By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Microsoft saved Titanfall from being canned, sony lacked cooperation/openness

So it isn't fake? Glad MS kept the game alive.



Around the Network
MB1025 said:
Namiirei said:

Fauxbuzz.com

Seriously, i don't even know how you can go on site like this one to search for reliable sources.

Faux = False in french, and this story is only on this site. (and if it's real...Ea who need funding ? Serious ? )

It is real. That site reported it directly from The Final Hours of Titanfall documentary.

Also why is it surprising EA wanted to find funding? A new IP that usn't theirs and only under their partnership program. Why should they g all in when someone else is willing to fund.

It also seems like Respawn wanted to play each company off of each other to get more money.

I believe people forget that the deal between EA and Respawn is EA Partners.  In other words the game is not made by EA, they only funded so much to Respawn and anything additional neededre-investment.  People keep forgetting that there was a lot of risk for EA and all this happen before the E3 reveal.  People keep thinking that EA has bottomless pockets but forget that they have been in the red for years.  Its clear that from the beginning that MS was in the ear of EA and Respawn before the project was even fully formed.  This is no different from Efforts Sony has done with developers they trust as well.



cmay227 said:
ryuzaki57 said:

It took only one year for Mass Effect 2 iirc

Mass effect 2 was not published by MS

Titanfall wasn't published by MS either :p



I don't get why EA needed to get funding from a console maker. They should have had enough to make it. Sounds like bullshit even though I know it is real it just doesn't make sense. Why didn't EA just fund it after Respawn ran out of money unless they were really short in which case they should probably budget better in future or hire someone who can.Also if Respawn were paying to develop it why did they give EA so much power that they could sell the full exclusive rights to MS. Also why would Sony go a Vita version rather than a PS3 version if they didn't want to reveal anything about the PS4. They were clearly still supporting the PS3 last year.

Also confirms that the game was meant to have a single player. Guess TF2 should/will have it then.



JerCotter7 said:
I don't get why EA needed to get funding from a console maker. They should have had enough to make it. Sounds like bullshit even though I know it is real it just doesn't make sense. Why didn't EA just fund it after Respawn ran out of money unless they were really short in which case they should probably budget better in future or hire someone who can.Also if Respawn were paying to develop it why did they give EA so much power that they could sell the full exclusive rights to MS. Also why would Sony go a Vita version rather than a PS3 version if they didn't want to reveal anything about the PS4. They were clearly still supporting the PS3 last year.

Also confirms that the game was meant to have a single player. Guess TF2 should/will have it then.

First you have to understand that Titanfall is not an EA game.  EA is only the publisher of the game.  They get to decide what systems the game come out on.  Also you have to understand how EA Partners work compared to this being a EA game.  The Partner experience and contract can be very specific for the type of services Respawn want from EA.  

The reason EA has the power to work with MS for exclusive because Respawn signed a contract that EA is their exclusive publisher.  Respawn can keep their IP but to have their stuff publisher (probably more console than PC) EA is their sole resource.

My opinion is that EA Paided Respawn a decent amount of money to be their exclusive publisher but they did not fund anything thing for Respawn game.  At the time Respawn did not even have a game.  Making the game, Respawn ran out of money and it was decision time.  There is no way for EA to know if the game would be popular or sell and thus they looked for someone to defer the risk to complete the project.  Its evident that MS was always there and probably took a 5 min call to slot the the as a exclusive.



Around the Network
ryuzaki57 said:
cmay227 said:
ryuzaki57 said:

It took only one year for Mass Effect 2 iirc

Mass effect 2 was not published by MS

Titanfall wasn't published by MS either :p

No shit! Point? Titanfall is a Xbox & PC exclusive ..period. Not timed . That could change but not like ME2. with a year turnaround. Maybe 4 or 5. If you were talking about ME2 you should have stated that instead of just being general with the name Mass effect.



pokoko said:
Dark_Feanor said:


The answer was given here many times:

Sony didn´t have the resources to fund and suport the game the same way Microsoft had.

If now with all the PS4 success Sony has laidoff duzens of developers on their first party studios do you think Sony would have enouth to spare two years ago on a new third party game?

No, that's just not realistic.  Sony could easily have spent a few million dollars on Titanfall.  That's nothing to a company the size of Sony.  This is obviously not a full funding issue.

This is deeper than that.  There are a lot of unanswered questions.  What was EA trying to accomplish?  Did they start a bidding war?  What were they telling Sony, that if they didn't match Microsoft then it would be an XO exclusive for a limited time?  Because that's what Respawn seemed to think.  If that's the case then I can't really blame Sony for backing away.

Before we say Sony made a mistake or did not make a mistake, I think we'd have to know the full story behind what EA was doing.  If they came to Sony first and Sony didn't want any part of Titanfall, that's one thing, but if they were demanding Sony pay up just to keep the game multi-platform, that's a bad direction for publishers to take.

First paragraph is a little naive. When you are as in debt as SOny, you don't throw around cash because you can. Also, historically they don't buy exclusivity, only exclusive content. They just like to be given 3rd party exclusives and not actually pay for them.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

I am going to read the book before commenting...



Sony didn't care because they are broke or dont have the servers to run this game.

Banned - Kantor



CommonNinja said:

Glad Microsoft Stepped in to help, Titanfall is an AMAZING game!

As far as the whole exclusivity deal goes, Microsoft deserved it if they were actually funding game development, but EA should have been more open with Respawn about the Deal and actually got their consent rather than keeping it a secret until they officially anounced it to the press.

Agreed with the bolded. Reading the piece, I have been moved from a position of wishing everyone could experience such a great game, to hoping it sparks enough sales and revenue to seem worth it to MS. If that means future games are MS exclusive or whatever, so be it.

It's a great read, people should check it out. One of my favorite aspects thus far is how much of an impact the difficult PS3 had in the development of the game. Titanfall might not be on Sony platforms, but as a result of a Sony platform, the game launched with no SP and what some would describe as kind of bare bones MP. They went with a free engine provided by Insomniac because they were very worried about Source hitting 60 frames on PS3. Yet design was so slow on that engine that the game went nowhere. Then Portal 2 hit on PS3 and they decided to give Source another shot. In the end it didn't matter, MS provided crucial funds and the game never shipped on the PS3.

Some of the earlier designs were cool as well, including a horde type shooter where you and a squad of buddies tried to survive on an alien planet. Also, the AI roles in MP began as a squad for each player, each with a different role that you could switch to on the fly using the d-pad and while not in control they'd run off and do their own thing.