Sections

Titanfall’s maximum player count is six on six

Wednesday, 8th January 2014 05:30 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Titanfall supports up to 12 players per match, a much more modest number than boasted by competing multiplayer shooters.

Answering a fan query on Twitter, Respawn Entertainment’s Vince Zampella confirmed the shooter supports up to two teams of six players each.

“Turned out to be the best balance with AI for us,” he said.

Meanwhile, the battlefields are made suitably populous by AI soldiers. Zampella didn’t confirm an exact count but said there will be “enough to make it fun” – but the players are the “real threat”.

Every player can have a Titan with them, he added, so firefights should still feel busy.

Nevertheless many commenters seemed disappointed, but Zampella said Respawn, which admittedly knows a fair bit about multiplayer shooters, ran plenty of trials before deciding that 6v6 is the right count.

“It is incredibly fun, we did a lot if testing. It is all about what we found most fun,” he said.

Titanfall is due in March on PC, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Thanks, Dragon.

Latest

92 Comments

  1. jmg24bad

    Honestly…. that is fucking horrible

    #1 9 months ago
  2. zme-ul

    one word: FAIL

    #2 8 months ago
  3. Arcnail

    Guess we’ll see how it plays. I can’t imagine the maps being all that big then…

    #3 8 months ago
  4. Ireland Michael

    Hahahaha! Wow.

    #4 8 months ago
  5. DeVitowned

    Power of the cloud right there.

    #5 8 months ago
  6. Stilvan

    Interest level just plummeted. Seriously Respawn, put it back in the oven.

    #6 8 months ago
  7. Xbone

    Aaand I lost every interest I had.

    #7 8 months ago
  8. Sang2

    HAHA…pathetic.

    #8 8 months ago
  9. fengato

    Vince deserves a bit more trust. Gunna wait and see. ;-)

    #9 8 months ago
  10. undermyrules

    Xbox 360 holding back as always..power of the cloud hahhahahaaha.

    #10 8 months ago
  11. redwood

    this is gonna change soon. veeeery soon.

    #11 8 months ago
  12. Fin

    If there’s one thing I love doing, it’s condemning a game I’ve not played based on a value that compares unfavorably to other games in the same genre.

    Is 32v32 in BF4 fucking amazing? Yeah.
    Will 6v6 in Titanfall be amazing? Probably.

    #12 8 months ago
  13. Llewelyn_MT

    I don’t get it. Why limit player number to 6v6 only to fill it up with bots? Is it some weird balancing feature? It really makes no sense other than to allow the worst and most clueless players to score kills when the opposing team is composed of players who actually know what they are doing.

    Multiplayer shooters is for people who like shooting characters controlled by other people for the added challenge. This is just stupid.

    #13 8 months ago
  14. gomersoul

    Here was me thinking this could give Xbox the upper hand. Too much is expected from this game, titanfall 2? Now we’re talking

    #14 8 months ago
  15. Puggy

    Well, it is not out now, so lets not bash the game. It might Change until release.

    After all, it is for the Xbox One. You remember some months ago? “You have to be online all the time” “You can not Play used games”
    And soon after “We listen! You do not have to be online all the time, because our fans wanted it”

    So Chances are this games pulls an Xbox1 too and goes like “Because we listen to our dedicated Players and our fans, we changed the number of Players to XX vs. XX. Power to the people!”

    Though honestly 6 vs. 6 really does sound a bit… small. Then again we were not that many more back then, when playing Counterstrike or Team Fortress… or Action Quake.

    #15 8 months ago
  16. Gekidami

    ^ Actually its on 360, its a 360 game at its core being ported to XB1 and it has nothing to do with the guys who decided to change the XB1′s mechanics. This game, besides being on their consoles, has nothing to do with MS. Why you’d assume one has anything to do with the other is baffling.

    Anyway, no interest before, defiantly no interest now. Everything about this game makes it sound like it should be F2P, yet its not. The only way they could make up for this if they announce that it has like +30 unique maps, but i’m guessing that wont happen.

    #16 8 months ago
  17. Dave Cook

    Really didn’t find this a problem when playing at gamescom. The AI troops really make the map feel busy, and you know, the big 30 foot mechs stomping around the place take up a lot of space.

    It’s seriously good. Try before you moan…ah wait, what am I saying, this is the internet. Sorry, I forgot…

    (goes back to being optimistic)

    #17 8 months ago
  18. KineticCalvaria

    Hmm I’m losing interest…

    #18 8 months ago
  19. JB

    I don`t get the comments on this game at all.

    Did they promise larger team or player size or something like that?

    It´s a new game, so it`s not like they “dumbed down” the game in comparison with the original.

    @13 How does less players or smaller teams equal “allow the worst and most clueless players to score kills when the opposing team is composed of players who actually know what they are doing” ?

    #19 8 months ago
  20. Xbone

    I did not want to play againts AI in my FPS multiplayer. Only real players… what the fuck is this shit? The power of the cloud?

    #20 8 months ago
  21. Dave Cook

    @20 You won’t notice, trust me on this guys. I’ll be accused of defending this game or being in EA’s pocket or some bullshit like that, but I wouldn’t let this put you off. It’s brilliant, make no mistake.

    #21 8 months ago
  22. Xbone

    @21 Not 100% of the times but its noticable. But it does not matter, its still a 6v6. If I wanna play againts bots… Well… I dont want to.

    #22 8 months ago
  23. Fin

    I’ve watched videos of Titanfall that looked good, but now I know it’s 6v6 those same videos look terrible.

    @21

    Dude, stop defending this game and being in EA’s pocket ;)

    #23 8 months ago
  24. Dave Cook

    @22 It’s not noticeable. At all.
    Have you played it?

    @23 Oi you! :P *shakes fist*

    #24 8 months ago
  25. torjs99

    lol

    thats a fucking joke

    #25 8 months ago
  26. dkpunk

    Eh, don’t waste your breath Dave. The people complaining about this probably weren’t going to buy the game anyway. This is by no means a deal breaker. I have faith in Respawn and the scores of people that have tried the game out and say it’s fantastic. I think I’m going to screencap these comments, that way I can post them after the game comes out.

    #26 8 months ago
  27. MrBambinoDent

    Behold the power of the cloud people :D

    #27 8 months ago
  28. Mr Tom

    The only “fucking joke” around here are these comments :(

    #28 8 months ago
  29. Pytox

    im gonna wait till reviews and gameplay vids drop to make up my mind

    #29 8 months ago
  30. ragedave

    sorry that really now cancelled my preorder :/
    12 vs 12 is a total standard nowadays and I blame the old console version and lack of dev time for that!
    If they would just release on PC and next gen it would run def with more.
    6 vs 6 is so 2007…
    I will wait 2 years for titanfall II :’(

    #30 8 months ago
  31. broketm

    Hmm this does make the game less attractive to me, and let me explain why.

    6vs6 imo, doesn’t make a game any less good than 32vs32. I’ve played enough FPS games competitively, 6v6, 5v5, etc… to know this actually works out best for a competitive match. I’ve seen enough of Titanfall to know the Titans won’t imbalance a game of both teams know what they’re doing.

    The thing is, I haven’t cared for competitive play in years. These days I just want to hop in a game with one or more friends and have some fun. With a limit of 6v6, on a public server or random match. It can quickly become very unpleasant when one team vastly out-skills the other.

    The higher the player-counts, the more attractive it generally gets for the casual player.

    Another issue is that it looks it will put you in a lobby, and randomly pick another to play against. Likely, playing with more than 5 friends will be nearly impossible. It will result in many severely stacked matches, and the solutions to those will make playing with friends even harder (I’m looking at you Mechwarrior Online…)

    #31 8 months ago
  32. Xbone

    @26 Actually, its a dealbreaker. I wanted an fps between cod and bf gameplay… but this? 6v6 in 2014? On a PC? You kiddin me? No way I buying this.

    #32 8 months ago
  33. Llewelyn_MT

    @26: It may not be a dealbreaker for CoD fans, but I doubt many Battlefield fans will be happy. I hate most single player shooters because the AI opponents are too predictable and unrealistic in many ways: passive, cheating, dumb, you name it.

    #33 8 months ago
  34. Hcw87

    Gotta love the internet armchair gamedesigners. You haven’t played the game yet, so it’s impossible for you to judge how the game is going to play. Do you really think the maps will be devoid of action because of this?

    Also it makes no sense mentioning the cloud at all, since the game won’t have more players on the PC. So it’s not a power problem, rather a gameplay decision they made.

    But Sony fanboys needs something to make them feel better, since they won’t even get to play the game unless they sacrifice their soul and buy a PC/Xbox.

    #34 8 months ago
  35. NocturnalB

    Wow that sucks… So Gears of War with robots. The maps are obviously not going to be very large, why would they need to be?

    And here I was hoping for at least 16v16 crazy robot action.

    #35 8 months ago
  36. TheBlackHole

    Everyone on this comment thread slamming this game already is a fucking idiot. Period.

    The game has clearly been designed with a specific player count in mind. You don’t retrospectively decide that shit because it’s a fundamental part of the design process.

    Also, multiplayer games don’t improve based on the number of players. Halo, Left4Dead, Counter Strike (among others) all work incredibly well 4v4.

    Until you’ve played it, your opinion literally means nothing. But sure, carry on with the grade school vitriol – it’s disappointingly unsurprising.

    @34 made some good points, and considered comments like that are obviously not the target of my post.

    #36 8 months ago
  37. NocturnalB

    BlackHole there are going to be positive and negative opinions on every game, why is it vitriol? And yeah I compared it to Gears but I meant numbers wise, personally I’m going to wait for gameplay before I make a decision.

    #37 8 months ago
  38. w3aponofchoice

    If you havent played it you have no idea what you are talking about. The game is amazingly fun at 6v6 (played it at TGS) there is nothing to complain about. Have a little faith because this game is going to be huge. I play mostly 32v32 BF also, and didnt give a fuck that the player count was lower, i just want to play it again.

    #38 8 months ago
  39. DeVitowned

    I love how even the smallest comments can bring out the butthurt. I’m sure the game will be awesome, but 6v6 sounds too small.

    Now back to armchair development. :-D

    #39 8 months ago
  40. Xbone

    @38
    “Huge”? Huh?

    #40 8 months ago
  41. TheBlackHole

    @37 uninformed positive comments are no more relevant or useful.

    It’s vitriolic because much of the negativity is bitter criticism, not justified concerns.

    #41 8 months ago
  42. tezzer1985

    6 v 6 to me sounds rather underwhelming, for a FPS online game. I don’t see how having more AI rather then human players is more fun.

    It seems to me like they went with that to dumb down the progression system. Shooting AI to level up and get your Titan will be easier then shooting skilled human controlled players.

    Bad choice in my head, but then again, I play games not make them, so could be good in practice, we will see

    #42 8 months ago
  43. Joe Musashi

    Someone from Respawn has responded in NeoGaf’s thread of this:

    “Lots of armchair game designing going on in here. I’d suggest playing before judging a something as insignificant as a number in a vacuum.

    Vince is right – we tried a huge amount of playercounts (all the way down to 1v1 and up quite high) and designed the maps, gameplay mechanics, and entire experience around which played best. If anyone wants to chase the numbers game, perhaps we’re not the experience they’re after? I dunno.

    And FYI, for amount of stuff happening at once in a map you’ll be hard pressed to find a game that keeps the action higher. I literally have to stop playing every few rounds because my heart just can’t take it some times. Remember, you can get out of your Titan and let it roam on AI mode – meaning there can be 12 Pilots wallrunning around, 12 Titans stomping below, and dozens of AI doing their thing.

    Oh, and I keep seeing people thinking we’ve got “bots” when we talk about AI. Thats not how they are. The AI in Titanfall are not replacements for human players. Our playercount is not 6v6 because of AI – AI play their own role in the game and are a different class of character in the game.

    Can’t wait! Only a couple months until speculative threads like this are gone and people are actually talking about their experiences with the game. Its truly fun stuff, and I hope everyone at least gives it a try.”

    JM

    #43 8 months ago
  44. Gekidami

    @41
    The player count being too low and the fact that this is a MP only game are ” justified concerns”. Its not like we’re complaining because we dont like the colour of one of the robots. Sounds like you’re just of the mentality that the game can do no wrong, unsurprisingly you and Hcw87 are two peas in a pod. Yeah, he made some good points alright, i mean he made none, but whatever. You agree with him, and thats all that counts.

    Though just for a laugh, what is your idea of a “justified concern”?

    #44 8 months ago
  45. TheBlackHole

    @44

    I actually meant @31 made some good points. I wasn’t referring to @34. Typo.

    I don’t know how much ‘wrong’ the game can do, because I haven’t played the finished article. Calling the player count ‘too low’ is completely subjective though, irrelevant even, until you’ve played it.

    You can’t justify a concern with no evidence as to why it matters so much. @31 did that, you didn’t.

    #45 8 months ago
  46. Fin

    All the negative comments are bullshit. You can’t say how good a game will based on the number of players in a fucking map. Seriously, get over yourselves.

    The argument that “it’ll be more unbalanced” is rubbish too, I played four 64-player games of BF4 last night, each of them one side won by 400+ tickets.

    I don’t even understand the negativity. I didn’t buy an XOne, but Titanfall is still more interesting than any upcoming PS4-exclusive.

    @44

    “The player count being too low”

    How do you define “too low”? Arbitrary number?

    #46 8 months ago
  47. manamana

    Awww, look at all those naysayers. Cute. Since when does a playercount makes a fun game? Bashing is soooo coool!

    And btw. @16: nonsense. The 360 version is a dumbed down version of what is coming to PC and Xbone. Of course they started developement on it severeal years ago. But the 360 version isnt even in Respawns hands …

    #47 8 months ago
  48. SplatteredHouse

    At no point has Titanfall given the impression of delivering wide (in number) combat. In fact, it’s absurd to suggest it should, because, if there are many mechs stomping and smashing, then each would be weaker. If not in terms of stats, at least for the impact.
    You want to allow good match flow, some balance, and they’ll likely want to prevent a situation where soldiers are routinely tripping over mechs. Mechs are more like the Nemesis, in Resident Evil, I guess. Decisive. Sometimes, infantry would be just as, or perhaps more effective?

    Look at the trailers. They’re fast paced, open, and high-impact. Judging by them, and what is known about the arena/map layouts that have been shown, I don’t find the idea of 6 v 6 as offering the optimum gameplay experience to be odd. For what they’ve indicated they want to offer, it’s not far wrong.

    #48 8 months ago
  49. Llewelyn_MT

    The only problem there is with multiplayer shooters that have such a small number of players is that it will be very hard to play with more than one friend at a time. With 64 players in Battlefield I often have to wait a match or two to get on the same team as my friends. With 6v6 it will be nigh impossible.

    Discounting rightful worries while praising the game that is not even out yet is just as insane.

    #49 8 months ago
  50. Fin

    @49

    I’d imagine Respawn will have more of a handle on parties and friends playing together than BF4 (which has no party system at all).

    #50 8 months ago
  51. SplatteredHouse

    @49 quicker queue times/more games active has got to be a plus, though. Are you discounting things? Because I haven’t. All I have talked about (and it’s something I delight to see) is a solid idea, conveyed clearly and with the advantage of a strong belief in the game’s direction from the people working on it. Hopefully, it works out for them. They certainly have made a great start. :)

    #51 8 months ago
  52. Raynor

    did zampella noticed ” It’s multiplayer based game …”
    now my only hope is Destiny .

    #52 8 months ago
  53. Erthazus

    WHAT?

    6 VS 6?

    ????????????????????????????????????????????

    #53 8 months ago
  54. SplatteredHouse

    @53 orange juice?

    #54 8 months ago
  55. Rockstar Vienna

    I don’t get the fuss about this game anyway. :/

    #55 8 months ago
  56. Erthazus

    Ok. Let’s just say that 6vs6 is fun but then map size is so freakin small… Just like in Hawken. It’s not a bad thing except that in Hawken you are only playing in mechs so you feel like that there are enough people with 6vs6 mode.

    @SplatteredHouse, xD lol.

    #56 8 months ago
  57. man with food

    Dont understand why people think that more players = better multiplayer. Its simply not true.

    I have mainly played two multiplayer games recently (the last of us, killzone mercenary) and they are both 4v4 yet I have a just as good (or even better on the last of us) experience playing these games as I do when I play something like battlefield. If you added more players to to these games they would feel cluttered no doubt.

    Like the devs said they tested it with a lot of different player count and 6v6 felt right, and if 6v6 felt right to the people who have been making and playing this game for maybe 2+ years then it is probably the right player count to have in the game. Any more and the game may feel to cluttered, any less too quiet.

    As for the bots, they are probably really easy to dispatch, kinda like the little ai soldiers on LoL or DotA. So it while they wont be a nuisance they will make you feel busy, and again, if these bots were all human players the game would feel cluttered. Obviosly human players will bring a much greater challenge than ai bots.

    Its not as if respawn doesn’t have experience with multiplayer games. They know what they are doing.

    @16 Although i cant be certain, im pretty sure Respawn a developing titanfall for X1 and pc while a different studio ports the game to 360. So the 360 version isnt holding ghe game back.

    #57 8 months ago
  58. Hcw87

    ”Remember, you can get out of your Titan and let it roam on AI mode – meaning there can be 12 Pilots wallrunning around, 12 Titans stomping below, and dozens of AI doing their thing.”

    It’s not 6 on 6. There will be as many AI or more than the current player number. So around 24-30 i guess. Plenty of stuff to shoot.

    #58 8 months ago
  59. Llewelyn_MT

    @50: With party system and a 6v6 system the wait times will take forever for 4 player parties.

    @51: How do you expect to have faster queues with 12 players? The wait time should be over 5 times longer than with 64 players. That’s basic math. With a party system it might be even worse.

    #59 8 months ago
  60. Fin

    @59

    Eh? How would it be any different to any other game that uses parties?

    “The wait time should be over 5 times longer than with 64 players. That’s basic math.”

    Yeah science!!

    12 player games means fewer spaces to fill to get a full game == faster wait times. You’re calculating it the wrong way.

    #60 8 months ago
  61. bennyx

    I wonder if this was on the PS4,could Respawn have pushed the boat out to the standard 12v12!!!!!!!!!

    #61 8 months ago
  62. Dave Cook

    @61 Yes, but why would they want to? They want it to be 6v6.

    Why is that so hard for people to understand?

    #62 8 months ago
  63. tenthousandgothsonacid

    I thought we’d had a meeting and agreed that “Shite & Fail” was the official vg247 derogatory term for this game ?

    No ? Oh well I propose the motion then.

    #63 8 months ago
  64. Llewelyn_MT

    Name a game with 6v6 players using parties you use as reference.

    Games with reasonable player count need not be full. Battlefield 3/4 works with any number of players from 4 to 64. I don’t think getting 12 players is easier.

    #64 8 months ago
  65. Legendaryboss

    This doesn’t sound like A problem, it wasn’t A problem when the media/fans were playing it however others have now come to this conclusion it is A problem now.

    AAA Game, coincidentally.

    #65 8 months ago
  66. Fin

    @64

    I don’t understand. You say BF3/4 works with any number of players from 4 to 64. Titanfall will work with any number of players from 2 to 12. 12 is a lower number than 64. It requires less players for a game to be full. Therefore, the wait for the required number of players will be lower.

    How is this hard for you to understand.

    #66 8 months ago
  67. pukem0n

    game just died for me, sorry…

    #67 8 months ago
  68. SlayerGT

    @66 Plus with half the field being AI everyone’s k/d will be positive..the reason most people enjoy the game so much I’d imagine. And is likely to become a trend. It’s also why I have interest in this game.

    #68 8 months ago
  69. Ireland Michael

    The problem isn’t just that it’s 6v6. It’s that it’s 6v6 plus bots. Why the hell would I want AI taking the place of real players in multiplayer? If there are bots in a game, they should be optional, not mandatory.

    The reason for this is pretty obvious – they couldn’t get the game running with more players than that without causing performance issues.

    As you start increasing the amount of data being sent between players over a network, the stress on the server and your computer increases exponentially, not gradually. Think of it like this. You have 11 people. One person joins. That one player adds 12 more calculations to the server PER PLAYER to EACH user, making about 144 extra calculations per player. If you have that. 6 players would only be about 36 calculations.

    This is a simplified example – there’s usually even more than that going on, but it’s the basic foundation of any multiplayer game. If you’ve ever seem a large gathering of people on an MMO server, you’ll know what I mean by this. The server can often handle it, but the hardware rarely can, and the X1 is pretty weak hardware.

    Bots will significantly reduce that problem because it requires less data to be sent between everyone and the server isn’t being bombarded with data at the same time.

    These guys have never made a decent game. I have little reason to believe that’s going to change with this one.

    Wasn’t this game supposed to be the poster child for TEH POWAH OF TEH CLOUD? Where is its unlimited power now? I can’t help but notice Microsoft seems to have shut up a fair bit about that whole aspect of the hardware recently. Because it’s clearly PR bullshit.

    #69 8 months ago
  70. Dragon

    I don’t know why this matters. I personally dont worry at all about number of players. The game is definitely fun, as numerous people have attested it, and that is what matters in the end.

    #70 8 months ago
  71. Hcw87

    @69
    Come on now, if XB1 can handle 64 players at 60fps (BF4), then they can handle a far higher playercount than 12 if they wanted.

    And if it was a power issue, XB1/PC would have a higher count compared to 360.

    Also it’s running on dedicated servers, so the consoles don’t handle the communication between players.

    #71 8 months ago
  72. SlayerGT

    @69 The reason bots were chosen is to get people to feel good about themselves. If I suck at BF4 I’m not gonna buy or play it. Bots help level the playing field. It’s better than handicapping.

    #72 8 months ago
  73. Ireland Michael

    @71 Not if the game is coded badly, it won’t. It becomes even less of a problem if the maps are huge, because the players are far enough apart from each other at any one time to alleviate stress on the server. This isn’t that sort of shooter, obviously, but 6v6 is a joke.

    MW2 wasn’t exactly known for its stability either. Or it’s quality.

    “Also it’s running on dedicated servers, so the consoles don’t handle the communication between players.”

    The consoles still needs to receive those communications and sends its own information out.

    @72 People should be awarded for what they do, not what they don’t. If it’s that big a problem, create an optional bot mod or a co-op mode. Bots is a multiplayer competitive match is a joke.

    #73 8 months ago
  74. SlayerGT

    @73 I agree with you, that’s why I’ll stick to BF4.

    #74 8 months ago
  75. Erthazus

    “They want it to be 6v6.

    Why is that so hard for people to understand?”

    Because 6vs6 is a QUAKE 1-2 standard at best. We are going to low standards of the multiplayer already for the FPS games in 2014?

    Give me a break. If the multiplayer is 6vs6 then maps are small. 6vs6 works in HAWKEN for example but you are always in the mech and maps are small and does not have a lot of strategy in them.

    #75 8 months ago
  76. manamana

    @75 well from what I recall Quake 2 was much more fun than any CoD game for me, so this is defenitely a good thing. Maps will be small, of course. No huge maps like Battlefield, yes. Whats so hard to accept about it? I look forward to that game, because I trust in Respawns feel for action packed gameplay.

    #76 8 months ago
  77. dtyk

    Such game designers on VG247, much talent, wow, very insight

    #77 8 months ago
  78. manamana

    I wanted to add a great comment from a Polygon user called “TachyoniCargo”, he said those very wise words:

    So let me get something straight. This is the exact same Titanfall that won all the awards at E3. The exact same Titanfall that everyone who has played it, has raved, and raved, and raved about how utterly amazing the game is. The. EXACT. SAME. Titanfall.

    The ONLY thing that has changed, is now you are AWARE that all gameplay has been locked at a low number of players. But it’s been locked at a low number of players all along. None of that stopped the game from being awesome, nor stopped everyone who has ever played it, from raving about it, nor stopped it from winning dozens and dozens of awards it has already racked up.

    It really amazes and saddens me, how gamers so easily put so much faith in arbitrary numbers, and so little faith in the creative, professional talents of some of the best devs on the planet, and their ability to craft awesome and fun games to play. It’s this blind love for arbitrary numbers, is why it is becoming increasingly hard to have good things in this hobby.

    Jan 8, 2014 | 2:42 AM

    #78 8 months ago
  79. Legendaryboss

    @78
    Exactly what i said in one sentence only difference is that post is much longer and more passionate.

    #79 8 months ago
  80. Playmaker

    I read crazy Ireland Michael going off again. Didn’t realize vg247s resident game dev had so much time to comment. Well no working projects I suppose now. Hows shitzone on the ps4 4c4 deathmatch???

    right I thought so. You’re so full of it. It reeks all over. Just ignore the drunk gentlemen. Just ignore.

    #80 8 months ago
  81. Ireland Michael

    @80 I don’t play Killzone and don’t have a PS4. I don’t intend to buy either of the new consoles for at least another year.

    What I do have is qualifications in networking engineering, experiences in the field, and a basic understanding of how this kind of hardware actually works. You have a lazy insult and assumptions of my brand loyalties that aren’t even remotely close to the truth.

    #81 8 months ago
  82. Fin

    @78

    Fuck yeah +a million.

    I just don’t understand the entire problem.

    @81

    Eh, not meaning to be harsh, but the way you talk about networking, you don’t really have much experience in it, in relation to games (though you may have something something like CCNA)

    “You have 11 people. One person joins. That one player adds 12 more calculations to the server PER PLAYER to EACH user, making about 144 extra calculations per player. ”

    Only if the server running an individual lockstep simulation for each player. Servers normally take the new players information and distribute it to the other clients. With a bit of logic on the server (such as sending less positional updates for things that are far away), the amount of added complexity is actually fairly minimal – there’s certainly a minimal impact on the clients (~10% increase in traffic, worst case).

    I think. I didn’t really understand what you were trying to say, but it looked wrong.

    #82 8 months ago
  83. Playmaker

    Lets see the resume. Your POWa of The cloud is such a energetic comment. The fact is you think 6v6 shows weakness or poor coding. Why don’t you not play this game and not comment since you won’t play it. 6v6 with AI is what it is. They haven’t made a decent game that YOU like. I and others love COD4.

    #83 8 months ago
  84. dtyk

    @Playmaker

    I understand you’re trying to be fair for Titanfall, but there’s no need to bring out dat negative attitude either

    Killzone single player blew, but the multiplayer really is quite fun

    Overall, I think people just need to sit back and let game devs do their jobs. Because frankly? 99.99 percent of us don’t know jack shit. The 0.01 percent that claims they do probably never made anything relevant.

    There’s a line between being critical and being a total twat, and people often cross that line (not directing at you Playmaker, just saying people in general).

    #84 8 months ago
  85. Ireland Michael

    @82 Like I said, it was a very simple example. It affects the hardware playing the game far more than it does the server itself, simple the PC is being flooded with more data than it can compute at any time. The problem is even worse if its P2P.

    The point I’m making is that these guys are not known for their technical experience. Has everyone completely forgotten how badly Modern Warfare 2 ran? Neither is EA known for their servet stability or stable code. Especially not after the state Battlefield 4 launched in.

    “They haven’t made a decent game that YOU like. I and others love COD4.”

    Welcome to the concept of “opinions”. I’m not the one insulting others right now. You chose to be a tit instead of discussing the topic.

    #85 8 months ago
  86. Legendaryboss

    @83
    Your trying way too hard, step back and fly into the sunset.

    Oh and then tell us how it was.

    #86 8 months ago
  87. dontbescaredhomie92

    “Could they of pushed the boat out if this was on PS4 and had 12v12″ Seeing as the game is also out for PC why the fuck would you think the PS4 would make any difference.
    Morons, there is such a thing as game balancing you know, sometimes higher player counts just don’t make sense and hearing from people who have already played this game that really is the case.

    #87 8 months ago
  88. lexph3re

    I see a lot of people hate this idea. I personally Love it, I am kinda sick of tons of players on a map at once. Kinda missed the Arena feel of having a few people on a map and the hunt. I realized that when I was playing KZ Mercenaries and Last of US that not EVERY game needs to have 24-254 players on a map at a time.

    If it’s going to make the game more balanced and preform better. More power to them! I would prefer that then a cluster fuck of people and basic combat.

    #88 8 months ago
  89. POOhead

    lol everyone watched the gameplay clips, everyone saw how good it was and now they find out it was played by 12 real players and they all start raging? lol how the hell didnt you guys expect this when they said ai bots were in the game, they even said for everyone person there would be about 4 bots are something

    #89 8 months ago
  90. davidbernard784

    lol 6V6 I heard the reservation key here http://www.gtacdkey.com/Titanfall-CDK.html for a very forward to immediately

    #90 8 months ago
  91. Fin

    @85

    No, you’re still wrong.

    “the PC is being flooded with more data than it can compute at any time”

    No game lags because it can’t process data (packets) fast enough. Lag comes from the time it takes for messages to arrive. Saying the PC is being flooded during an MP game is like saying Netflix is buffering because it’s being flooded.

    The bottleneck in P2P games is the speed of the upload connection (generally), not the speed at which clients can interpret packets.

    Also, making the core multiplayer tech (messaging with low lag) is actually pretty easy (doubly so, given they’ve branched off Source), it’s not something that is prohibitively difficult for a small studio.
    BF4 is an unrealistic comparison – with 64 players, each player object in the game being physically simulated (bullets, vehicles, items), the amount of data being passed around is insane.

    #91 8 months ago
  92. Hybridpsycho

    hah, people are surprised. Idiots.

    #92 8 months ago

Comments are now closed on this article.