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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Not So BREAKING News! Titanfall 2 Won't be Xbox Exclusive!

DialgaMarine said:
I think we all saw this coming. Yes, EA was making a decent amount of the first one from MS paying for exclusivity, but I don't think any amount that MS would be willing to pay could make up for the amount of money EA would be losing if they didn't make this a multi platform franchise that goes for several titles like CoD or BF. It definitely has the potential. It just did so horribly because EA bet on the wrong horse . I bet if this game had released on PS4/ PS3, along with the other platforms, it would've been closer to a ten million seller, vice the 4 million or so it's at now. I think EA is learning their lesson about underestimating PS.


Except Sony only wanted this on the Vita.



Around the Network

I'm actually happy to hear this. If Titanfall contains the same type of game machenics as the first, It will definately be an early purchase for me.



Send a Friend Request On PSN :P

Tbh the first one wasn't really that amazing, the game lacked a massive array of guns, it was online based and it lacked a core singleplayer experience, it tried but failed on that front, the burn cards were a nice touch though along with earning the titans, one thing I will say though is the enxt one should totally outright ditch last gen systems entirely, I still believe that the 360 alone held back the first game and it would do the same again if the 2nd went PS3/360.

The other problem they have I've noticed is doing a small squad based game properly, there aren'y really that many massive big COD like small suqad based shooters these days, you could probably count CS but I'm talking more on COD's level, there just doesn't seem to be that many and the lack of polish and there not being many games of that type, it's no wonder it didn't sell well, I still rememebr complaints from both console and PC players wanting the game to go full on 64 vs 64 players even though the 360 is limited, the XB1 to a degree and even then it would have thrown the balance of the game out of whack, not every game needs to be 64 vs 64, that's why we've got the likes of COD, Battlefield,Killzone and Planetside 2, there's probably more bigger player based games than there are squad based shooters, we don't need more of those because you effectively kill another player base entirely.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Ka-pi96 said:
jlmurph2 said:
DialgaMarine said:
I think we all saw this coming. Yes, EA was making a decent amount of the first one from MS paying for exclusivity, but I don't think any amount that MS would be willing to pay could make up for the amount of money EA would be losing if they didn't make this a multi platform franchise that goes for several titles like CoD or BF. It definitely has the potential. It just did so horribly because EA bet on the wrong horse . I bet if this game had released on PS4/ PS3, along with the other platforms, it would've been closer to a ten million seller, vice the 4 million or so it's at now. I think EA is learning their lesson about underestimating PS.


Except Sony only wanted this on the Vita.

I think he means if EA or Respawn had funded the full game themselves and didn't need to make any agreements and were able to publish it everywhere.

Well yeah if only they were able. Respawn had no money and EA didn't see any worth for the game back then. Either Sony or MS had the chance to save it from being canned. MS took that chance.



McDonaldsGuy said:
You know I always thought Sony should've got Respawn before MS/EA. Would've given Sony its first killer app first person shooter franchise.

Sony had a chance before MS but they wanted to keep the PS4 innards close to their vests.

Anyway, I don't think anyone in the world expects Titanfall 2 to skip Sony consoles again, but what the thread title says and what the article and quotes say are two very different things.

"Titanfall 2 won't be Xbox exclusive" - Well, the first one wasn't either. And the quote in the article says it "could" come to PS4. So this is really nothing different than what was said months ago.

And then it goes on the emphasize a quote about a "bigger footprint than one platform". The first one was already on three platforms. It could literally launch on the same platforms and have a bigger footprint than one platform.

Either way the more people that get to experience Titanfall the better. There is really nothing else like it. And I hope they don't change a goddamn thing. No big SP, no drastic change to player count, no adding a bunch of bullshit to keep some ADD gamers happy on content unlocks.



Around the Network
jamesmarkus87 said:

Frankly, I'm surprised that Titanfall 1 hasn't yet been released on PS4. Games published by EA don't tend to stay exclusive for long. 


Has it been a full year yet? That seems to be the trend regarding Xbox One exclusive to PC release, seems like Microsoft Exclusive to open wouldn't be a stretch for a year.



Chazore said:
Tbh the first one wasn't really that amazing, the game lacked a massive array of guns, it was online based and it lacked a core singleplayer experience, it tried but failed on that front, the burn cards were a nice touch though along with earning the titans, one thing I will say though is the enxt one should totally outright ditch last gen systems entirely, I still believe that the 360 alone held back the first game and it would do the same again if the 2nd went PS3/360.

The other problem they have I've noticed is doing a small squad based game properly, there aren'y really that many massive big COD like small suqad based shooters these days, you could probably count CS but I'm talking more on COD's level, there just doesn't seem to be that many and the lack of polish and there not being many games of that type, it's no wonder it didn't sell well, I still rememebr complaints from both console and PC players wanting the game to go full on 64 vs 64 players even though the 360 is limited, the XB1 to a degree and even then it would have thrown the balance of the game out of whack, not every game needs to be 64 vs 64, that's why we've got the likes of COD, Battlefield,Killzone and Planetside 2, there's probably more bigger player based games than there are squad based shooters, we don't need more of those because you effectively kill another player base entirely.

bold #1 - I don't know how that's a bad thing. The "massive array of guns" in Battlefield or CoD always get whittled down to 2 or 3 that people find are the most effective. The best thing about Titanfall's smaller arsenal of guns is that they are all viable and all balanced. I have over 500 hours in the game and it still amazes me today the wild combinations I see people using and using effectively.

bold #2 - They went with the engine they did because of the PS3. It's in the Final Hours of Titanfall article/app whatever by Geoff Knightly or whatever his name is. Dewrito Pope. And that's sad because the game never ended up releasing on it anyway.



Still not interested... But good for ps4 fans that like fps I guess?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Single player campaign, please.



sounds more like EA is waiting for M$ to moneyhat it again...