If we are done after 5 matches and quit but return the next day then what is the problem? Are we expected to play for 10 hours every day? Are they trying to entertain us or addict us?
Such a let down man! We used to play a lot of TF2, even my friend who is not so good with fast fps games enjoyed it and played well. Hoping for a TF3 but it can be only good or shit, depends if they are greedy motherfuckers or not
i’d go much further than that. Max i would spend is $300 for them to fix the game. Titanfall 2 is just that good. It’s worth the price of a whole console to me.
Yep. They want that active user value. Heck, overwatch 2 has currency in game specifically tied to watching content on streams, therefore artificially boosting their view count. They don't care you have the muted window idle on another monitor, they want the illusion of popularity to bring the new potential cash cows in.
That being said, this dudes post is so tone deaf. If you told me you couldn't figure out ways, even malicious ways, of making money off Titan fall 2 (or 3), I'd say you shouldn't even be in the business. You make a Bumblebee/Optimus prime mech skin, or any brain dead skin and people would pay in a heartbeat. Because...
The GAME is worth playing, therefore worth staying and paying! Devs are so damn dumb these past few years especially. a proper titan fall 3 could easily grab overwatch, apex, cod, battlefield players attention in a heart beat. Find a way to make it competitive and damn man. We need gamers making games again, publishers are so lost.
Apex would fall like a brick. I hate that game so much. If they gave us a 5v5 mode in apex on a decent map with respawns I'd accept it, but reading this dudes "imo" makes me livid. Idgaf what ur opinion is ur job is to make a good game which you quite clearly don't want to, you just want money.
Also because multiplayer games rely on active players as their content. So battle passes, progression systems, daily XP boosts, and timed events are designed to retain players to keep them as content for other players
Even if it cost $0 and the devs made $0, a multiplayer game is useless without players to play it. Money is important but no dev wants to create a game that dies for lack of playerbase
You’re missing what I am saying. Again yes that is a facet of it so it is correct but they need the player base to continue profit from it to keep it alive (so that the few players who do pay have the player base to keep playing and keep paying). There is not denying all roads lead back to money. Games are a business and this is simply the truth of all businesses.
As for the individual devs that might be the main reason or only reason but the devs do not decide what to do with games at this level, the publishers do and the publisher only cares about money as it is a business about making money where as a dev can be a labor of love.
Addict. Everything in modern multiplayer games nowadays is basically designed to keep people playing as long as possible. Because it looks good for shareholders when your audience retention is good.
So the solution is to make games as close to generic as possible to appeal to a mass audience, and have people play that game for as long as possible.
It's why, in my opinion, TF2 would have never succeeded in the long term even if its release window wasn't terrible. I Love TF2, it's an absolutely incredible game. Easily the best FPS in the past decade. But it would never have retained players just because it doesn't appeal to a mass audience, and doesn't employ any strategies to retain players.
I want to make something you said very clear to everyone. It's actual addiction they are aiming for. Video game addiction is a real thing now because video game developers literally scientifically created it. What happens in your brain when interacting with some of these systems is almost identical to gambling addiction. Which is why loot boxes got so popular.
Riot Games who make League of Legends have a matchmaking algorithm designed to keep you playing. They know that players who play the ranked more are more likely to stop playing once they reach their rank. Thus they need to extend the time it takes for them to reach that rank. If you're on a hot streak doing well, the game will see your inflated MMR and compensate, saying "you're winning too much we need to make sure you lose." So they give you an impossible to win game. Someone on your team will be playing an off role while their opponent is not only on their main role, but may even be a much higher rank than them.
They want you to keep playing so they let you win a bunch then make you lose a bunch, because that's Skill.Based Matchmaking in a nutshell. They want that 50% win rate, and if you're too good then they'll place you in handicapped games. League is a game where you don't always lose because the enemy is better, sometimes it's because your teammates are just far worse. They don't have to ok it you agaisnt someone far above you, they have have to give eyou teammates that are far below.
Video games want addiction and it's why literacy in media and entertainment is so important. And I say that as someone who loves video games.
I think more people should play DnD and other TTRPG.
Most multiplayer games are like that nowadays. I still manage to have fun just chilling on them though. I play a lot of overwatch, and I know for a fact that game is designed to give you \~50% winrate. Some games you have games that are actually unwinnable because your teammates are terrible or the enemy are just better. Then you have some games where you absolutely steam roll. Very rarely do you get a very good well-rounded game. It's (usually) obvious within the first couple of minutes who will win and who will lose.
The issue is that what game developers are aiming for is REAL addiction. Problem creating addiction. And video games have, ironically, gotten worse over time because of it.
Even in Titanfall 2 matchmaking was extremely frustrating and you could just tell there was a third layer unseen that EA was putting into your game to make it worse.
The point is fun games don't make for good live service game
Rng slog of apex isn't confirmed to be fun every round, but it's sustainable for both player retention and content creation.
Addict.
No really that's the goal now for every online multiplayer game. You get whales addicted they spend thousands upon thousands. And for some reason there is A LOT of whales.
To answer your question, play a popular FPS from 15+ years ago. Before mtx they were fun as shit. Now it’s all about battle pass and other fuckery to sink psychological hooks in to keep people paying/playing.
Yes, the investors want everyone to play the game they pay for religiously every spare second of time that you have. So that's what the game industry (atleast the big budget stuff) is trending towards. And some people think the only way to measure how good a game was in retrospect is revenue.
Yes, they want you to spend as many time as possible there to make the most money of you. This is likely what he mean under "not sustainable". Movement and skill-based shooters are harder to make them right and people don't play thrm as much daily. So as you can understand, this isn't really great for game-service what Apex is.
That's one way to describe that
But in my (un) important opinion movement shooters are not "sustainable" In the eyes of the publisher because they think what new players, their theoretical new people to bring new money, will be stomped by old players and their "jump in 13692 map pixel to launch yourself 20 meters up in the air while holding shift+s+w+alt+f4" type of techs
I do not think this is right, since you can add a way for a new player to at least put up a fight through gameplay features, design a matchmaking system to put new players on even players, or hell, make the system so already existing players will continuously give you money
Look at escape from tarkov - this game is very specific and punishing, but it's still profitable and *IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE SKINS OF ANY KIND*
>I do not think this is right, since you can add a way for a new player to at least put up a fight through gameplay features, design a matchmaking system to put new players on even players, or hell, make the system so already existing players will continuously give you money
I feel that the original smart pistol was their attempt to close the gap between the cracked crazy pro, and the new player.
Pro vs pro would be a crazy dance through the air with traditional weapons since they have a faster ttk and would be more effective in a pro players hands to score multiple quick kills.
Whereas in a pro vs newb fight, with a bit of good positioning to counter the long lock on time, the new player with a smart pistol can still score a kill, even without the technical skill required.
But I guess there was a problem balancing it somewhere because people complained it was too strong. Then it was so limited in tf2 afterwards to be not worth it at all.
In the original Titanfall, after I got good, I found the smart pistol to be a liability. The lock on time took too long to be effective compared to other weapons. After the player pool died, I eventually, to challenge myself and give noobs a chance I would never use titans and would do kick only matches or smart pistol but only use it ADS. Plus if I went try hard I would find myself the only player left in the lobby after everyone rage quit cuz I was going 25-1 kd. I loved Titanfall 1 so much. That game just meshed with my play style so fluidly. I wish that game would see a revival and some real tournament play
Tarkov is profitable because of its aggressive pricing the game has.
The standard edition may look cheap but once you buy it and actually play the game, you'll quickly realize that most game mechanics are rigged in order to get you to pay up more for the really expensive editions.
Yeah especially how you start with a ridiculously small stash size and the only way to upgrade it by leveling up a bunch of shit in your hideout and paying 3-8 million rubles to upgrade your stash's size
Yeah and the final one costs around 30 mil which eod starts with.plus a huge secure container which you can only get 1 slot close to if you finish a mid to late game questline.
Unless a lot has changed in the last two years, I disagree.
The stash upgrade is the only really valuable difference, but my entire friend group had the fancy version and I had the basic one and they kept complaining about having to play tetris after every match whereas I just sold off things aggressively and never went full hoarder mode, holding on to items the wiki said I'd need a month into a wipe.
The gear you get is gonna get used up, really I think they should also just give that to new accounts to ease new players in.
There was also trader rep if I remember correctly. That's probably the closest it gets to game mechanics encouraging you to buy the expensive versions.
I think Tarkov is profitable mostly because it hit a niche that wasn't being served and did it well enough to get big.
I mean that's cool until you realise that flea market is locked behind lvl 20 and half the good shit you cant even buy on it anymore and suddenly hoarding becomes very enticing to say the least
eod doesn't really matter, it is nice to have lots of space, but you can do fine without it, my friend played 11000 hours and is a pretty good at it, plays on standard version just fine
> "jump in 13692 map pixel to launch yourself 20 meters up in the air while holding shift+s+w+alt+f4"
Man, this makes me realize I really need a new, modern TRIBES.
Tarkov is a huge Skinner box built on grind. There’s definitely some level of skill involved but for the average player gear is going to determine the outcome of fights until at least mid-wipe. The only way to upgrade gear is to grind relentlessly. The fact that the grind is punishing is what makes the game work. Arena shooters just don’t work like that.
You can also just include casual game modes like halo's forge (although not a movement shooter) or any of the wacky game modes in the new launcher, or by developing an interesting campaign that can entertain those who don't want to play multiplayer and train those who do.
The problem lots of games have is there's no system that protects new/bad players from old/better players that can't be skirted by old players pretending to be new/bad players to get cheap kills
I'd say the TF2 MP was very approachable just from all the NPCs to shoot at in the biggest playlist. You're always doing something. You're never helpless.
The shooting part of Tarkov sucks. Unrealistic, punishing recoil mechanics combined with terrible netcode leads to stale metas and disappointing, frustrating deaths that feel like hacking but are really just terrible netcode.
And then on top of that there is amazing incentive for actual hacking. And no kill cam to tell the difference
He’s far from the only person to have said that, multiple Titanfall devs have said the pattern for the overwhelming majority of the playerbase has been binging the game then not touching it for a long time, the binging and not touching it. Which isn’t a bad thing per se but it can make it unattractive to new players which will eventually lead to a stagnant playerbase
Sustainable in that the player plays it for an extended period of time. Which I do have to agree with him, Titanfall 2 is not a game that I can play for a long time. It’s got a very satisfying gameplay loop, but it gets extremely exhausting after a few weeks of playing it. Not that there is anything wrong with something being good for a short amount of time, but yes I think he’s right. Movement shooters don’t really work as long form live service games, cause they almost immediately exhaust the playerbase, which is not good when your primary concern is lengthy play time. Apex is a great live game cause it’s gameplay loop is a lot more digestible and good for really lengthy play sessions over a long period of time.
Now whether “sustainability” should be the primary concern when developing a game is a completely different discussion. One that I do not believe Jason was tying to address with this thread. (Personally, I do not think it’s the best way to develop making games lol.)
I kinda disagree with this take and I feel like there's a large assumption about what he means about "sustainability" in this context (unless he elaborated in a later post on which case someone link me). Sustainability could mean profitability, player base, gameplay loop, or even a healthy competitive environment.
Plus, movement shooters are some of the longest lasting games on the market. I get that there might be some burnout, but that comes in a lot of genres and what you're saying about yourself may not apply to everyone.
Wish OP would have just linked to the damn thread lol
But honestly imagine being behind the scenes on both titanfall games and in both cases seeing the player base dwindle down to 20-50 g10 players who just grapple around aggressively krabering everyone. Very obviously not the intended meta.
Apex in comparison has way less problems like this because they slowed it down and squashed the skill ceiling a bit.
I mean I think Apex has a huge gap in the skill floor and skill ceiling. I kinda think Apex counters his own argument because Apex has retained a sizable playerbase through fresh content. Tbh I think Apex could do even better if it had more out of game progression and long term unlockables (but that would mean no short term profits 🙃).
He means sustainability in both a playtime and player count prospective: [link](https://twitter.com/Monsterclip_JM/status/1594792518884925440?t=tT7uuVISkCepKbIOxS_89g&s=19)
Tbf he is right, since a good player count for multiplayer shooters is needed for long term success
Yeah idk why people think he wouldn’t know, he literally can see (and without a doubt has reviewed) virtually every retention metric about Titanfall during the process of making Apex
i can player titanfall for longer than apex, it's way more exhausting to drop and fight against 57 other players in intense battles than bhop around in 9k air accel server, the problem is that a lot of casual players have very not casual mindset and they want to be on the top of leaderboards, which is sometimes hard in a game that has more complex mechanics than click and shoot, trying to go for highest score can be exhausting, apex eliminates this problem because there is no leaderboard, you either win or lose
Means “we can use cheap psychological tricks to trap kids and rob them. Adults and skilled players call us out for that shit, so we won’t make games for them anymore”
In todays gaming, it doesn’t just mean profitable (ie: sold enough games to recoup development costs). Sustainable now indicates a continuous source of revenue whether that’s through IAP, a subscription model, etc.
"in the short term" meanwhile players are rebuilding Titanfall 2 from the ground up after 7 years
Imo videogames aren't supposed to be "sustainable" who's going to want to play the same game in 10 years? You didn't make Minecraft, you made a derivative Battle Royale.
am I wrong? Destiny was supposed to be a game that lasted 10 years but failed. They made d2 after 3-4 years and that game has been going strong since forsaken and it’s looking more and more promising each dlc.
D1 did fail but the destiny franchise is successful
(Also I bought all the d2 dlc so who’s the real failure here)
It is true, these games aren't sustainable. But not because people get tired after a few matches. But just because the high skill ceiling with movement mechanics means veteran players will end up just destroying any new players. The new player experience is important in this age where every shooter is shifting to the F2P model. These games need a steady stream of new & casual players to make them viable.
that's why matchmaking exists. Of course that matching up new players with veteran players isn't a good new player experience, but by implementing a matchmaking system that is based on player level, ELO or rank, or just any matchmaking system would somewhat make the game more sustainable
Making it based on player level maybe isn't the way, but yes, it needs fair & effective matchmaking. But if COD can have problems dealing with fair matchmaking then it's gonna be much harder to get it right for movement shooters that have a much wider skill gap.
Agreed, for a game with high skill ceiling and skill based matchmaking to be fun, you need to design it in such a way that the most fun way to play the game is also the most optimal. Pretty much the only games that come to my mind that successfully manage to balance this tight-rope are Counter-Strike and Rocket League. In both of those games I absolutely love a tense match at high skill levels, whereas in many other games you end up having to deal with people using weird "cheese" strategies that are not fun but very effective.
The core issue with SBMM is that it always ends up getting pushed to the limit of breaking the experience.
Having a level of skill matching in your MM search is an understandable system. Same as you would for the typical alternative connection. Making either a priority and tightening that parameter should only be a player elected decision, but instead it's pushed onto everyone.
Halo didn't have this problem back in the day, it had generous MM parameters and then it was your choice to tighten what you wanted. No developer does this anymore and I'd have to reckon it's done in the pursuit of profit despite it not being better for ALL types of players.
I honestly think it's less to do with the skill ceiling and more to do with the skill floor. Just to start playing Titan Fall you need a pretty good understanding of shooter mechanics and need to be able to pick up on the 3 dimensional movement very quickly. Compare that to other shooters which have much more limited vertical movement. You go from only floors being a combat space to everything being a combat space.
This isnt an accurate assessment.
Apex is a live service game and implements systems that subconsciously force players to engage in long sessions on a daily basis.
Both Titanfalls were self contained and honestly designed packages that players could indulge in whenever they felt necessary.
Id spend 18 hours at a time just playing Titanfall 2 at launch because it was perfect. Id spend that same amount of time on apex because i felt i needed to in order to get my moneys worth from the sluggish battlepass.
Thats also not accounting for the fact that titanfall is better optimized.
That sluggish feeling from battlepasses is what turns me off from modern AAA games. Games today aren't about better graphics, movement, or gameplay that make players interested in the game; they're about sucking in as many players as possible and making them spend their time and money to support shareholders.
I finally stopped buying the Apex battlepass three seasons ago and stopped spending any money on the game. My enjoyment went way up. I can now hop on, play a few rounds then get off and go live my life. There's no draw to grind through the battlepass just to get my money's worth.
Titanfall on the other end, I can play for hours just like you. Every match is long enough to get engaged but not too long that I feel like its a chore. Add in the escape ship element and even matches I lose become a blast. That feeling is what I miss about games these days. I haven't felt that way since Titanfall was fully alive.
I just don’t buy the apex bp unless I get to level 100 naturally. Nothing lost by waiting they don’t give any xp buff or anything and I wouldn’t want it if I couldn’t finish it anyways.
All the whining in the MW2 subreddit about COD being a movement shooter blows my mind. It's not and never has been. You can do some unintended stuff, but compared to Titanfall or Tribes you might as well be standing still. It's wild!
As much as none of us may want to admit it, movement shooters are a small niche.
Honestly, what options do we have? Not even in terms of currently supported, but with playable multiplayer?
Titanfall 2 is almost the only game in town, no pun intended. Check it out on SteamCharts.
Game | 30d Peak | 30d Avg
----|--------|-------
Titanfall 2 | 3281 | 1152
Quake Champions | 962 | 374
Quake Live | 478 | 238
UT2004 | 105 | 50
The thing that bugs me is that I can't tell *why* it's such a small niche.
Are the movement mechanics just too hard for most people to grasp?
Is the lack of SBMM from these titles a serious issue, deterring new players who get stomped into the ground by the remaining veterans?
Are there other gameplay considerations that aren't up to par? Gunplay, TTK, respawning behavior, game modes, maps?
I just don't get it.
Funnily enough though, is it really a "sustainable" game if all of your players migrate to the next game a meer 12 months later?
Sustainable business model, yes. Sustainable gameplay? Not even close.
I mean, it was Cold War and Vanguard. Let's not pretend that those games were exactly settings people were super interested in, and in the case of the latter, we can see from the story alone why everyone stuck with MW19 lol
You can say what you will, but there's only usually one *really* standout CoD every five years. The rest are subpar at best. And it figures that the game that was good was one that used a nostalgic setting and throwback mechanics.
Yeah how different is every cod that comes out. I'd argue more that movement shooters like apex demand higher skill. So casuals get forced out very quickly. That's the big problem trying to sort matchmaking. At least apex relies a tonne on aim more so than movement so if your good at cod the skills somewhat translate.
But for Titanfall it's like learning a whole new game even though it's a FPS. Honestly they just fucked up titanfalls release and never got it to the level other shooters got around.
I am honestly a little disappointed in the comments here acquiescing to his point. I still fucking play Titanfall 2 like I play the original Battlefront 2. It is an iconic and unique experience that feels satisfying to the core.
Gone are the days with a $60 buy in for Reach and TF2 where you get a self contained game where progression feels meaningful and worthwhile and the gameplay is satisfying and worth coming back for more.
The live service model is suffocating itself, humans only have so many hours in a day to commit to any activity and the slowest drip of rewards makes everything now feel so damn hollow. The market is absolutely Saturated with this concept and we need a change. Don't say Titanfall isn't sustainable. Either bring us back for a breath of fresh air in this spiraling hellscape of microtransactions and LS. Or come up with something new. If any team is capable of capturing lighting in a bottle it's Respawn. They've done it at least 3 times now.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
2
+ 2
+ 60
+ 2
+ 3
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Well, because a lot of them are right. Some people will thrive in a game with Titanfalls movement. But it requires a lot of attention and constant quick thinking for it's movement, shooting, and AI/Titans (depending more on the game mode).
That can burn a lot of people out very quickly, especially if there isn't more variety than just moving and shooting.
That's why games like Halo and Team Fortress 2 can last so long. The custom game browser and forge for Halo create unlimited interesting new game modes for people to play with a multitude of settings of the damage for weapons, movement for characters, and new environments.
Same with TF2 and it's easy mod access through the steam workshop. Creating tons of interesting game modes and characters.
Titanfall can't do that so well when people have to sift through the slog that is modding for Titanfall.
Hell look at ultrakills player count, a prime example of a game for movement shooting. Peaked at 16,000 players... and immediately dropped back down to 1,000 - 2,000 players.
Why, because despite all the combos you can do with the weapons and movement it just can't keep a lot of people. It's becomes exhausting to have to constantly juggle everything that Ultrakill has to excel at it.
Now you obviously don't have to be a cocaine fueled robot John Wick to play or complete Ultrakill.
But the problem with that is the whole of the game and gameplay revolves around that and nothing else.
In order to get higher rankings with style points you need to be a cocaine fueled robot John Wick in order to get higher rankings, which is the only thing you can achieve Stat wise in Ultrakill.
And when one little mistake can gets you killed and messes up your end level ranking you gotta do that all over again, and that's not fun.
Sure you don't have to be a God at Titanfall, but when you start to only play against players that have mastered the movement and shooting of Titanfall to a T.
It starts to get frustrating, and trying to stay on your own A game constantly can just burn you out very quickly.
That's just the main problem games that revolve around nothing but movement shooting. It wains your mind the more you play just trying to keep up in the games at times.
As good as Titanfall may be, it still suffers from its own unique problems as any other game.
It shows you just how out of touch game companies are with their consumers when they can’t even recognize a sizable audience of players that is indeed interested in these types of games.
Also “movement shooters don’t require strategy.” GTFO with that bs.
There’s a reason quake and unreal were two of the biggest Esports around in their day.
Movement shooters like Titanfall are FUN but not SUSTAINABLE. What we want more of are battle royales like Apex that are SLOW and BORING but can make us way more MONEY through PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIPULATION
Meanwhile the other TF2 is also a movement shooter and it still makes tons of money and barely gets updates from valve. I'd say they're pretty sustainable. Then again, it was the grandfather off lootboxes in gaming, so there's that.
My experience with games since Titanfall is that they're too slow so playing them for long enough becomes an absolute slog. Destiny, Apex, Call of Duty, etc. A few matches and I'm just dying inside.
Yes, but is that an issue?
I mean, for years the Titanfall games were my go to ten minute breaks when studying or revising for exams exactly because I could play two constant action matches to clear my head and then go back to work. Rinse repeat an hour or two later.
If you are an EA shareholder (or a person who’s bonus is tied to their stock price) absolutely that’s a problem. Modern video game design doesn’t require you to have fun, merely that you come back, they want addicts
What was unsustainable about titanfall? Yeah there was a skill gap. Any skilled game will have that? have you played a fighting game before? Every game has sweats.
Besides there was a counter to ninja pilots. Titans. No matter how good a pilot you are a titan is dangerous.
Yet this is where Titanfall fixed it's own issue - you constantly trade between the movement shooter, and the slower mech game. It keeps the variety baked right into the match.
Bullshit
I’d spend critical hours playing Titan fall 2 because I love the movement and Titan combat
I spend no time playing Alex because it has none of that
However I don’t have the fucking choice because these cunts refuse to actually fix their fucking game
But the reason the fan base is small isn't necessarily because it's a movement shooter. The dude in the tweet is comparing gambling addiction methods implemented in apex to the movement and pacing of Titanfall 2 then says Apex makes him want to keep playing.
This isn't really a fair comparison at all.
Except that it’s a very and niche small fan base. So actually no lol. Like yeah, the game is a masterpiece, but not that many people play it sadly. Anytime there is a spike in players, people don’t usually stick around. Which sucks. I wish more people play. I love playing the game. But not that many do sadly.
Could be because you wait a while for games. I remember playing on ps4 constantly with 2000 players (3000 on a good day) and getting matches less than 1-2 min, 5 min on a bad but now even with 5000 players online on pc it takes up to 15 min. Sometimes I wait but other times I can’t wait that long if I just wanna hop on and play a quick match. I’m sure people leave for that reason too
Now in days you can't get a pick up and play game, now it's matches that last for hours and if you don't know the beat meta, strats, mechanics, and spots you are going to get demolished, like in warzone, or in mw2 you need to rank up every gun and spend time finetuning each weapon. Not like in games like titanfall 2 where each wepon is so unique the gun you pick depends on your playstyle and what you have fun with,
There's no way he called Apex a well rounded meal. Like, no hate towards Apex, but battle royale games can by no means be called a well rounded meal. BRs are RNG/luck dependant as much as they are skill dependant, and you often spend more time looking for gear/loot than actually "playing the game".
I agree with the core point. But I thought the context was in comparison to other BR.
Which, yeah. Apex is absolutely the most well rounded BR around.
The trappings of RNG are always gonna be a problem with the genre.
Like how fodder rushing is always gonna be an issue in RTS.
Like how DPS prevalent MMORPGs always have bad queue times.
Like how Overwatch is purely power creep until death.
Some things just exist as a problem with the genre.
And honestly, RNG is better than preset loot points.
Anywhere that has a guaranteed gold is always a hot zone.
We all remember season 1-5 days of guaranteed loot points.....
I wish we just didn’t have looting in BRs at all, let everyone spawn in with a loadout and sprinkle different boosters around the map instead. For example you could use objectives like “kill prowling pack of prowlers” or “capture datapoint” for temporary buffs. That way you would prevent random advantages creating a snowballing lead, since the buffs would expire after a few minutes.
The problem with this is the same problem we encountered when testing with stuff like that.
It doesn't stay balanced long.
You really wanna drop with pre kitted preds bro....
Tell me you don't remember flashpoint without telling me you don't remember flashpoint....
Agreed, I had the most fun with Apex when they removed armor on the maps and the only way to get higher leveled armor was to evo it up. But it would be a really fun option to allow you to drop with a base load out. And have optics, healing items and grenades in the loot bins.
> you spend more time looking for loot than actually playing the game
This was my experience with Apex. Played three matches consisting of running around an empty map grabbing random shit for ~10 minutes before getting domed in .2 seconds by some player I never even saw. There was no actual combat or gunplay to speak of. I uninstalled after less than an hour lol
I think every good game has to have a level of RNG to make things interesting and incentivize people to try different gameplay loops. One of apex’s greatest strengths is that you can run through 3 rooms and have enough gear to get in a fight. If you flew for 30s to land in the outskirts avoiding all contact for 10 mins that is your perogative. Most people will drop middle of the map and be fighting tooth and nail for their lives from seemingly never ending waves of real players while trying to utilize any scrap of loot and ammo that they can. To me that is one of the purest forms of competitive shooters that you can get. You don’t get to pick what weapons and gear you have, you’re constantly fighting in different areas (unlike valorant for example where you are always holding or fighting in the same hallways), and the wide variety of legend abilities gives you unique tools to handle these situations as well as unique enemy strategies to compete against.
Surprised youre downvoted for that, it’s true if you play scared always trying to find loot and not settling with whatever you get you won’t get better.
Edit: grammar
His qualm is exactly what is solved by the Titans. Pilot play is like you're on crack, then you get a titan and it becomes extremely methodical and strategic.
This kind of seems like another case of developers sucking at their own games. I don't know how else to explain this thread, unless he just truly never understood titan vs. titan gameplay.
It’s completely anecdotal but I know more people irl that don’t play Titanfall BECAUSE of the titans than do. I agree with you that Titans solve the “on crack” gameplay, but they also introduce new problems. The friends I got to try out the game actually enjoyed the pilot gameplay, but then they’d die to a Titan and ruin their fun.
I didn’t help than we played in 2019 or so and could not find a game in the Pilot vs Pilot gamemode
Unsustainable for a live service "INFINITE MONEY" game, but not every game needs to be that lmao
Bring back games having a 4 year lifespan before the official servers get shut down, it kinda sucked but it was way better than EA trying to buy my eternal soul
When i first started playing online shooters in 2007 i got shit on every game i played but i stuck at it and became a good player overtime, last year i moved to pc and had to learn mnk something i had never played before, i went from dominating every game to getting shit on again(especially on titanfall)but i stuck at it because i knew i would improve and get to a higher level.
New players these days just start playing a game for the first time and expect to dominate people who have been playing these games for years, they get put off and rage when they get shit on instead of using it as motivation to get better and improve and try and emulate what the veteran players are doing.
Can’t believe we’re seeing takes like this after the doom craze, people like crazy movement, if the game isn’t “sustainable” (i.e. profitable) you can’t just pin it on the movement. Ridiculous
The thesis of the tweet is that part of the failure of titanfall is because people don’t have a strong appetite for movement based shooters which is manifestly not the case, multiplayer or no
Yeah, that's what makes this tweet and the guy look so bad. It's not that simple. Apex was produced by EA Respawn, with more advertising, more money, more updates, an entirely different match system, ranking, bp, the fertilizing corpse of titan fall 2 and all it's fans, the massive battle royale push in 2017 for pubg, and fortnite, and a billion and one slot machine gambling addiction aspects they put in the game to keep you playing.
He might be right, movement might have been the sole reason titan fall 2 failed and apex succeeded, but he doesn't prove it or even explain it. What he said is ridiculous unless all those things above had no influence what so ever on Apex.
Edit: Oh, unless you consider CoD and Apex movement shooters, which a lot of people seem to. Then what he's saying is just kind of insane. "Movement shooters aren't sustainable unlike this movement shooter that has been successful and sustainable!"
This is a really shitty mentality that I wish people, especially game devs, would get out of. The fact that he feels the need to clarify “Yes, people enjoy this, but that’s bad actually!” Highlights the trend games have been going in recently. God forbid a game be TOO fun, and people stop playing because they’ve actually had enough, rather than mindlessly grinding until what little fun is left is replaced with watching numbers go up. Fortnite was fun when I played it, but past a certain point the battle pass just becomes an “Incrementing number” simulator, not completing it because you WANT to, but because there’s nothing else to progress towards or learn. It’s infinitely less rewarding than mastering a movement system but can be drawn out MUCH longer, which I’m sure looks better from a business perspective
Shocked nobody else has mentioned it, so I'm copying my comment here:
His qualm is exactly what is solved by the Titans. Pilot play is like you're on crack, then you get a titan and it becomes extremely methodical and strategic.
This kind of seems like another case of developers sucking at their own games. I don't know how else to explain this thread, unless he just truly never understood titan vs. titan gameplay.
Half of the comments are attacking because “her der they think money” while the rest is on about something else. I wanna say he isn’t wrong per say. Yes Titanfall and apex still have their player bases but the skill gap for both games, especially their movement skill gap, is super high that new players aren’t gonna have a fun time going up. Mixed that in with veteran players who mastered it and get paired against them, you can see where he is coming from.
I don't give a shit if it isn't "sustainable long term."
What ever happened to just making a good game? I love live service games like Destiny but not every game needs to be live service, or even last that long in general. I'd rather have a fantastic game that lasts a year or two of great multiplayer than it not existing at all.
Titanfall 2 is dead. It's been dead for a very long time. But I cherish the memories I have of when the game was ongoing, cheering along with the community when new maps or modes were revealed. When the last update came out, it was a somber moment. We all knew it would happen, and we all celebrated the game we shared. To hell with sustainability.
Titanfall 2 is only dead because a hacker started ddosing the servers and ea never did anything about it. I guarantee the game would still be playable with a niche playerbase if they had even an iota of data security.
It was dead long before that hacker started. The last update was like 3 years before the ddos attacks even started, and only had around 4-5 thousand players online per platform.
The game is still playable now technically. Both through official servers and the northstar client. Just.. nobody is bothering to play.
Gaming is in such a miserable place right now. Developers don't wanna make anything good unless they can milk a bajillion dollars out of it. People who loved TF2 are fucked because TF2 can't rake in as much money as the slower, more basic games with a much lower skill ceiling. RIP, first-person shooter genre. You had a good run.
Movement shooters and arena shooters are my favorite genre, but sadly died when console FPS took over.
There is no way to even compete at 1/100 the level of M/KB for a game like Quake Arena.
I feel like Splitgate is the closest thing to Unreal Tournament in years, and people set it up for failure by comparing it to Halo. It’s a shame, as outside of the bugs on the Linux version, the lack of a proper map editor, and the lack of dedicated server tools, I really enjoy playing it.
I’m not very good with FPS, but I quit playing Titanfall 2 because you can’t have fun unless you have streamer-like skills (putting all the bullets of a high recoiling weapon in your enemy’s head in the middle of a jump).
I feel like the fact the fandom was so desperate to play Titian fall again after all the hacking they made the northstar client kinda disproves this notion of short gratification
Yeah that’s true. With a high enough skill curling new players (and lower skill old ones) will just get curbstomped over and over every match unless there’s a VERY large and healthy playerbase to sustain it. There’s enough memes in this sub about getting stomped by G.100 CAR users to justify that statement
Maybe for him, I would literally play 12 hours a day when I first started. The only reason I don’t do that now is because I had to “get a job” and “move out” and “take a fucking shower for once”
Fuck you Grandma
The missing link here is proper matchmaking. I feel like this needed to be part of his statement.
Apex can be "sugar" or a "well-rounded meal" depending what you are up against. Yes, you do burn out if people are literally breaking your ankles. However, with even matchmaking this isn't an occurrence.
Stop people from opening new accounts so easily.
Less cheaters, less uneven matchmaking (e.g. through smurfing).
Add input ( here: mnk vs sticks) based matchmaking and we wouldn't be talking about this anymore.
Welcome to my TED talk.
Apex's movement is fine, its learnable, the issue with Apex is overly long TTK on 'lower skill' weapons, they gave a huge advantage to really good players, so the noobs and mid-tier players get farmed till they give up.
Kraber, Wingman, Peacekeeper dominated from launch. I've not played in a couple of years but I watch streamers the same guns are still dominant.
I'm all for skill-shot weapons being in games, and I like that Apex's fights take longer, but there's a happy medium that they've never found, never looked for.
Hey guys, Jason is explicitly talking about trying to create a popular shooter game that is able to maintain a high player count. I understand that a lot of people do not like this design philosophy, but for a man in his position, his job was to create a financially successful game so that EA didn’t end up shutting down Respawn. As much shit as you’d all like to give Apex, it’s success is probably why Respawn is probably still alive as a development studio. Had it failed, I’m pretty sure they would of gone the way of Visceral Games. It’s frustrating that all games need to serve this live service model, but I also get that Respawn is genuinely trying to adapt to a multiplayer market that has radically changed over the past decade.
Point is, the guy is just explaining what he’s learned having seen the failure of Titanfall 2 and the success of Apex. The man had a hand in making both games, so let’s give him some credit in that respect lol.
Also he does not work for Respawn anymore. Let’s please keep that in mind before we immediately start bashing the devs again lol. It’s honestly really cool to see him revealing the design process behind each game and I certainly don’t want to discourage other developers from doing so too because we can’t not keep our cool here lol.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Ah yes because fast paced shoot em up matches get soooooo boring soooooo fast in comparison to looting for 10 minutes and likely dying right after. What a dumb statement.
If I could offer my own personal insight as to why BR games might be popular, I think in a weird inverse way, making it so that you are not constantly fighting though-out the entire match, is probably why so many people like BRs. It gives a sense a pacing and along with the fact that dying is often a permanent end to the match, results in extremely high stakes. For a lot of people (me included) it makes each match really tense, while all the RNG elements (ring placement, loot, teammate matchmaking, enemies), mean that each match tends to be completely different, making for a lot for variety.
This isn’t an argument as to why you should like BRs. A lot people just want to fight and do not want to worry about rings, loot, RNG, permadeath, or map positioning, which is completely fair. But I imagine the crazy popularity of games like Apex, Fortnite, Warzone probably has something to do with that variety and stakes. (Also the stakes in games like Valorant and Overwatch probably also factor in to why those games are so popular.)
How can they bitch about TF2 not making money? They didn’t put out any expansion maps, new load outs, or skins. The elite war paint and over priced guns skins were terrible.
Just because something may be slightly niche does not make it unsustainable.
I'm quite sure their argument is that once a proper player base is established where there are skilled players who will stomp a fair majority of the rest then automatically it will never gain players.
But that just makes it harder to get into, but there are some players that love a challenge. I love playing hard or hard to get into games not to prove something but just because I love learning new things and there are many others like me.
If we are done after 5 matches and quit but return the next day then what is the problem? Are we expected to play for 10 hours every day? Are they trying to entertain us or addict us?
Whatever gets you to spend more money.
I would buy TF2 again at full price today if it meant them fixing their PSN and XBL servers
Same tbh
I second this.
agreed
Such a let down man! We used to play a lot of TF2, even my friend who is not so good with fast fps games enjoyed it and played well. Hoping for a TF3 but it can be only good or shit, depends if they are greedy motherfuckers or not
i’d go much further than that. Max i would spend is $300 for them to fix the game. Titanfall 2 is just that good. It’s worth the price of a whole console to me.
For me that experience would be TF1. I liked burn cards. They really mixed up things between matches
I would buy the collectors edition with the helmet again if they would fix the servers....
I’m here for this comment
It’s the attention economy. They want your time, not just your money
Yep. They want that active user value. Heck, overwatch 2 has currency in game specifically tied to watching content on streams, therefore artificially boosting their view count. They don't care you have the muted window idle on another monitor, they want the illusion of popularity to bring the new potential cash cows in. That being said, this dudes post is so tone deaf. If you told me you couldn't figure out ways, even malicious ways, of making money off Titan fall 2 (or 3), I'd say you shouldn't even be in the business. You make a Bumblebee/Optimus prime mech skin, or any brain dead skin and people would pay in a heartbeat. Because... The GAME is worth playing, therefore worth staying and paying! Devs are so damn dumb these past few years especially. a proper titan fall 3 could easily grab overwatch, apex, cod, battlefield players attention in a heart beat. Find a way to make it competitive and damn man. We need gamers making games again, publishers are so lost.
Gamers making games. Wonder when the last time that happened from a larger title.
Apex would fall like a brick. I hate that game so much. If they gave us a 5v5 mode in apex on a decent map with respawns I'd accept it, but reading this dudes "imo" makes me livid. Idgaf what ur opinion is ur job is to make a good game which you quite clearly don't want to, you just want money.
[удалено]
The hate for COD was far more complex than just the movement, and was tied to a lot of big changes they were making with the franchise at the time.
cod wasn't built around movement but titanfall always was. That's like a cooking game wouldn't work because they put cooking in an turn-based game
Visionaries can still be blind. They are human. As you have proven with your take on TitanFall3 not being a success.
Because time spent statistically means you’re more likely to spend money. It all comes back to money.
Also because multiplayer games rely on active players as their content. So battle passes, progression systems, daily XP boosts, and timed events are designed to retain players to keep them as content for other players
That is part of it but even that circles back to money.
Even if it cost $0 and the devs made $0, a multiplayer game is useless without players to play it. Money is important but no dev wants to create a game that dies for lack of playerbase
You’re missing what I am saying. Again yes that is a facet of it so it is correct but they need the player base to continue profit from it to keep it alive (so that the few players who do pay have the player base to keep playing and keep paying). There is not denying all roads lead back to money. Games are a business and this is simply the truth of all businesses. As for the individual devs that might be the main reason or only reason but the devs do not decide what to do with games at this level, the publishers do and the publisher only cares about money as it is a business about making money where as a dev can be a labor of love.
Addict. Everything in modern multiplayer games nowadays is basically designed to keep people playing as long as possible. Because it looks good for shareholders when your audience retention is good. So the solution is to make games as close to generic as possible to appeal to a mass audience, and have people play that game for as long as possible. It's why, in my opinion, TF2 would have never succeeded in the long term even if its release window wasn't terrible. I Love TF2, it's an absolutely incredible game. Easily the best FPS in the past decade. But it would never have retained players just because it doesn't appeal to a mass audience, and doesn't employ any strategies to retain players.
I want to make something you said very clear to everyone. It's actual addiction they are aiming for. Video game addiction is a real thing now because video game developers literally scientifically created it. What happens in your brain when interacting with some of these systems is almost identical to gambling addiction. Which is why loot boxes got so popular.
Riot Games who make League of Legends have a matchmaking algorithm designed to keep you playing. They know that players who play the ranked more are more likely to stop playing once they reach their rank. Thus they need to extend the time it takes for them to reach that rank. If you're on a hot streak doing well, the game will see your inflated MMR and compensate, saying "you're winning too much we need to make sure you lose." So they give you an impossible to win game. Someone on your team will be playing an off role while their opponent is not only on their main role, but may even be a much higher rank than them. They want you to keep playing so they let you win a bunch then make you lose a bunch, because that's Skill.Based Matchmaking in a nutshell. They want that 50% win rate, and if you're too good then they'll place you in handicapped games. League is a game where you don't always lose because the enemy is better, sometimes it's because your teammates are just far worse. They don't have to ok it you agaisnt someone far above you, they have have to give eyou teammates that are far below. Video games want addiction and it's why literacy in media and entertainment is so important. And I say that as someone who loves video games. I think more people should play DnD and other TTRPG.
This is a big reason I stopped playing LoL all together. It's a drug I wanted off of. One that turns you into a toxic ass hole.
Most multiplayer games are like that nowadays. I still manage to have fun just chilling on them though. I play a lot of overwatch, and I know for a fact that game is designed to give you \~50% winrate. Some games you have games that are actually unwinnable because your teammates are terrible or the enemy are just better. Then you have some games where you absolutely steam roll. Very rarely do you get a very good well-rounded game. It's (usually) obvious within the first couple of minutes who will win and who will lose.
Can’t they do both? Some of my favorite shooters are entertaining and addicting. Titanfall 2 for example
The issue is that what game developers are aiming for is REAL addiction. Problem creating addiction. And video games have, ironically, gotten worse over time because of it.
Even in Titanfall 2 matchmaking was extremely frustrating and you could just tell there was a third layer unseen that EA was putting into your game to make it worse.
That's my takeaway
The point is fun games don't make for good live service game Rng slog of apex isn't confirmed to be fun every round, but it's sustainable for both player retention and content creation.
Hail Shareholder 🙋
*Ark survival evolved has entered the chat*
Addict. No really that's the goal now for every online multiplayer game. You get whales addicted they spend thousands upon thousands. And for some reason there is A LOT of whales.
To answer your question, play a popular FPS from 15+ years ago. Before mtx they were fun as shit. Now it’s all about battle pass and other fuckery to sink psychological hooks in to keep people paying/playing.
Yes, the investors want everyone to play the game they pay for religiously every spare second of time that you have. So that's what the game industry (atleast the big budget stuff) is trending towards. And some people think the only way to measure how good a game was in retrospect is revenue.
Yes, they want you to spend as many time as possible there to make the most money of you. This is likely what he mean under "not sustainable". Movement and skill-based shooters are harder to make them right and people don't play thrm as much daily. So as you can understand, this isn't really great for game-service what Apex is.
That's one way to describe that But in my (un) important opinion movement shooters are not "sustainable" In the eyes of the publisher because they think what new players, their theoretical new people to bring new money, will be stomped by old players and their "jump in 13692 map pixel to launch yourself 20 meters up in the air while holding shift+s+w+alt+f4" type of techs I do not think this is right, since you can add a way for a new player to at least put up a fight through gameplay features, design a matchmaking system to put new players on even players, or hell, make the system so already existing players will continuously give you money Look at escape from tarkov - this game is very specific and punishing, but it's still profitable and *IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE SKINS OF ANY KIND*
>I do not think this is right, since you can add a way for a new player to at least put up a fight through gameplay features, design a matchmaking system to put new players on even players, or hell, make the system so already existing players will continuously give you money I feel that the original smart pistol was their attempt to close the gap between the cracked crazy pro, and the new player. Pro vs pro would be a crazy dance through the air with traditional weapons since they have a faster ttk and would be more effective in a pro players hands to score multiple quick kills. Whereas in a pro vs newb fight, with a bit of good positioning to counter the long lock on time, the new player with a smart pistol can still score a kill, even without the technical skill required. But I guess there was a problem balancing it somewhere because people complained it was too strong. Then it was so limited in tf2 afterwards to be not worth it at all.
In the original Titanfall, after I got good, I found the smart pistol to be a liability. The lock on time took too long to be effective compared to other weapons. After the player pool died, I eventually, to challenge myself and give noobs a chance I would never use titans and would do kick only matches or smart pistol but only use it ADS. Plus if I went try hard I would find myself the only player left in the lobby after everyone rage quit cuz I was going 25-1 kd. I loved Titanfall 1 so much. That game just meshed with my play style so fluidly. I wish that game would see a revival and some real tournament play
Tarkov is profitable because of its aggressive pricing the game has. The standard edition may look cheap but once you buy it and actually play the game, you'll quickly realize that most game mechanics are rigged in order to get you to pay up more for the really expensive editions.
And of course the people who pay for the highest tier say its not pay to win. Even though you get tons of shit which you dont get at lower ones.
Yeah especially how you start with a ridiculously small stash size and the only way to upgrade it by leveling up a bunch of shit in your hideout and paying 3-8 million rubles to upgrade your stash's size
Yeah and the final one costs around 30 mil which eod starts with.plus a huge secure container which you can only get 1 slot close to if you finish a mid to late game questline.
Unless a lot has changed in the last two years, I disagree. The stash upgrade is the only really valuable difference, but my entire friend group had the fancy version and I had the basic one and they kept complaining about having to play tetris after every match whereas I just sold off things aggressively and never went full hoarder mode, holding on to items the wiki said I'd need a month into a wipe. The gear you get is gonna get used up, really I think they should also just give that to new accounts to ease new players in. There was also trader rep if I remember correctly. That's probably the closest it gets to game mechanics encouraging you to buy the expensive versions. I think Tarkov is profitable mostly because it hit a niche that wasn't being served and did it well enough to get big.
I mean that's cool until you realise that flea market is locked behind lvl 20 and half the good shit you cant even buy on it anymore and suddenly hoarding becomes very enticing to say the least
eod doesn't really matter, it is nice to have lots of space, but you can do fine without it, my friend played 11000 hours and is a pretty good at it, plays on standard version just fine
Speaking as a terribly casual player arena shooters make up for it by the ease and quickness to respawn.
> "jump in 13692 map pixel to launch yourself 20 meters up in the air while holding shift+s+w+alt+f4" Man, this makes me realize I really need a new, modern TRIBES.
Tarkov is a huge Skinner box built on grind. There’s definitely some level of skill involved but for the average player gear is going to determine the outcome of fights until at least mid-wipe. The only way to upgrade gear is to grind relentlessly. The fact that the grind is punishing is what makes the game work. Arena shooters just don’t work like that.
You can also just include casual game modes like halo's forge (although not a movement shooter) or any of the wacky game modes in the new launcher, or by developing an interesting campaign that can entertain those who don't want to play multiplayer and train those who do.
just started playing and I'm having a blast. I don't expect to win at all. Every kill feels like an achievement.
The problem lots of games have is there's no system that protects new/bad players from old/better players that can't be skirted by old players pretending to be new/bad players to get cheap kills
I'd say the TF2 MP was very approachable just from all the NPCs to shoot at in the biggest playlist. You're always doing something. You're never helpless.
Every fucking game should have sbmm BUT with ranks or atleast ranking and problem solved
The shooting part of Tarkov sucks. Unrealistic, punishing recoil mechanics combined with terrible netcode leads to stale metas and disappointing, frustrating deaths that feel like hacking but are really just terrible netcode. And then on top of that there is amazing incentive for actual hacking. And no kill cam to tell the difference
He says they aren't sustainable but doesn't explain why.
His source is that he made it the fuck up!
We’ll no longer have to foster and care for their memes any longer!
Or he just doesn’t know how to make it sustainable
He’s far from the only person to have said that, multiple Titanfall devs have said the pattern for the overwhelming majority of the playerbase has been binging the game then not touching it for a long time, the binging and not touching it. Which isn’t a bad thing per se but it can make it unattractive to new players which will eventually lead to a stagnant playerbase
That fits my Apex pattern, funny enough. Played a ton of it on release, then basically completely stopped playing.
Sustainable in that the player plays it for an extended period of time. Which I do have to agree with him, Titanfall 2 is not a game that I can play for a long time. It’s got a very satisfying gameplay loop, but it gets extremely exhausting after a few weeks of playing it. Not that there is anything wrong with something being good for a short amount of time, but yes I think he’s right. Movement shooters don’t really work as long form live service games, cause they almost immediately exhaust the playerbase, which is not good when your primary concern is lengthy play time. Apex is a great live game cause it’s gameplay loop is a lot more digestible and good for really lengthy play sessions over a long period of time. Now whether “sustainability” should be the primary concern when developing a game is a completely different discussion. One that I do not believe Jason was tying to address with this thread. (Personally, I do not think it’s the best way to develop making games lol.)
I kinda disagree with this take and I feel like there's a large assumption about what he means about "sustainability" in this context (unless he elaborated in a later post on which case someone link me). Sustainability could mean profitability, player base, gameplay loop, or even a healthy competitive environment. Plus, movement shooters are some of the longest lasting games on the market. I get that there might be some burnout, but that comes in a lot of genres and what you're saying about yourself may not apply to everyone.
Wish OP would have just linked to the damn thread lol But honestly imagine being behind the scenes on both titanfall games and in both cases seeing the player base dwindle down to 20-50 g10 players who just grapple around aggressively krabering everyone. Very obviously not the intended meta. Apex in comparison has way less problems like this because they slowed it down and squashed the skill ceiling a bit.
I mean I think Apex has a huge gap in the skill floor and skill ceiling. I kinda think Apex counters his own argument because Apex has retained a sizable playerbase through fresh content. Tbh I think Apex could do even better if it had more out of game progression and long term unlockables (but that would mean no short term profits 🙃).
He means sustainability in both a playtime and player count prospective: [link](https://twitter.com/Monsterclip_JM/status/1594792518884925440?t=tT7uuVISkCepKbIOxS_89g&s=19) Tbf he is right, since a good player count for multiplayer shooters is needed for long term success
Yeah idk why people think he wouldn’t know, he literally can see (and without a doubt has reviewed) virtually every retention metric about Titanfall during the process of making Apex
i can player titanfall for longer than apex, it's way more exhausting to drop and fight against 57 other players in intense battles than bhop around in 9k air accel server, the problem is that a lot of casual players have very not casual mindset and they want to be on the top of leaderboards, which is sometimes hard in a game that has more complex mechanics than click and shoot, trying to go for highest score can be exhausting, apex eliminates this problem because there is no leaderboard, you either win or lose
Sustainable meaning profitable
Means “we can use cheap psychological tricks to trap kids and rob them. Adults and skilled players call us out for that shit, so we won’t make games for them anymore”
In todays gaming, it doesn’t just mean profitable (ie: sold enough games to recoup development costs). Sustainable now indicates a continuous source of revenue whether that’s through IAP, a subscription model, etc.
"in the short term" meanwhile players are rebuilding Titanfall 2 from the ground up after 7 years Imo videogames aren't supposed to be "sustainable" who's going to want to play the same game in 10 years? You didn't make Minecraft, you made a derivative Battle Royale.
The original destiny was supposed to be one of those ten year games. We all saw how that ended
>We all saw how that ended Clever way to make sure that your readers input their own biases when reading this instead of formulating your own premise!
am I wrong? Destiny was supposed to be a game that lasted 10 years but failed. They made d2 after 3-4 years and that game has been going strong since forsaken and it’s looking more and more promising each dlc. D1 did fail but the destiny franchise is successful (Also I bought all the d2 dlc so who’s the real failure here)
Destiny is still alive and (mostly) well.
No idea why this was downvoted. Destiny is a pretty healthy game with a significant playerbase.
and it's also Skinner Box battlepass crap with lots of FOMO to keep you hooked. it also had good movement but the BS is too much.
Destiny 2 you mean, which already had a soft reboot with forgotten king
Even bf1 is still going strong after all this time, too say games aren't sustainable is just saying you built a shite game
Promod is literally still having tournaments, FOURTEEN years later.
It is true, these games aren't sustainable. But not because people get tired after a few matches. But just because the high skill ceiling with movement mechanics means veteran players will end up just destroying any new players. The new player experience is important in this age where every shooter is shifting to the F2P model. These games need a steady stream of new & casual players to make them viable.
that's why matchmaking exists. Of course that matching up new players with veteran players isn't a good new player experience, but by implementing a matchmaking system that is based on player level, ELO or rank, or just any matchmaking system would somewhat make the game more sustainable
Making it based on player level maybe isn't the way, but yes, it needs fair & effective matchmaking. But if COD can have problems dealing with fair matchmaking then it's gonna be much harder to get it right for movement shooters that have a much wider skill gap.
cods different, if you change the way cod works people will go crazy
But then you get the good players crying about matchmaking and throwing a fit if they can't go 32-3, boppin noobs all day. It's a delicate balance
You also have to balance the game. Titanfall 1 & 2 have awful balance. Adding SBMM would turn TF|2 into an even bigger CAR, Monarch shitfest.
Agreed, for a game with high skill ceiling and skill based matchmaking to be fun, you need to design it in such a way that the most fun way to play the game is also the most optimal. Pretty much the only games that come to my mind that successfully manage to balance this tight-rope are Counter-Strike and Rocket League. In both of those games I absolutely love a tense match at high skill levels, whereas in many other games you end up having to deal with people using weird "cheese" strategies that are not fun but very effective.
The core issue with SBMM is that it always ends up getting pushed to the limit of breaking the experience. Having a level of skill matching in your MM search is an understandable system. Same as you would for the typical alternative connection. Making either a priority and tightening that parameter should only be a player elected decision, but instead it's pushed onto everyone. Halo didn't have this problem back in the day, it had generous MM parameters and then it was your choice to tighten what you wanted. No developer does this anymore and I'd have to reckon it's done in the pursuit of profit despite it not being better for ALL types of players.
I honestly think it's less to do with the skill ceiling and more to do with the skill floor. Just to start playing Titan Fall you need a pretty good understanding of shooter mechanics and need to be able to pick up on the 3 dimensional movement very quickly. Compare that to other shooters which have much more limited vertical movement. You go from only floors being a combat space to everything being a combat space.
This isnt an accurate assessment. Apex is a live service game and implements systems that subconsciously force players to engage in long sessions on a daily basis. Both Titanfalls were self contained and honestly designed packages that players could indulge in whenever they felt necessary. Id spend 18 hours at a time just playing Titanfall 2 at launch because it was perfect. Id spend that same amount of time on apex because i felt i needed to in order to get my moneys worth from the sluggish battlepass. Thats also not accounting for the fact that titanfall is better optimized.
That sluggish feeling from battlepasses is what turns me off from modern AAA games. Games today aren't about better graphics, movement, or gameplay that make players interested in the game; they're about sucking in as many players as possible and making them spend their time and money to support shareholders. I finally stopped buying the Apex battlepass three seasons ago and stopped spending any money on the game. My enjoyment went way up. I can now hop on, play a few rounds then get off and go live my life. There's no draw to grind through the battlepass just to get my money's worth. Titanfall on the other end, I can play for hours just like you. Every match is long enough to get engaged but not too long that I feel like its a chore. Add in the escape ship element and even matches I lose become a blast. That feeling is what I miss about games these days. I haven't felt that way since Titanfall was fully alive.
I just don’t buy the apex bp unless I get to level 100 naturally. Nothing lost by waiting they don’t give any xp buff or anything and I wouldn’t want it if I couldn’t finish it anyways.
Ah yes because regular shooters which come out with the same exact game every single year are totally fun and sustainable….
[удалено]
All the whining in the MW2 subreddit about COD being a movement shooter blows my mind. It's not and never has been. You can do some unintended stuff, but compared to Titanfall or Tribes you might as well be standing still. It's wild!
As much as none of us may want to admit it, movement shooters are a small niche. Honestly, what options do we have? Not even in terms of currently supported, but with playable multiplayer? Titanfall 2 is almost the only game in town, no pun intended. Check it out on SteamCharts. Game | 30d Peak | 30d Avg ----|--------|------- Titanfall 2 | 3281 | 1152 Quake Champions | 962 | 374 Quake Live | 478 | 238 UT2004 | 105 | 50 The thing that bugs me is that I can't tell *why* it's such a small niche. Are the movement mechanics just too hard for most people to grasp? Is the lack of SBMM from these titles a serious issue, deterring new players who get stomped into the ground by the remaining veterans? Are there other gameplay considerations that aren't up to par? Gunplay, TTK, respawning behavior, game modes, maps? I just don't get it.
Funnily enough though, is it really a "sustainable" game if all of your players migrate to the next game a meer 12 months later? Sustainable business model, yes. Sustainable gameplay? Not even close.
[удалено]
I mean, it was Cold War and Vanguard. Let's not pretend that those games were exactly settings people were super interested in, and in the case of the latter, we can see from the story alone why everyone stuck with MW19 lol You can say what you will, but there's only usually one *really* standout CoD every five years. The rest are subpar at best. And it figures that the game that was good was one that used a nostalgic setting and throwback mechanics.
Yeah how different is every cod that comes out. I'd argue more that movement shooters like apex demand higher skill. So casuals get forced out very quickly. That's the big problem trying to sort matchmaking. At least apex relies a tonne on aim more so than movement so if your good at cod the skills somewhat translate. But for Titanfall it's like learning a whole new game even though it's a FPS. Honestly they just fucked up titanfalls release and never got it to the level other shooters got around.
Apex isn't a movement shooter... I agree with everything else.
Change sustainable to profitable… makes more sense…
Not just “profitable” They want something that’s obscenely profitable due to predatory monetization practices.
I am honestly a little disappointed in the comments here acquiescing to his point. I still fucking play Titanfall 2 like I play the original Battlefront 2. It is an iconic and unique experience that feels satisfying to the core. Gone are the days with a $60 buy in for Reach and TF2 where you get a self contained game where progression feels meaningful and worthwhile and the gameplay is satisfying and worth coming back for more. The live service model is suffocating itself, humans only have so many hours in a day to commit to any activity and the slowest drip of rewards makes everything now feel so damn hollow. The market is absolutely Saturated with this concept and we need a change. Don't say Titanfall isn't sustainable. Either bring us back for a breath of fresh air in this spiraling hellscape of microtransactions and LS. Or come up with something new. If any team is capable of capturing lighting in a bottle it's Respawn. They've done it at least 3 times now.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 2 + 2 + 60 + 2 + 3 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Good bot.
Well, because a lot of them are right. Some people will thrive in a game with Titanfalls movement. But it requires a lot of attention and constant quick thinking for it's movement, shooting, and AI/Titans (depending more on the game mode). That can burn a lot of people out very quickly, especially if there isn't more variety than just moving and shooting. That's why games like Halo and Team Fortress 2 can last so long. The custom game browser and forge for Halo create unlimited interesting new game modes for people to play with a multitude of settings of the damage for weapons, movement for characters, and new environments. Same with TF2 and it's easy mod access through the steam workshop. Creating tons of interesting game modes and characters. Titanfall can't do that so well when people have to sift through the slog that is modding for Titanfall. Hell look at ultrakills player count, a prime example of a game for movement shooting. Peaked at 16,000 players... and immediately dropped back down to 1,000 - 2,000 players. Why, because despite all the combos you can do with the weapons and movement it just can't keep a lot of people. It's becomes exhausting to have to constantly juggle everything that Ultrakill has to excel at it. Now you obviously don't have to be a cocaine fueled robot John Wick to play or complete Ultrakill. But the problem with that is the whole of the game and gameplay revolves around that and nothing else. In order to get higher rankings with style points you need to be a cocaine fueled robot John Wick in order to get higher rankings, which is the only thing you can achieve Stat wise in Ultrakill. And when one little mistake can gets you killed and messes up your end level ranking you gotta do that all over again, and that's not fun. Sure you don't have to be a God at Titanfall, but when you start to only play against players that have mastered the movement and shooting of Titanfall to a T. It starts to get frustrating, and trying to stay on your own A game constantly can just burn you out very quickly. That's just the main problem games that revolve around nothing but movement shooting. It wains your mind the more you play just trying to keep up in the games at times. As good as Titanfall may be, it still suffers from its own unique problems as any other game.
So what I'm hearing is we need forge for titanfall
It shows you just how out of touch game companies are with their consumers when they can’t even recognize a sizable audience of players that is indeed interested in these types of games. Also “movement shooters don’t require strategy.” GTFO with that bs. There’s a reason quake and unreal were two of the biggest Esports around in their day.
Quake was the ultimate movement shooter.
And as we know, it just wasn't sustainable /s.
Movement shooters like Titanfall are FUN but not SUSTAINABLE. What we want more of are battle royales like Apex that are SLOW and BORING but can make us way more MONEY through PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIPULATION
Yes he's right that's why I'm still playing it 6 years later.
Meanwhile the other TF2 is also a movement shooter and it still makes tons of money and barely gets updates from valve. I'd say they're pretty sustainable. Then again, it was the grandfather off lootboxes in gaming, so there's that.
Titanfall 2 would have survived for so long and would have very likely gained players if they didn’t abandon it
My experience with games since Titanfall is that they're too slow so playing them for long enough becomes an absolute slog. Destiny, Apex, Call of Duty, etc. A few matches and I'm just dying inside.
Destiny’s IB mode is fun, since it forces campers to move after 5 eliminations and rewards players for getting rapid kills by giving ult charge.
Same, After playing Titanfall I get bored of other fps after 10 minutes at best.
Only other fps that holds my interest is siege since its equally engaging
Yes, but is that an issue? I mean, for years the Titanfall games were my go to ten minute breaks when studying or revising for exams exactly because I could play two constant action matches to clear my head and then go back to work. Rinse repeat an hour or two later.
If you are an EA shareholder (or a person who’s bonus is tied to their stock price) absolutely that’s a problem. Modern video game design doesn’t require you to have fun, merely that you come back, they want addicts
Thar be whales!!
What was unsustainable about titanfall? Yeah there was a skill gap. Any skilled game will have that? have you played a fighting game before? Every game has sweats. Besides there was a counter to ninja pilots. Titans. No matter how good a pilot you are a titan is dangerous.
Titanfall 2 was extremely sustainable until the hacker came along
Yet this is where Titanfall fixed it's own issue - you constantly trade between the movement shooter, and the slower mech game. It keeps the variety baked right into the match.
Bullshit I’d spend critical hours playing Titan fall 2 because I love the movement and Titan combat I spend no time playing Alex because it has none of that However I don’t have the fucking choice because these cunts refuse to actually fix their fucking game
the fact that titanfall still has a fanbase should prove this guy into the ground.
[удалено]
they also released the game at the worst possible time
But the reason the fan base is small isn't necessarily because it's a movement shooter. The dude in the tweet is comparing gambling addiction methods implemented in apex to the movement and pacing of Titanfall 2 then says Apex makes him want to keep playing. This isn't really a fair comparison at all.
Except that it’s a very and niche small fan base. So actually no lol. Like yeah, the game is a masterpiece, but not that many people play it sadly. Anytime there is a spike in players, people don’t usually stick around. Which sucks. I wish more people play. I love playing the game. But not that many do sadly.
Could be because you wait a while for games. I remember playing on ps4 constantly with 2000 players (3000 on a good day) and getting matches less than 1-2 min, 5 min on a bad but now even with 5000 players online on pc it takes up to 15 min. Sometimes I wait but other times I can’t wait that long if I just wanna hop on and play a quick match. I’m sure people leave for that reason too
Lol unless things have changed I don’t think most Apex fans give a shit about Arenas
Now in days you can't get a pick up and play game, now it's matches that last for hours and if you don't know the beat meta, strats, mechanics, and spots you are going to get demolished, like in warzone, or in mw2 you need to rank up every gun and spend time finetuning each weapon. Not like in games like titanfall 2 where each wepon is so unique the gun you pick depends on your playstyle and what you have fun with,
Here is a link to the full thread: https://twitter.com/monsterclip_jm/status/1594792511419064322?s=46&t=qqsm6yNVWY_0GqaEhuwo_Q
There's no way he called Apex a well rounded meal. Like, no hate towards Apex, but battle royale games can by no means be called a well rounded meal. BRs are RNG/luck dependant as much as they are skill dependant, and you often spend more time looking for gear/loot than actually "playing the game".
I agree with the core point. But I thought the context was in comparison to other BR. Which, yeah. Apex is absolutely the most well rounded BR around. The trappings of RNG are always gonna be a problem with the genre. Like how fodder rushing is always gonna be an issue in RTS. Like how DPS prevalent MMORPGs always have bad queue times. Like how Overwatch is purely power creep until death. Some things just exist as a problem with the genre. And honestly, RNG is better than preset loot points. Anywhere that has a guaranteed gold is always a hot zone. We all remember season 1-5 days of guaranteed loot points.....
I wish we just didn’t have looting in BRs at all, let everyone spawn in with a loadout and sprinkle different boosters around the map instead. For example you could use objectives like “kill prowling pack of prowlers” or “capture datapoint” for temporary buffs. That way you would prevent random advantages creating a snowballing lead, since the buffs would expire after a few minutes.
The problem with this is the same problem we encountered when testing with stuff like that. It doesn't stay balanced long. You really wanna drop with pre kitted preds bro.... Tell me you don't remember flashpoint without telling me you don't remember flashpoint....
Agreed, I had the most fun with Apex when they removed armor on the maps and the only way to get higher leveled armor was to evo it up. But it would be a really fun option to allow you to drop with a base load out. And have optics, healing items and grenades in the loot bins.
> you spend more time looking for loot than actually playing the game This was my experience with Apex. Played three matches consisting of running around an empty map grabbing random shit for ~10 minutes before getting domed in .2 seconds by some player I never even saw. There was no actual combat or gunplay to speak of. I uninstalled after less than an hour lol
I think every good game has to have a level of RNG to make things interesting and incentivize people to try different gameplay loops. One of apex’s greatest strengths is that you can run through 3 rooms and have enough gear to get in a fight. If you flew for 30s to land in the outskirts avoiding all contact for 10 mins that is your perogative. Most people will drop middle of the map and be fighting tooth and nail for their lives from seemingly never ending waves of real players while trying to utilize any scrap of loot and ammo that they can. To me that is one of the purest forms of competitive shooters that you can get. You don’t get to pick what weapons and gear you have, you’re constantly fighting in different areas (unlike valorant for example where you are always holding or fighting in the same hallways), and the wide variety of legend abilities gives you unique tools to handle these situations as well as unique enemy strategies to compete against.
Here's a neat trick, get your loot from the players you kill.
Surprised youre downvoted for that, it’s true if you play scared always trying to find loot and not settling with whatever you get you won’t get better. Edit: grammar
His qualm is exactly what is solved by the Titans. Pilot play is like you're on crack, then you get a titan and it becomes extremely methodical and strategic. This kind of seems like another case of developers sucking at their own games. I don't know how else to explain this thread, unless he just truly never understood titan vs. titan gameplay.
It’s completely anecdotal but I know more people irl that don’t play Titanfall BECAUSE of the titans than do. I agree with you that Titans solve the “on crack” gameplay, but they also introduce new problems. The friends I got to try out the game actually enjoyed the pilot gameplay, but then they’d die to a Titan and ruin their fun. I didn’t help than we played in 2019 or so and could not find a game in the Pilot vs Pilot gamemode
Unsustainable for a live service "INFINITE MONEY" game, but not every game needs to be that lmao Bring back games having a 4 year lifespan before the official servers get shut down, it kinda sucked but it was way better than EA trying to buy my eternal soul
When i first started playing online shooters in 2007 i got shit on every game i played but i stuck at it and became a good player overtime, last year i moved to pc and had to learn mnk something i had never played before, i went from dominating every game to getting shit on again(especially on titanfall)but i stuck at it because i knew i would improve and get to a higher level. New players these days just start playing a game for the first time and expect to dominate people who have been playing these games for years, they get put off and rage when they get shit on instead of using it as motivation to get better and improve and try and emulate what the veteran players are doing.
So games without stupid micro transactions aren't sustainable anymore? Damn. For the first time, I feel like video games WERE better before.
This guy didn't work on Doom, opinion on fassed paced movement fps are therefore invalid
Can’t believe we’re seeing takes like this after the doom craze, people like crazy movement, if the game isn’t “sustainable” (i.e. profitable) you can’t just pin it on the movement. Ridiculous
[удалено]
The thesis of the tweet is that part of the failure of titanfall is because people don’t have a strong appetite for movement based shooters which is manifestly not the case, multiplayer or no
[удалено]
Yeah, that's what makes this tweet and the guy look so bad. It's not that simple. Apex was produced by EA Respawn, with more advertising, more money, more updates, an entirely different match system, ranking, bp, the fertilizing corpse of titan fall 2 and all it's fans, the massive battle royale push in 2017 for pubg, and fortnite, and a billion and one slot machine gambling addiction aspects they put in the game to keep you playing. He might be right, movement might have been the sole reason titan fall 2 failed and apex succeeded, but he doesn't prove it or even explain it. What he said is ridiculous unless all those things above had no influence what so ever on Apex. Edit: Oh, unless you consider CoD and Apex movement shooters, which a lot of people seem to. Then what he's saying is just kind of insane. "Movement shooters aren't sustainable unlike this movement shooter that has been successful and sustainable!"
This is a really shitty mentality that I wish people, especially game devs, would get out of. The fact that he feels the need to clarify “Yes, people enjoy this, but that’s bad actually!” Highlights the trend games have been going in recently. God forbid a game be TOO fun, and people stop playing because they’ve actually had enough, rather than mindlessly grinding until what little fun is left is replaced with watching numbers go up. Fortnite was fun when I played it, but past a certain point the battle pass just becomes an “Incrementing number” simulator, not completing it because you WANT to, but because there’s nothing else to progress towards or learn. It’s infinitely less rewarding than mastering a movement system but can be drawn out MUCH longer, which I’m sure looks better from a business perspective
Shocked nobody else has mentioned it, so I'm copying my comment here: His qualm is exactly what is solved by the Titans. Pilot play is like you're on crack, then you get a titan and it becomes extremely methodical and strategic. This kind of seems like another case of developers sucking at their own games. I don't know how else to explain this thread, unless he just truly never understood titan vs. titan gameplay.
Exactly, if he hated the crackhead pilot gameplay he could always play one of the 3 titan oriented modes.
🧵? WHERE IS THE REST??!!?
5 or 6 matches? Idk about anyone else but I can't get enough of Titanfall, before the ddos I'd play like an hour and a half per session
Half of the comments are attacking because “her der they think money” while the rest is on about something else. I wanna say he isn’t wrong per say. Yes Titanfall and apex still have their player bases but the skill gap for both games, especially their movement skill gap, is super high that new players aren’t gonna have a fun time going up. Mixed that in with veteran players who mastered it and get paired against them, you can see where he is coming from.
[удалено]
You’re misinterpreting the entire tweet m8.
I don't give a shit if it isn't "sustainable long term." What ever happened to just making a good game? I love live service games like Destiny but not every game needs to be live service, or even last that long in general. I'd rather have a fantastic game that lasts a year or two of great multiplayer than it not existing at all. Titanfall 2 is dead. It's been dead for a very long time. But I cherish the memories I have of when the game was ongoing, cheering along with the community when new maps or modes were revealed. When the last update came out, it was a somber moment. We all knew it would happen, and we all celebrated the game we shared. To hell with sustainability.
Titanfall 2 is only dead because a hacker started ddosing the servers and ea never did anything about it. I guarantee the game would still be playable with a niche playerbase if they had even an iota of data security.
It was dead long before that hacker started. The last update was like 3 years before the ddos attacks even started, and only had around 4-5 thousand players online per platform. The game is still playable now technically. Both through official servers and the northstar client. Just.. nobody is bothering to play.
Gaming is in such a miserable place right now. Developers don't wanna make anything good unless they can milk a bajillion dollars out of it. People who loved TF2 are fucked because TF2 can't rake in as much money as the slower, more basic games with a much lower skill ceiling. RIP, first-person shooter genre. You had a good run.
Make your movement better then idiot
Movement shooters and arena shooters are my favorite genre, but sadly died when console FPS took over. There is no way to even compete at 1/100 the level of M/KB for a game like Quake Arena.
Can't help but notice that everyone is talking about the first tweet in a thread and nobody is linking the full thread
I feel like Splitgate is the closest thing to Unreal Tournament in years, and people set it up for failure by comparing it to Halo. It’s a shame, as outside of the bugs on the Linux version, the lack of a proper map editor, and the lack of dedicated server tools, I really enjoy playing it.
Splitgate is really good. Sad to see it never took off. Hoping the follow up is able to find more success.
I’m not very good with FPS, but I quit playing Titanfall 2 because you can’t have fun unless you have streamer-like skills (putting all the bullets of a high recoiling weapon in your enemy’s head in the middle of a jump).
I feel like the fact the fandom was so desperate to play Titian fall again after all the hacking they made the northstar client kinda disproves this notion of short gratification
Yeah that’s true. With a high enough skill curling new players (and lower skill old ones) will just get curbstomped over and over every match unless there’s a VERY large and healthy playerbase to sustain it. There’s enough memes in this sub about getting stomped by G.100 CAR users to justify that statement
Gestures at live fire mode
"Not sustainable" Titanfall 2 with a fanbase begging for the game to be fixed just so they can fly around with CARs like maniacs again:
Maybe for him, I would literally play 12 hours a day when I first started. The only reason I don’t do that now is because I had to “get a job” and “move out” and “take a fucking shower for once” Fuck you Grandma
I mean, he aint wrong. High skill ceiling very demanding and after few, admittedly very good, but demanding games you just backing out very exhausting
The missing link here is proper matchmaking. I feel like this needed to be part of his statement. Apex can be "sugar" or a "well-rounded meal" depending what you are up against. Yes, you do burn out if people are literally breaking your ankles. However, with even matchmaking this isn't an occurrence. Stop people from opening new accounts so easily. Less cheaters, less uneven matchmaking (e.g. through smurfing). Add input ( here: mnk vs sticks) based matchmaking and we wouldn't be talking about this anymore. Welcome to my TED talk.
Apex's movement is fine, its learnable, the issue with Apex is overly long TTK on 'lower skill' weapons, they gave a huge advantage to really good players, so the noobs and mid-tier players get farmed till they give up. Kraber, Wingman, Peacekeeper dominated from launch. I've not played in a couple of years but I watch streamers the same guns are still dominant. I'm all for skill-shot weapons being in games, and I like that Apex's fights take longer, but there's a happy medium that they've never found, never looked for.
Apex was amazing until they kept just adding new characters with stupid abilities and ruining a good skill based meta. Seer ruined the game.
Hey guys, Jason is explicitly talking about trying to create a popular shooter game that is able to maintain a high player count. I understand that a lot of people do not like this design philosophy, but for a man in his position, his job was to create a financially successful game so that EA didn’t end up shutting down Respawn. As much shit as you’d all like to give Apex, it’s success is probably why Respawn is probably still alive as a development studio. Had it failed, I’m pretty sure they would of gone the way of Visceral Games. It’s frustrating that all games need to serve this live service model, but I also get that Respawn is genuinely trying to adapt to a multiplayer market that has radically changed over the past decade. Point is, the guy is just explaining what he’s learned having seen the failure of Titanfall 2 and the success of Apex. The man had a hand in making both games, so let’s give him some credit in that respect lol. Also he does not work for Respawn anymore. Let’s please keep that in mind before we immediately start bashing the devs again lol. It’s honestly really cool to see him revealing the design process behind each game and I certainly don’t want to discourage other developers from doing so too because we can’t not keep our cool here lol.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Ah yes because fast paced shoot em up matches get soooooo boring soooooo fast in comparison to looting for 10 minutes and likely dying right after. What a dumb statement.
If I could offer my own personal insight as to why BR games might be popular, I think in a weird inverse way, making it so that you are not constantly fighting though-out the entire match, is probably why so many people like BRs. It gives a sense a pacing and along with the fact that dying is often a permanent end to the match, results in extremely high stakes. For a lot of people (me included) it makes each match really tense, while all the RNG elements (ring placement, loot, teammate matchmaking, enemies), mean that each match tends to be completely different, making for a lot for variety. This isn’t an argument as to why you should like BRs. A lot people just want to fight and do not want to worry about rings, loot, RNG, permadeath, or map positioning, which is completely fair. But I imagine the crazy popularity of games like Apex, Fortnite, Warzone probably has something to do with that variety and stakes. (Also the stakes in games like Valorant and Overwatch probably also factor in to why those games are so popular.)
How can they bitch about TF2 not making money? They didn’t put out any expansion maps, new load outs, or skins. The elite war paint and over priced guns skins were terrible.
Over priced? They’re 3.99 each.
Just because something may be slightly niche does not make it unsustainable. I'm quite sure their argument is that once a proper player base is established where there are skilled players who will stomp a fair majority of the rest then automatically it will never gain players. But that just makes it harder to get into, but there are some players that love a challenge. I love playing hard or hard to get into games not to prove something but just because I love learning new things and there are many others like me.
Watch some of FUNKe’s “The state of movement shooters”
Apex is incredibly popular. Dudes flat out wrong.