Agreed 100% I got an X1 for the sole purpose of playing TF and I returned it the very next weekend. It's a good game don't get me wrong (the first time I played I didn't like it at all) but it's lacking in a lot of areas and seems really incomplete. I also agree 100% about the bots holding the game back. So many times I'm having fun in a game and then I kill a bot or get tricked by a bot and it just kills my mood. They're more of a destraction then anything else.

What I can't deny is that this game has the potential to be one of the best FPS games of all time (currently BF4 IMO). It just needs to make adjustments and add a lot of things but the potential is without a doubt there.

I've been reading this a lot. What is a generic FPS?

How the inclusion of the bot holds the game back?

Which shooters were better than Titanfall? And what aspects they edge Titanfall on?

I understand this, but it's about Titanfall's exclusivity and whether or not it helped Microsoft's or EA's end.  It's given boost during the launch week and a few afterwards, but what about now?  It's not pushing hardware anymore, do you think?  Checking out the weekly SW charts and you can seen sales declining quite rapidly for the XB1 version upon launch week and then the weeks after.  Checking out the hardware side and since launch you see the uptick, but week by week after, sales are basically almost back to numbers pre-titanfall release.  Not to mention, much of those hardware/software numbers are skewed due to the price cuts/ free game promo during that 2 wk period.  Also, you'd have to consider how much both sides have recouped for the promos/bundles/and ad costs.  It's not simple "X console outselling Y console" but "did X console with/because of/or Y software" sales justify the exclusivity in place? 

Personally.. we don't know what MS paid EA for exclusivity.  I personally believe, if anything, MS banked on the hype and probably overpaid thinking people were going flock to the xb1 for titanfall.  Just as well, EA probably felt underpaid because software revenue wise, they've could of easily covered what MS paid them and meet sales expectations much sooner had they also released it on Sony's platform (remember, this was also a time period where people on both platforms were literally starving for another game release).

As the OP's original topic.. Titanfall exclusivity did prove to be pointless.  MS didn't gain what they wanted and EA probably didn't make what they were hoping.   

Microsoft did comment on their hardware sales. In fact you can read their article on the March NPD right here. That's about as far as Microsoft can go. If EA doesn't want to reveal Titanfall numbers then why would MS reveal Titanfall numbers? It's a pretty simple question you're not providing an answer to.

So you're saying Titanfall didn't push consoles? Can I see your evidence?*
So you're saying EA isn't pleased with the Titanfall sales numbers? Can I see your evidence?*

Microsoft did provide those sort of statistics already this gen. With Dead Rising 3, and other games they published. You understand what a publisher is, yes?

LOL out of all of these people, why would EA be "meh"? They not only received money from MS for exclusive rights, but they saved money by not having to invest into development since MS stepped in and footed the bill there too. It was a complete win/win for EA from any logical point of view. Same with Respawn.

So you're saying Titanfall was a failure for Microsoft? Can I see your evidence?*


* - "LULZ PS4 outsold xbone in march!11" doesn't count as evidence. Hope that helps. I'll respond if you ever post anything that can be substantiated in any way and is derived from anything other than what you think might have happened or believe MS should be doing rather than what logic tells us EA and MS have done in the past.

I'm not slamming it. I'm not even complaining. I haven't played it but from all accounts, it's a fun game. The problem lies in the fact that the hype and the game didn't match up. It was hyped by the media as the second coming. It was suppose to change the way we think about FPS. It was suppose to be Doom/Half Life/Halo etc. When that didn't happen, and people realized it, they felt duped. I think this is where the hate comes from. Sure, there are those people who are just fanboys for other systems, but the majority of it has to do with what I said.

They could have shown 50 retail exclusives and i would still not buy their system. I truly loathe the xbox division of microsoft after the always online/drm debacle. Also i worry about their strategy. When the 360 just launched it had a better lineup than what ps3 had. Slowly though microsoft switched all their efforts on kinect and made nothing but halo, gears and forza. Ps3 just got better and better because devs supported the ps2 like with god of war or in this case the last of us. Sony just has this awkward launches where the big studios are just wrapping up on their previous project come launch.

Like the rest of the bunch with the same opinion, you're super wrong.

From 2010 till last year MS invested in countless Arcade and Indy titles; however, the latter didn't count until last year when Nintendo and Sony announced that they decided to add more indies to their marktplace.

I'll give you some critically aclaimed Arcade games to play if you "have both" like most claim.

State of Decay, Battleblock Theater, Iron Brigade, Shadow Complex, Splosion Man, Dust, Halo: Spartan Assault, etc...

It made Microsoft look like they had something of value, so I wouldnt say its pointless.

While you might throw some facts into him, I think he already made his mind of not getting a Xbox console. If his reasons to dislike it may seem dubious to you, it's his reasons and his opinion. Also, an opinion is someone's judgement, not a fact. So his opinion is not wrong.

Everybody is entitled to an opinion but that doesn't make their opinions correct by default.

I think you are confused here, not me buddy. He can hate Xbox all he wants, I'm not selling One.

Pun intended.