Titanfall Story Recap in 60 Seconds

In anticipation of Respawn’s inevitable sequel, today’s episode of 60 Seconds focuses on the story underpinning Titanfall‘s multiplayer component and, specifically, the intergalactic battle between the IMC and the Militia.

That’s right, the Frontier beckons once more and with a single-player campaign now confirmed for Titanfall 2, it is clear Respawn has plenty of sci-fi lore left to explore in its budding new franchise. Recent GameStop leaks suggest that an announcement could be coming sooner than anticipated, so let’s get up to speed with the narrative in the meantime.

Titanfall 2 is currently on course for PlayStation 4, Xbox One and PC, but will you be picking up Respawn’s sequel come release? Do let us know and as always, if you have any tips or suggestions for the show, you can email [email protected].

For more in the 60 Seconds series, be sure to subscribe to PlayStation LifeStyle’s YouTube channel, where you’ll find the latest in our catalog of original videos.

Essential Reading:

Now Loading...The Division and Reviews

Now Loading...Will No Day One The Division Review Affect Your Buying Decision?
Chandler Wood

@FinchStrife

This kind of thing is just what the video game industry needs! More parity between the released experience and what outlets review it at. It's an issue nobody wants to tackle, because sites that get early reviews get traffic, and publishers like the positive publicity from early controlled looks at their game where the odds are more in their favor that nothing will go wrong or break.

It's up to either the journalists or the publishers to break the cycle and Ubisoft being the first ones to come out and say that they aren't going to let reviewers get half an experience before reviewing an online centered game is a great move.
Ben Tarrant

@Ben_Tarrant

I echo what Chandler said. Games are shipping incomplete, heavily reliant on day one patches and such more often than not. Servers can't hack day one traffic either.

Journalists will get a jaded and presumptuous experience in comparison to someone picking up a game like this a week after release for example.

I actually commend Ubisoft from having the balls to do it. We all know the servers are going to be mush day one anyway.
Alex Co

@excaliburps

Honestly? I'm OK with what Ubisoft is doing with The Division. I mean, is it a sign that the publisher isn't confident with the product as so many people assume? I doubt it. People have played the beta, so they pretty much know the gist of what the game is about, right?

I agree with what Chandler and the rest said. For the most part, that's what we do here on PlayStation LifeStyle. If a game is online-focused, we hold off on publishing a review until after we've had a good go on public servers and play with the gaming public -- yes, even when we're invited to review events.

This is the same reason why some of our reviews are "late." Do we want them being late? Nope, since a late review means lost traffic. However, we do feel that giving a proper review is more important than a timely one, which I hope our readers agree as well.

With The Division, Ubisoft did the right thing since even if they give the review disc/code a day before release, you can bet your sweet ass that some publication will have a review up even if they've played just an hour or two...y'know? For tEH Hitz! It's a vicious cycle, and I for one, am glad Ubisoft announced how they're tackling reviews. This way, if you see a The Division review pop up the day of release, then you know that person/publication only had a few hours of play time before judging the game (might be less once you factor in writing time, media capturing, editing, etc.).

Will other publishers follow? I imagine so. Should you buy games without reading reviews first, though? I'd advice people to wait first or if they liked what they've played so far from the demo/beta, then go ahead. Ultimately, the best reviewer in the world is YOU. If you like a game, who cares what numerical score it gets, right?
Mack Ashworth

@GamingWithMack

I think having media outlets wait until launch to review the game is great for assessing the multiplayer portion as, more often than not, the pre-launch experience is usually a lot more stable.

Hopefully readers will be able to wait for reviews to release before dropping their dollars on a potentially unstable experience. Of course, that's up to gamers and the risks they want to take.
Zarmena Khan

@Zarmena

I think Ubisoft nailed it for once. People think they're not confident with what they've produced but considering the nature of the game, this was the best course of action. If anything, they're probably losing day one sales due to their decision so kudos to them.