hi there Respawn, i'd buy a DLC which includes most of the TF1 maps to TF2 , i recommend: Backwater, Swampland, Fracture, Outpost, Hangar, Demeter, the turrets map, where the giant turret is, which destroys the space station, and the robot factory, i forgot its name, except for wargames, that map sucks thanks for reading
Another good suggestion Derrame. I would be happy to pay even $30, but only if they gave all the maps at once. This spoon feeding, 1 map every 2 months is a pathetic work ethic. And the work required is work that they unnecessarily inflicted on themselves. Like I've said before, it would be easy to include ALL TF1 maps almost seamlessly if they had not unnecessarily changed almost every core functionality of the game. But since they wasted all of that time unnecessarily to degrade the game, the result is now it takes them 2 months to release 1 old map. Rediculous. Therefore, the bottom line is that even though your suggestion is a great one, it will probably never happen, because at this rate, even after they release War Games this month, it would take them another 40 months (3 years and 4 months) to complete the other 20 maps (so by October 2020). PATHETIC!!!
i only understand the literal, non metapher meaning of that sentence and is soo funny, hilarious, i cant stop laughing, just imagine respawn devs with a spoon and people waiting and waiting for a bit every two months! a map every two months, tf2, the game which had dlc's for over three years! this is history! but seriously, i'd buy the dlc if it contains most of tf1's map, without a second thought, just imagine tf2's technology and engine combined with tf1's maps, environments, visual, sorrundings, magnificent!
I would buy the maps too, but I would not go this far. The way you say this it is implying that "tf2's technology and engine" is better for the TF1 maps than what "tf1's technology and engine" was. That is absolutely not true. "tf2's technology and engine" was an unnecessary and colossal waste of energy, time, money and resources to take something that was perfect and seriously downgrade it and ruin it. "tf2's technology and engine" actually are not even worthy of tf1's maps, but I would buy them, because it might make the game at least a tiny bit more tolerable. They would actually be the one bright spot of the game or the lipstick on a pig.
Swampland, Airbase and Overlook, god, those maps are stunning, i really like them, the beautiful landscape and the details, and Nexus, like giant servers or antennas took over by nature and the gritty yet futuristic city, really good i'd love to have those maps in tf2
Yeah, those maps are stunning and beautiful. I generally play the Campaign, which only has these 9 maps (Fracture, Colony, Relic, Angel City, Sentinel, Boneyard, Air Base, Demeter, Corporate), which are all great in their own right, but on the rare occasion when I get to play the Hardpoint Domination lobby or that I go into the Attrition lobby, I realize how I had forgotten how great some of the other 15 maps were. They are very nostalgic to me, because for the first 7 to 9 months I lived in the Hardpoint Domination lobby and saw all of these maps and got to know them very intimately, so now when I go back and see them it is like visiting an old friend. Thinking about these maps made me kind of want to list them all and rank them with my favorite at the top to my least favorite at the bottom. Rise Angel City War Games Zone 18 Overlook Nexus Runoff Relic Air Base Swampland Smuggler's Cove Export Colony Sentinel Demeter Training Ground Boneyard Lagoon Backwater Sand Trap Haven Fracture Corporate Dig Site This ended up being really tough for me, because even the least favorite maps hold at least some special place in my heart and I would take my least favorite TF1 map over any TF2 map every day and twice on Sunday. Since I am so familiar with the Campaign 9, I really had to take a step back and view each map from an engineering design perspective (wallrunning routes, layered levels, etc.) and also how the maps play for each mode. What I found very interesting and surprising was how low some of the Campaign 9 fell on my list and how high some of the DLC maps were on my list. It is amazing to me that only 3 of the Campaign 9 made my top 10, but 4 of the DLC maps made my top 10. That tells you just how good the quality of work was for the DLC content for TF1. I spent a lot of time thinking about this and reviewed it a couple times after I was done and I feel very comfortable with this list.
If they do release these maps, I want them to be very... whats the word here... VR. At this point I have kind of accepted that the remastered maps are part of Titanfall 2. But I always feel some guilt playing them when they first come out. (Don't ask why because I don't know either) So I wish that they would all look like you were playing them in a sim pod. Just enough VR detail to remind you you aren't in this fight. Why? This is because these battles already happened. The fracture fight already battled it out. Demeter was attacked and the Militia won. This would add to the "Pilots use simpods to reenact historic battles" line. I dunno just my thoughts.
I understand your point and it makes sense, but I would just make 2 comments about this. 1) I would be OK if they did what you suggest so long as it was only something at the beginning of the game, sort of how the beginning of a game on the War Games map is, where it would say that this is a pilot simulation (but for historical purposes in this case), but then once the game started it was just normal gameplay with no indication that you were playing a simulation. I wouldn't want it to affect how the entire gameplay looked or felt. 2) This is more of a question. Are we 100% sure that TF2 took place after TF1? And, even if it is, I'm not sure I like the idea of TF2 looking back on TF1 as if those were the old days, because in my opinion, TF1's mechanics and engine was far superior especially with regard to titans, so I will always plant my flag in the ground that if there is a TF3, it would be better to start with TF1 as the base. I just don't want to give any more reasons for people to have a mindset of TF2 is where we are, TF1 is old and we shouldn't go back there. I would rather have the mindset of TF1 was a superior unique experience that allowed you to express yourself in ways never possible in other games. TF2 was a nice test to see if a cartoony more traditional FPS game (more COD with titan boosts) might attract more people, but let's get back to the adult world and superior titan mechanics. I see TF2 as more of a temporary diversion than a progression.
I feel that Titanfall 2 is another "version" its like the devs said "How can we do this differently?" They changed rodeos from you sit on them and shoot to you take their battery. They changed doom state to see how it would go. They tried smaller maps with a more war killed environment instead of larger maps. Instead of making the maps closed with lots of close quarters they made them very open. Instead of customizing "freedom" with the titans, they made classes. Its a different experience than Titanfall, but that doesn't mean its a bad experience. Trying to fit a game into the boot Titanfall left is exactly the right term. Titanfall and Titanfall 2 appear to both be "Testing the water" kind of games. See which elements worked better, take feedback, and then improve it with either a new game, DLC, or some other way. You feel that Titanfall had superior multiplayer with great fighting positions, lots of parkour, and better titans. I find that you are right in some cases, although sometimes playing on the tight fighting spaces on maps like Rise and War Games often discourage the use of longer ranged ADS guns like the G2, Flatline, and the R-201. Maps with many layers and lots of ins and outs can put a damper on the use of these longer range guns as the target would quickly slip out of cover and then back in. Take a route you can't fight them in, and then be too close for comfort. Open spaced maps I feel were a success, though Titanfall 2 has too many of them to balance the indoor maps. Combining the outdoor maps into a playlist of indoor maps would create a balanced system. Titanfall 2 was superior in terms of story telling. More pilots, more titan weapons, and the campaign is much better. Derrame is bringing up time and time again about how she wants the campaign for a future TF3 (I think its too early to want this but meh you do you) to be something with Jack rescuing BT. However, on my side I feel it would be more interesting to have Cooper be a "look up to" character. One where you fight next to him. AI pilots were something I found extremely disappointing for the Titanfall 2 singleplayer. I have no Idea how one would do it, and that is probably why the "pilots" were always in titans. Phew that was a long tangent. I would find it extremely hard to believe that someone cried twice during the campaign due to turns of events. I find it hard to believe the ending of Titanfall's campaign left you feeling proud and awesome. With Titanfall's multiplayer, detail and customization and Titanfall 2's singleplayer, some of the multiplayer elements, and its customization, I feel that a third installment would be exactly what we want and a whole lot more things that would be epic. You can't make an incredible game when the only thing you have to go off of is a game that had low content at launch, had a poor story, but then was somehow regarded as an amazing experience. You have to try something new in order to know what you need to do, and what you shouldn't do. Stop regarding Titanfall as perfect and wonderful, as it wasn't. Stop regarding Titanfall 2 as poor and pathetic, as it isn't look at the bad in Titanfall also, and look at the good in Titanfall 2. On a final note, Titanfall 2's story takes place after the events of the Titanfall campaign. When watching the epic animated intro at the start of the campaign, it is said "despite recent victories at Demeter" (along those lines.) Then with the advancements of weapon technology, R-101 to R-201, G2A4 to G2A5, P2012 to P2016, It could be reasoned that several years have passed in between the games. Think about it. P.S. Ponder this quote from the devs for a while. I think it makes sense. "We started by addressing the fact that you move so fast. You can’t shoot out of the air so easily. So we slowed things down just a touch." -Steve Fukuda
I feel I've been very welcoming and respectful to you. I've said you have some great ideas and a great imagination. You're more than welcome to your opinion, but please don't tell me what to do or not do. Also, I have looked at the good in TF2. I've said on numerous occasions that the Single Player Campaign is outstanding perfection. I've also even recently said that with the addition of FD and how well it was done that I believe TF2 would be worthy of a Game of the Year award just for the SPC and FD alone. My only problem is with the Multliplayer and actually I believe Steve Fukuda is largely responsible for driving all of the changes in the Multiplayer that I don't like. I have a similar quote of his I found last summer: "We actually also slowed the game down a fair bit. When I go back and play Titanfall 1, I'm always floored by just how amped up it is...how fast the players are. I understand that it might disappoint some players who are coming back to the game from Titanfall 1, but I think overall the change is healthy for the game. It was a good design decision." No, it was a horrendous design decision, because it extracted what made Titanfall unique in my opinion. I was furious when he said that and still am. It is like an artist not even being able to recognize what made his creation unique and beautiful and feeling like it was that itself that was a mistake.