Titanfall's First DLC Map Pack Launches in May - $10 for 3 Maps

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Titanfall's First DLC Map Pack Launches in May - $10 for 3 Maps

titanfall dlc pack expedition

Titanfall players will be getting a 2v2 Last Titan Standing mode, and Titan burn cards in a free update, separate from the DLC.

As to be expected, Titanfall, this year's big triple A shooter, has a season pass, so developer Respawn Entertainment is hard at work cranking out DLC map packs. Today at PAX, it has announced that the first of these packs, Expedition, will arrive next month, in May, 2014. It will contain just three maps, and have a price tag of $10 (or, $25 when purchased in the Season Pass).

As for the three maps, "Swampland," is a stretch of alien ruins that offers trees for wallrunning, "Runoff," is a map that incorporates water, and "War Games," is a map that's hosted within the game's training simulator.

Meanwhile, all Titanfall players will be getting a free update in the near future, which, as promised, will introduce some new game modes. The example Respawn gave was a 2v2 variant of the Last Titan Standing mode. It is also planning to add Titan-specific burn cards, and Titan insignias to the game, as well as something called "Rifts", which will introduce various tweaks to already-existing modes (possibly like Left 4 Dead 2's mutations)

The company added that it was looking in to ways to make the newly released private matches more viable, such as adding a way to filter games through hashtags.

So there you have it, $10 for three maps. It does seem a little sparse, considering competitor Battlefield 4's map packs contain four maps apiece as well as new weapons, but to be fair it is also slightly cheaper than BF4's DLC price. Having the game modes and the burn cards as a free update gives hope that new weapons and Titans will also be free.

Source: Twitter

Webby Voting Banner

Permalink

The next generation of gaming starts now!

It's completely different from the experience you already have!

The shitty map dlc begins. Well, I was hoping it wouldn't go this way and I knew I was delusional in hoping so, but I guess it is going to be this way. Thanks a fuckin lot, EA.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!! Good joke EA, now tell us the real price... or are you being serious here?

3 maps for 10$? 3 maps... 3.33$ per map? I don't know about you EA but when a game doesn't let me pick the maps... I am not inclined to shuffle out money for it. Here's the thing, I pay 10 bucks to you and your crappy algorithms allow me to play those maps about 1/5th of the time.

So no... try again or put in proper matchmaking where I decide who gets in and what map we play.

Interesting, considering they once said the game would have no micro-transactions. Well, I guess DLC isn't a micro-transaction ....no.... no wait, that's exactly what it is, just with a different name attached to it. Huh. Guess they just lied, then.

What I find curious, though, is the fact that the game's massive sales aren't being boasted about. After all, this is Titanfall! The game that spawned a franchise that "will be around for a long, long time"! The franchise that will eventually surpass CoD itself!

So tell us, how many units has this masterpiece of gaming sold?

Xbox One: 1.25 million in nearly five weeks
PC: 0.18 million in nearly five weeks
Total: about 1.44 million

....oh.
....oooooooh.

Well....that bites.

Just for funsies, let's see how that stacks up to the other major shooters in the "Modern Military Shooter" sub-genre....

Call of Duty: Ghosts: 20.47 million
Battlefield 4: 9.13 million
Medal of Honor: Warfighter: 2.43 million

Congrats, EA, you've now failed to replicate CoD's popularity three times. You've achieved the trifecta!

I was really iffy about this game when it was first announced as primarily online. After hearing from some friends getting annoyed with the matchmaking and now this? I'm happy my money went into Dark Souls 2 instead

The only thing I really want in Titanfall is a practice mode. Maybe chuck in some bots, even if they are a bit crap. I just wanna practice the levels, learn my wall running lines, tool about with the guns and generally arse about without having to worry about invisible wallhackers sniping me or rotating my head.

As for the DLC, standard for the industry i guess. Which is too say about as standard as your average day in an African dictatorship. Normal, but horrifying. I got gifted the special edition with the DLC for free (I think?) so I'm gonna be checking it out. They do need a map veto system and better matchmaking though. Got into a game earlier where my team had 4 people under level 20, and the enemy team had no-one below gen-3. They had 2 gen-8's for crying out loud.

I'm guessing this is what is expected when working under EA. It's full price (or almost) and $10 for 3 fucking maps. Is a proper expansion something really too hard now? Can you at least pick which maps you want to play and use them with every mode in the game?

So what happens if you don't buy the DLC, but you end up playing with people who do own it? When the server decides to switch to a map that you don't own, will you just get kicked from the lobby? Will it simply be impossible to play with people who own it?

Publishers continue to gouge the crap out of the prices on map DLC

And we, the consumers, continue to throw our money at them.

That's EA for you ^^ No use to buy their games if you see how they treat their customers. Free content? No, you will have to pay for every bit. For your convenience, servers will also be shut down earlyl, when the sequel is out, so that you don't have to play an outdated experience.

And suddenly, my decision not to buy Titanfall becomes far more sensible....

Well that's crazy expensive. Fuck that :D

Oh man the last time I was suckered into buying a map pack was back in 2008 for CoD4. Are these things seriously making money anymore? A whole year of monthly content drops (that's 12 for those of you who can't do the math) came bundled with the Hardened edition of MW3 for $30 with a shitton of other bonus content, and now _four_ drops are $15 each in Ghosts. And the "season pass" is a five-fucking-dollar discount on that.

This is bullshit. Just utter bullshit. I can't believe Ghosts came with _one_ co-op mission, when MW2/3 were loaded with them and Blops had plenty of zombies shit. But never fear, you can buy the rest extra!

Sorry Titanfall, even the mindless hordes of CoD fans are getting sick of this shit and Ghosts failed to out-earn its predecessor by millions of copies, the first CoD to have done so. You don't have anywhere near that kind of fanbase. Nickel and diming them isn't going to work.

CriticKitten:
Interesting, considering they once said the game would have no micro-transactions. Well, I guess DLC isn't a micro-transaction ....no.... no wait, that's exactly what it is, just with a different name attached to it. Huh. Guess they just lied, then.

Nope, DLC isn't Micro Transaction. Unless you have to pay every time you want to play those maps...

I'm not surprised by this. In first it's EA, one of their game without overpriced microtransactions (and yes IMO, this map pack is a microtransaction) is a dream.
I expected it because i followed the preorders numbers and selled units and like CriticKitten said earlier: the game is tanking ! Tomb Raider (a remake of a one year old game) sold lot more, it say a lot.

I hope for them the X360 version will save the game (it's weird: a studio is hopping to save a new gen game will the old gen... Crazy no ?) but in reality i don't care lol.

Bindal:

Nope, DLC isn't Micro Transaction. Unless you have to pay every time you want to play those maps...

Textures, new weapons pack or even map packs can be considered microtransactions, it's just an opinion because microtransactions ARE Dlc... It's downloadable content for the game, no ?
It's the same thing, just a different name... It's just a matter of semantic, nothing more.
Of course it's just my opinion and nothing more.

Rodolphe Kourkenko:
Nope, DLC isn't Micro Transaction. Unless you have to pay every time you want to play those maps...

Textures, new weapons pack or even map packs can be considered microtransactions, it's just an opinion because microtransactions ARE Dlc... It's downloadable content for the game, no ?
It's the same thing, just a different name... It's just a matter of semantic, nothing more.[/quote]
Except for Microtransactions, you pay something from the game itself and get to use (usually) it exactly ONCE - or it's a single copy you can use infinitely if it's for example a single gun/scope/grip/camo.
This is plain and simple DLC. A Mini-Addon. You pay once, you get a few items, you get to keep them forever.
The price doesn't matter and you not liking the price doesn't automatically make it Microtransactions. It just makes it overpriced for you (and in this case, probably for most people)

Bindal:

Except for Microtransactions, you pay something from the game itself and get to use (usually) it exactly ONCE - or it's a single copy you can use infinitely if it's for example a single gun/scope/grip/camo.
This is plain and simple DLC. A Mini-Addon. You pay once, you get a few items, you get to keep them forever.
The price doesn't matter and you not liking the price doesn't automatically make it Microtransactions. It just makes it overpriced for you (and in this case, probably for most people)

I tend to agree... But it's just an opinion because, for example, in some multiplayer games, you can buy "packs", which give you one use items and/or weapons and characters (the ME3 multiplayer packs is a perfect example). So you have with microtransactions one use items AND mini-addon (characters, weapons, textures etc).
I find the differences between the two more andmore vague as the time pass.

I think it's almost the same thing... How can we make a difference between the two ?

Why were people so hyped about this game again?

Were they really expecting something different?

You know, with steam workshop and the PC indie explosion community content has never been so accessible and catered for. But this a 'AAA' console game. Community support is something they laugh in the face of. This is why I'm a PC gamer, so i don'y have to put up with this shit.

Well, at least the game worked on launch for me and is actually somewhat fun to play, unlike other FPSes I've bought recently.

Yes BF4, I'm still bitter. Mainly as you still don't work properly for longer than 20 minutes.

No thanks, the state of this game is keeping me from even booting it up again. I'm getting some terrible lag at times and keep getting dropped out of this stupid 90 second matchmaking system.

Free running, fast paced, run and jump anywhere, shoot on the move, jump jet pack movement, giant armoured robots battling with infantry and other giant armoured robots, quick shoot and scoot gameplay, decent variety of weapons.............AND PEOPLE ARE CHOOSING TO CAMP IN CORNERS WITH SHOTGUNS!!

I'd love to now see an anti camping playlist, complete with Battle Royale style exploding collars if you stay in an area for too long. Four seconds should be enough. Seriously nerds, just because it says its from the makers of Call of Duty, doesn't mean you have to play it like Call of Duty.

So god only knows how many years ago this one little game called Counter Strike comes out and you get to pick what map you want to play in every game and you get to create your own maps and you can make dedicated servers with your own rules that you and your friends can play on and you can play on LAN to avoid all the lag of connecting to company servers.
Now whatch out: THE FUTURE HAS ARIVED! Where you don't get to chose the map you want to play, can't make custom games and dedicated servers with your friends, get an insulting amount of maps when you buy the game, but don't worry: we will put out new maps for you with updates! UPDATES THAT YOU HAVE TO BUY BECAUSE WE LABELED THEM DLC. Anyone cretinous enough to spend mondy on this should be hospitalized in a mental institution and financial independence be denied to him ...

wooty:
No thanks, the state of this game is keeping me from even booting it up again. I'm getting some terrible lag at times and keep getting dropped out of this stupid 90 second matchmaking system.

Free running, fast paced, run and jump anywhere, shoot on the move, jump jet pack movement, giant armoured robots battling with infantry and other giant armoured robots, quick shoot and scoot gameplay, decent variety of weapons.............AND PEOPLE ARE CHOOSING TO CAMP IN CORNERS WITH SHOTGUNS!!

I'd love to now see an anti camping playlist, complete with Battle Royale style exploding collars if you stay in an area for too long. Four seconds should be enough. Seriously nerds, just because it says its from the makers of Call of Duty, doesn't mean you have to play it like Call of Duty.

Well funny thing: considering how the CoD series is pushing itself as realistic military shooter (along with all it's bastard children) I'd say the way people play CoD is accurate. In a real combat scenario you find a hiding spot with a good angle on a wide open area and shoot anyone retarded enough to expose himself. This has been true of warfare ever since we moved past the napoleonic style formations. "Camping noobs" are the guys who actualy do it right.

Where does that leave Titanfall? Well it is set in the future but come on ... it's just a sci-fi themed reskin of modern shooters with freerunning elements and mechs slaped on. That should in theory give it a more mobile feel to the action ... buuuuut if hulking mech kill droids that are capable of fighting on their own existed i verry much doubt that we would also deploy squishy humans along side them (now Astartes in full battle plate marching along the engines of the Collegia Titanica is another thing). But even asuming the operation style of Titanfall is legit: what would be the smart thing to do? Run around like a spaz child on too much sugar hopping to god one of the giant mechs or the dozens of soldiers doesn't hit you and that the walls you are running on don't collapse OR use speed and agility to find the best cover spots from which you can dispatch enemies without beeing seen until your own giant hulking mech is ready for deployment and then run around killing everything? Sure it may not make the game fun, but hey: they are doing it right.

Off-topic: got to love the chuby version of Attack on Titan :D

XDSkyFreak:
So god only knows how many years ago this one little game called Counter Strike comes out and you get to pick what map you want to play in every game and you get to create your own maps and you can make dedicated servers with your own rules that you and your friends can play on and you can play on LAN to avoid all the lag of connecting to company servers.
Now whatch out: THE FUTURE HAS ARIVED! Where you don't get to chose the map you want to play, can't make custom games and dedicated servers with your friends, get an insulting amount of maps when you buy the game, but don't worry: we will put out new maps for you with updates! UPDATES THAT YOU HAVE TO BUY BECAUSE WE LABELED THEM DLC. Anyone cretinous enough to spend mondy on this should be hospitalized in a mental institution and financial independence be denied to him ...

That's the future for you. Better graphics and technology but less convenience and options.

You should have seen Red Alert 2. They kept making free map and mission packs, encouraged everyone else to make their own with a great map editor, then added new pages to their website so you can see everyone's maps/missions and vote for the best. I literally had more than 1000 maps before I bought a new computer, most of them were actually more interesting than what the developers made.

Especially with Warcraft 3. Me and a couple of friends actually changed the rules to be more like StarCraft and we literally made a 6 mission long campaign with dialogue and everything. We look back it now and it wasn't very well designed, but damn was it exciting when given so much editing freedom. So easy to set up a LAN connection and manage everything.

XDSkyFreak:
So god only knows how many years ago this one little game called Counter Strike comes out and you get to pick what map you want to play in every game and you get to create your own maps and you can make dedicated servers with your own rules that you and your friends can play on and you can play on LAN to avoid all the lag of connecting to company servers.
Now whatch out: THE FUTURE HAS ARIVED! Where you don't get to chose the map you want to play, can't make custom games and dedicated servers with your friends, get an insulting amount of maps when you buy the game, but don't worry: we will put out new maps for you with updates! UPDATES THAT YOU HAVE TO BUY BECAUSE WE LABELED THEM DLC. Anyone cretinous enough to spend mondy on this should be hospitalized in a mental institution and financial independence be denied to him ...

Spot on dude could not say it better myself. What ever happened to expansion packs ?!it was about 15-20 for alot more then 3 fucking maps extra guns and prob a single player extra bit to the base game. Half-Life 1 had Opposing Force and Blue Shift both well worth the money. But kids today really dont seem to understand the value of money. $10 what 6 for 3 fucking maps in an overpriced multi-player only game that is already overpriced.

Well, that's only a bit sparse....disappointing to be sure.

But look, let's give them the benefit of the doubt, there's going to be a Titanfall 2, it's going to be way bigger and multiplatform. It's the first game, Respawn didn't exactly get a lot of control on what they got to put it out on.

Let's just hope shit's learned and they sort this shit out by next game ...which hopefully isn't out in a year.

I know this is a slippery slope, but EA's been sliding down it for a while now...

I still believe there will come a time when you will buy a basic shell of a game, with no textures, barely any guns and no storyline, for $100 - but there will be a texture pack for $20, a gun pack for $15 and a story pack for $30.

It seems ridiculous now, but considering the cost of new consoles today, the cost of gaming on them has become ridiculous. The one thing gaming did was it leveled the playing field. Sure, your buddy may have 10 more titles than you do, but you could dominate in the one football/fighting/action game you had. You didn't have to have all of the games he had to be good. When you're playing with people from different backgrounds (assuming of course they could afford to game) it didn't matter what race you are, how much money is in the bank or whether you're male or female. What mattered was the game and having fun putting your skills to the test.

Did you master all the combos? Have you found the secret areas and items? Is your timing good enough to score that match-winning goal?

I was disheartened to hear about Battlefield players having to buy the latest maps and updates in order to keep playing. I told a friend of mine that there are games, like Counterstrike, where the community made maps for free. He looked at me like I was the crazy one. They were almost forced to keep up with everyone by paying to do so. This is not the equality gaming promised us. We had something beautiful for a while, and now it, too, is succumbing to the temptation of money. It won't be long before the player with the most money wins. Menus filled with options for better guns, more health and even a god mode (if you're willing to pay for it) could eventually be the norm. The same things we were trying to escape from - the daily grind of our jobs, the unequal societies which favour the haves and other forms of discrimination - now seems to be creeping into our games.

I thought the original point of the console was to give the average Joe and Josephine a chance at gaming, especially if they didn't have the technical expertise to handle a PC or the money to buy one. For the longest time, console games sold at the same price as PC games, and there were instances when Playstation titles went "Platinum" meaning the price was cut down, usually by half. When I look at the cost of console titles today, it is insane. I didn't buy Starcraft 2 until the price dropped because I felt $50 for the game was a bit much. There are now console games starting at $60. EA's Titanfall is $59.99 across platforms. Also, why pay full price for something that barely has more than a few hours of content, and why pay full price when it is digitally distributed? I can understand if they delivered a DVD to you, but there is so much digital content for full price when there is actually no real distribution.

I grew up gaming on console and PC. I loved my Playstation 1 and 2. I felt little, if any connection to my PS3. I will not be buying a PS4. Instead, any cash that would have gone into a new console, will be firmly invested in my PC. This is not to say the PC is better. The console could be awesome if the games were better and a little cheaper. The thing that made me want to buy a console was the exclusives, which seem rare these days.

Maybe the game developer companies and publishers have lost sight of the reason they made and distributed games. If the player has no emotional connection or investment in a game, they will find other uses for their money...such as a new PC.

Bindal:
Nope, DLC isn't Micro Transaction. Unless you have to pay every time you want to play those maps...

Your definition is bad.

Here's several definitions of the term:

A micropayment is a financial transaction involving a very small sum of money and usually one that occurs online.

Small payments made with actual money which result in an in-game bonus, such as an extra item, character, etc...

A micropayment is an e-commerce transaction-type with a low financial amount. Micropayments are typically used to purchase online products and services such as e-books, music and memberships.

A microtransaction is an e-commerce transaction of very low value.

DLC falls within all of those definitions.

All that is required to call something a "micro-transaction" is this:
1) A low price tag
2) Paying for some otherwise inaccessible portion of a game's content

Nothing in the definition implies that the items you paid for have to be a "one-time benefit". There are plenty of other types of micro-transactions out there which don't fall under your definition of "one-time benefit". Paying for character slots, for example.

DLC is absolutely a form of micro-transactions. Meaning they lied when they said there would be none.

Yeah, glad I didn't buy the Season pass early. Bought the game and had fun, but I wasn't going to jump on the DLC ship that fast. Not after Battlefield 3. This is exactly what I expected.

XDSkyFreak:

Well funny thing: considering how the CoD series is pushing itself as realistic military shooter

It does?

I'd say the way people play CoD is accurate.

I didn't know that firing a sniper rifle as you pulled it up to your eye while running and jumping was an accurate and reliable killing method.

I heard there wasn't enough maps in the release. If so, then charging for more seems a bit shady to me.

Especially since the maps probably existed before the game was released, and they held on to them for the purpose of selling them later.

Fucking disgusting.

kortin:
The shitty map dlc begins. Well, I was hoping it wouldn't go this way and I knew I was delusional in hoping so, but I guess it is going to be this way. Thanks a fuckin lot, EA.

They're giving you the OPTION to pay for extra content which is not required to play the game. This is also a multiplayer game. Explain to me how this could NOT happen but also how it is bad?

Terminate421:

kortin:
The shitty map dlc begins. Well, I was hoping it wouldn't go this way and I knew I was delusional in hoping so, but I guess it is going to be this way. Thanks a fuckin lot, EA.

They're giving you the OPTION to pay for extra content which is not required to play the game. This is also a multiplayer game. Explain to me how this could NOT happen but also how it is bad?

It's bad because it splits the community. The already small community.

And then, as you can see from this thread, it pushes people who were on the edge about playing away. It's a bad move on pretty much every front. Aside from the fact that the pricing is fucking absurd.

No, you see, what I was hoping would happen are free map packs. Paid map packs are horrible, free ones are fine.

$10 is really not that much. It could pay for what? One-third of a lunch at Panera? I don't own this game (yet), but frankly I'm not seeing the problem. The content will at least add longevity in the long run. And if you're not willing to pay that much, well, you didn't need it in the first place.

But it's a good thing to know that some people think I should be lynched for my opinion or something.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here