass engine too.
|
Nah, that engine belongs to Activision, but they just remade something that works kinda similar, I am guessing. Its easier to play than COD for sure. When EA recieves more than reasonable profits for Titanfall (which it deserves) they'll give Respawn the money. Lord knows after Activision Respawn doesn't want to be purchased nor give their IP's to anyone.
