Hi there pilots this thread is about the Single Player in TF2, we all can agree that it's great, and I, personally, want a sequel for Jack and Bt's adventure, the next game could start with Jack rescuing BT, he can use new titans to find what is left of BT and then, BT gets repaired and both start a new adventure in the frontier, both are now experienced and hardened in battle, so they can have a new special mission, new planets, new battlefields, new characters, allies and enemies, a bit more exploration, a new adventure in the frontier, this time focused in the war between the IMC and the Militia (i know some player dont want single player, but the flaws of TF2'sMP are not because the single player, are because the game was rushed to release, less than two years of development are just not enough) see you in the frontier
Hey Derrame, I was digging around and noticed you had posted this and no one responded to it and it got blown out of the new posts area before anyone even noticed it. I think your post is good and deserves a response. I had one recently that I submitted that I thought was a really good one too and the same thing happened, so I am going to include a link to it in this response as well, because it actually relates to your's. Anyway, back to your's. Yes, I absolutely agree! Yes, I agree. As much as Trini my boy will hate me for it, I would like to see less factions, not more. I just want IMC and Militia with each having a lot of depth. Too many factions just leads to a lot of very thin backgrounds and stories. I love the Single Player. I just don't want to the Multiplayer to suffer because 80% of the time is spent on the Single Player. I disagree that flaws in the Multiplayer were not because there was a Single Player. The CEO of Respawn even said that right before TF1 came out. When asked the question: "Why did you step away from making a single player campaign to focus on this campaign/multiplayer concept?" Vince says, and I quote: "Uh, it's about, looking at where people spend most of their time. You know, generally people will burn through a single campaign, single player campaign as fast as they can. You know, you spend 5, 6 hours and you know 80% of the work goes into that. And then you go spend 100 hours in this thing that gets, you know it's bare bones, it's the minimum you can get away with. You know, for us, it was about pushing the boundaries of what multiplayer is, so we said, let's take all that great single player stuff, build up the world. That world that you're going to spend 100 hours in SHOULD BE THE MOST FULL FEATURED." You can hear his remarks at around the 5:25 mark: https://www.gamespot.com/videos/vince-zampella-interview-the-lobby/2300-6417517/ I agree that the Single Player Campaign was absolutely outstanding! However, in order for it to be that good, they had to spend at least 80% of their resources on it. And if you do that, the Multiplayer is going to suffer and it did. The reason TF1's Multiplayer was awesome was because they focussed on only the Multiplayer. You even referenced how good it was in your recent post called "Context Tipps", where you said this: My point is, I want both, but since I am going to spend 100s to 1000s of hours in the Multiplayer and only 10 hours in the Single Player, I don't want the Multiplayer to suffer because there is a Single Player, which is why I had created this post that no one responded to: http://www.titanfall-community.com/threads/farm-team-in-search-of-the-best.8496/
If I had a choice I agree with EN and I would rather Tf3 be multiplayer exclusive and have respawn focus all there attention to that. But people are funny and I still think that can cause a lot of complaining. It will look like respawn is giving you half a game at full price. Even though there NOT, but like I said people are funny and logic gets thrown out the window a lot of times. I think a campaign mode definitely has its bright side and can help the popularity of a game , but if it's going to make Tf3 debut with an unfinished multiplayer like Tf2 did then it's a bad decision. If they don't have to rush the release and have enough time to do campaign and multiplayer PROPERLY then by all means go ahead and include it.
Thank you Omega!!! Even if there is only one who agrees with me, I'll take it. Very well said my friend.
i'm thinking (it's still a work in progress ) that tf3 should have a single player campagin, available to play it offline to rescue BT and do some special missions on the frontier, new planets, enemis, characters, choices, etc, and an online campaign, like in tf1, with real life players, in some special mp maps, which is the transition and connection between single player and multiplayer, it gives context and depth to mp, and of course the nomal mp, lots of good maps, like tf1's maps
I would actually prefer they would split it into 2 games as I laid out here: http://www.titanfall-community.com/threads/the-grand-potential-of-the-titanfall-franchise.8687/ I very much enjoy the Single Player, especially if it was it's own game that could provide about 120 hours of gameplay. However, for me, since I would spend 1000s of hours there, I will always rather the Multiplayer take precedence. Whether it's 10 hours (like in TF2) or 120 hours (as I'm suggesting as a standalone), I just would not want even one minute spent on a Single Player to reduce the quality of the Multiplayer experience, which is exactly what happened in TF2. The area where you spend 1000s of hours was neglected by spending 80% of your time on a 10 hour set piece. That is just rediculous. I know I said it before, but a good analogy is that it would be like if your total housing budget was $100,000 and you spent $80,000 on a time share where you will visit for 2 weeks and only $20,000 on the home you will live in for the other 351 days of the year. Again, rediculous!!!