They've already killed this game by releasing it a week after BF1. Dumbest thing I've ever heard, they need to keep this game as far away from BF1 as possible, and EA has the capital to hold onto this game and give it a good release. I can't -blam!-ing fathom why they would release anywhere near a game like BF1.
But the game itself looks very good, hopefully it'll do much better as far as player retention goes.
English
-
Battlefield: Ww1 setting, slow, realistic gameplay Titanfall: Futuristic setting, off the wall crazy technology from wall running to black hole grenades to the titans themselves with faster gameplay. I'd say there's enough difference and appeal to different players to ensure they both get a sizeable fanbase
-
At the end of the day however they are both AAA, first person shooter, matchmaking, online multiplayer games. I don't really have an opinion on which way it'll go. Some highly overpaid people have either made a huge mistake or trying to dominate that particular market at that time. Time will tell but I'm leaning towards Titanfall 2 suffering. Which really sucks.
-
由Cat Quiver編輯: 6/15/2016 2:18:10 AMIt's still not exactly healthy. Obviously they want to get big on holiday sales which is probably another reason the first suffered. But with the lack of content in the first game and the ridiculous campaign bitching this will probably make or break the franchise. Either way I'm getting it.
-
I've heard others guess that this is EA's one-two punch directed toward COD. BF1 to take all the "boots on the ground" people away and Titanfall 2 to grab the rest of them which I could see being true. It could backfire though for sure.
-
I might get both, I'll need to see more about the campaign before I commit to titanfall though. But not everybody can afford to get two games back to back, I still think titanfall is going to lose sales to BF1 that it wouldn't have if it was spaced farther out. But EA doesn't really give a shit, they make money either way.