Right, Gumby. Titanfall 1 would have been different if it was multiplatform, but since it wasn't multiplatform Respawn utilized MS' networks to run certain cloud features and make the game better. I wonder why Sony doesn't seem to offer the cloud to developers who want to use it?

This is why you never listen to the reasons developers give for exclusivity. Any reason other than money is probably a lie. The original reason was the game wouldn't get made without Microsoft financial backing. EA didn't want the full risk of a cod replacement but were willing if Microsoft paid a huge part of development cost. As always, follow the money.

You guys talking about the cloud are taking this quote wrong.

They're saying that they would have liked to be multi-platform however because the decision was out of their hand they built the game around what they had available to them.

I mean that doesn't necessarily mean you're still wrong but until we hear some official statement about them saying that Titanfall 1 would have been possible on ps4 with all its features still intact this is just a stretch.

@all of you with your cloud

Did the PC version use the cloud too? Then any platform could've used the same cloud. EA could have paid for it for the PS4 version. Azure is another division of MS, they would've gladly get paid for more usage, they don't care if it would be used for PS4 games.

And no, the X1 doesn't have anything special inside to make the cloud work (see PC version)....

The issue was and is a business decision. For instance, TF2 is obviously multiplatform and exist on PC, PS4 and Xbox One. However, TF2 as served isn't even close to the same as TF1. Lot of design decisions has changed to accommodate for the fact that MS no longer subsidizes cloud power for Respawn.

TF2 completely lacks the AI we had, and the latency/ping is significantly higher (despite still using Azure, because you may be sitting on somebody else's server as TF2 uses multiple cloud providers) and as such the game is now slower paced. It's clear the game has been compromised by the need to reduce server load sadly.

Respawn already made it clear during the first TF1 that the game as it was, wouldn't have existed if it were not for MS and Azure, because nobody would make subsidize their server needs. Heck, Sony didn't even bother to respond to Respawn when they reached out to Sony. Instead Sony wanted Respawn to make a paltry PS Vita game! o_0

I'm looking to Crackdown 3 for over the top cloud processing instead now and really bummed out on how TF2 was designed to reduce cloud processing resources. :(

@uptownsoul
Hhhmm.. no that wasn't it. The original reason was that when they took this to Sony they did not want to provide the dedicated could servers for the game. When EA asked Microsoft, they said they could handle it and that's why it became exclusive. It could have definitely been done on the PS4. This time around it looks like EA or Respawn will be providing the servers. Haven't hear any mention of dedicate servers coming from Microsoft for Titanfall 2.

I wonder if Capcom is wishing they went full multiplatform with SFV.

@Aenea
Yes, the PC version also used Microsoft's dedicated servers. There are over 300K of them, so I think they have some to spare. EA didn't want to pay for it and neither did Sony. That's why it went to Microsoft.

@XanderZane
"Haven't hear any mention of dedicate servers coming from Microsoft for Titanfall 2." -- Well consider yourself informed: http://www.pcgamer.com/tita...

"I wonder if Capcom is wishing they went full multiplatform with SFV." -- I'm wondering if Insomniac & Crytek aren't thinking the same with Sunset Overdrive & Ryse

@imgumbydammit

I agree with you. The cloud generated AI player are missing and take away from the feel of a fuller alive world. But, people that haven't really played the first one wouldn't know. TF1 was shallow but, fun. TF2 is really missing something. I was wondering what would happen to the game without cloud computing AI. Now we know we are getting a dumb down version because Sony doesn't have it. It so far is not as good as the first and I may pass on this also. Thanks Sony :-(

@uptownsoul
And you see how the game has suffered moving from Azure. If have spent anytime with the first TF you can tell that it is a much better then the gimped version that has to be compatible with PS4. It doesn't play the same.

@itsmebryan "And you see how the game has suffered moving from Azure." -- Wrong...Again. As I have to repeatedly teach the uninformed, the changes in Titanfall 2 are not because Respawn moved from Azure because Respawn has NOT moved from Azure (as pointed out here: http://www.pcgamer.com/tita... )

Maybe, just maybe Respawn went in a direction you don't like. Is that even remotely possible???

Good ole EA! THey always find a way to piss off a lot of people. ROFL @uptownsoul you mean there are STILL people that believe in the cloud for processing power? It's good for saving my game in case I have a fire, or someone stills my xbox or ps4 or wiiu, or PC but PROCESSING POWER? ROFL2

To all the people trying to downplay the cloud being used as a must have or to people pointing at the CURRENT article which has NOTHING to do with UPTOWNSOULS comment uptownsouls was CLEARY talking about previous claims in PREVIOUS articles about the cloud:

https://www.engadget.com/20...

QUOTE from article back in March 2014:
Xbox Live's lead program manager. "We were convinced that enabling dedicated servers using cloud computing presented a great opportunity to realize our vision for Xbox One."

http://www.gamespot.com/art...

QUOTE from article in early 2014:
Respawn Entertainment has shed light on how critical cloud servers are to the recently-launched Titanfall, and explained why it chose to power significant elements of the game using Microsoft's Azure cloud infrastructure.

http://blogs.microsoft.com/...

@indyman77
"ROFL @uptownsoul you mean there are STILL people that believe in the cloud for processing power?" -- I never said the cloud could or couldn't be used for processing power. I'm saying Respawn, in this article, did NOT mention that as a reason why Titanfall 1 wasn't playable on PS4. So I merely asked who were the ones who said Titanfall 1 was only possible with the power of the cloud.

I'm super disappointed that TF2 went backwards with reduced cloud. You would think the sequel is going to be better, but instead they had to reduce reliance on cloud power.

More platforms, less game. :(

@uptown

Well, back in the day, I believe it was the devs. Got into a big debate with one of the Xbox fans(want to say donthate, but not entirely sure) about how they couldn't do it without the cloud, and how MS saved the game, and all that jazz, and his arguments were primarily based on a book by Geoff Kieghley.(again, don't quote me on it being that particular user though, don't want to start anything if it wasn't.)

Was all BS back then, like I said. But I do believe the exclusivity decision may have been out of their hands, although I think they would have been given a choice to release a lesser game, or go exclusive, but I felt that EA wouldn't abandon the IP at such a late stage in development since they would have had to put up significant funds, and there was nothing making it seem like they couldn't make a return.

The devs themselves though did a good job of towing the MS line, talking up Cloud, and how awesome MS was and all that.

You are a fanboy too, who is the hypocrite now?

Your comment is so ironic. Microsoft appreciates your compliance.

yep 51 voted disagree to prove it

Off... topic... much?

writer:

Or that MS bribe the developer enough, and they are now bitter. XD

Sony seems to have happy third party devs that made exclusives.

There's a big difference.

Sony and Nin fund development of games and in return they get exclusive deals.

MS (not all cases, but a lot) send a money hat to Publishers for games ALREADY in development and were originally planned to release on multiple platforms. So effectively, they pay money to block games going to other platforms.

When did he say that other companies didn't do it?

Don't call people names unless you look at yourself in the mirror.

I guess not. But if you bench against the bigger market, your compensation would need to be bigger to cover the loss of sales. Of course exclusivity costs. But if you bet against a smaller market (say you'd only sell 50% more) you only need fill that gap. But if you actually bet against 150% you lose more then twice even if the compensation would be 100% - which it never is. That's my whole point. EA lost by far more with that deal than they won. And more so Repawn if they got paid a fixed amount per copy. I'm not sure, if Microsoft won. It didn't really move consoles.

I think the cloud server is overated. I also think Microsoft just says that to help them sell more consoles imo. I don't blame them they have to do everything they can to sell more consoles.

Crackdown 3 is gonna be amazing! No if's or buts about that. And Speaking of marketing, i wonder how the PS4's HDR capabilities is doing?

It will be a release game for the Scorpio, will be Scorpio console exclusive 'cos it's running the physics locally. Ooh and it will be on PC too of course, like all Xbox games....

@BakPain

E3, Games Com, what ever venue it was shown at doesn't change that it was a super controlled presentation of it.

Let see them show it off in the same glory but first ask the audience to connect to the network and start downloading and streaming stuff.

what iom saying is that it wa a controlled presentation. closed network just fro the show. no one else was allowed on that, and ms probably paid for a higher speed onnection. that wont be the average consumers situation where people are on facebook, streaming mvioes and in some cases playing online game son other consoles.

it may look pretty now, but end user experience is going to be different. heck people had a difficult time streaming games while movies are being streamed

It's all about 4k, UHD, and the most powerful console on the market now. All of that other stuff that was supposed to knock everyone's socks off, let's just sweep all of those goodies under the rug.

@PFFT Why doesn't anyone talk about XB1S HDR and blurry upscaler? I'm actually curious how this actually will turn out when DF will have their test equipment adjusted and the "real" 4k console releases in November and the MS marketing will finally be seen as what it is. Clever but non substantial.

Oh, ya, and re: cloud. What makes you think Azure is exclusive to Xbox? if that wasn't just another marketing bubble like all the ones before.

Everything Microsoft said about the Xbox One is a lie
Not one claim from them is still standing
Everything they said fell apart

Ju:

Azure doesn't need to be exclusive to MS (and I'm sure MS don't mind some Sony money), but instead Xbox has this:

http://www.ign.com/articles...

That is a fact, not an opinion! :)

@donthate...40M vs 20M users. More stable...ya. Sure. /s TCP/IP is TCP/IP there is no magic in MS's socket implementation vs. one in NetBSD, if anything, NetBSD is one of the most reliable OS implementing sockets. Guess what a lot of routers and switches run on.

I doubt it required substantial servers to deliver the AI. MMO's have had dumb AI for decades now through dedicated servers, and they are nowhere near as robust as Azure is, and provide much more functionality to run entire persistent worlds, which is much less than what was used in TF, which basically hosted the games, and did some basic AI routines which would have been more than possible on a local system

Azure is a pretty impressive cloud tech. It's reliable and fast, with lots of connection points for the user to reduce latency. But it is far from the only service which can deliver what TF1 had. Any number of cloud solutions or even restricted dedicated servers that are owned by the publishers, could manage what was done on the Azure for TF1.

The marketing that it was only possible on Azure was a lie, outside the fact that that was the only place it was doing it, so technically, it was true.

@Bakpain

Actually, they do. They currently are partnered with RackSpace for their cloud needs, and RS is one of the bigger cloud systems out there. In any case, Sony wasn't specifically needed to deliver TF with Cloud, any number of servers could have been used, from Amazon, to Google, to Sony's own dedicated servers, and even Azure itself if EA wanted to pay for it.

My guess as to why the game doesn't have cloud AI now is because the pub/devs would have to pay for it, since it's no longer exclusive, and they don't want to do that, hence the feature was nixxed. On the first game, MS paid for that feature.

It has nothing on the first Titanfall, sorry pal.

Won't go that far yet since I'm not that vested in either title.

But it is quite interesting just how many Xbox fans are dismissing TF2 just because it's not multi-plat, and somehow making it out like the first was so much better because of the Cloud, despite the AI bots being one of the most criticized parts of the game by many.

It's almost like they need to cling onto a 3 year old marketing thing, and barely even discuss what is so different about it....although some do of course.