@sheri3366: I disagree that every game needs a story campaign, take UT for example, there is no story, but it has enough gameplay features to make up for it. It's the same as games with no multiplayer but has enough content to make up for it (e.g. Wolfenstien 2014, Bioshock). You just need to provide enough value to make up for not doing that feature.
Nice new look, though I wish it was a little brighter, maybe it's the lighting but it looked a little gloomy. I would also suggest maybe having everyone face toward the camera, maybe in an angled table so the hosts can still face each other easier.
Titanfall doesn't necessarily need a campaign, but it needs enough content to justify that feature not being implemented rather than feel like it was 'half a product', which felt especially egregious when there was a season pass to get the rest of the maps. I'm glad they eventually made that free, but sadly the playerbase had dropped significantly by that point which was a shame.
If you want a benchmark for a good full priced multiplayer-only game, look at the Unreal Tournament Series. Those games had no campaign but it had lots of maps, wide array of weapon choices (without bullshit progression grind), a variety of AI, tons mutators, modes, true offline/LAN features, and mod support to provide near-infinite possibilities.
Don't get me wrong tho, I really enjoyed Titanfall and believe mechanically it's probably the best feeling shooter of this generation (tho Wolfenstein 2014 comes close). It's just a shame how poor business practises hurt this game's longevity.
@lebowski53: Cynicism is looong over due. Ubi, and others have already shown to be pulling the wool over consumers' eyes. It's a good counter to the 'hype culture' that now gets marketed around to get fans to act like free PR people.
jedikv's comments