I'd say I'm enjoying it, but it's more of a rental game.
Thief was one of the best series on PC, and I can't help but feel this new reboot has been made with consoles specifically in mind, and is therefore butchered.
Disappointing, and proof that consoles aren't always good for the industry.
If this were PC-only, I'm sure they would have used a better engine, had more open maps and less limitations in AI etc.
Beta is boring, gameplay overall is kind of limp, feels like a WoW/LoTR online clone.
Does nothing special.
AND it requires a monthly payment.
This will sit with the Star Wars online game in the free-to-play bin in a year or so.
Also, had this playing on max graphics at 1080p with the AA turned onto max. These shots are post-processed. The game doesn't look as good as it does in these shots.
Same. I bit the bullet, I don't care about the campaign length rumours.
If it's £20-25? Sure. £54.99? Yeah no. Not a chance.
No bad games for sure, just a bit dull and tedious after a while.
Infamous 2 got kinda boring pretty quick.
And £54.99 (ripoff) no doubt.
Why anyone is using the store to buy games for around £15 more than, say, Amazon, is beyond me.
WE WANT A PC RELEASE DATE!
I expect more of these MS-paid-off opinions up until launch.
Seriously, this is kind of getting pathetic. It's becoming SO obvious that MS are paying people.
I haven't seen a game get this much attention since...maybe GTA 5.
And the fact that Titanfall is MS's, arguably, last attempt to establish its' place in the next-gen battle, I'm not surprised. Which is why I want this game to fail, but it won't.
Hope this means SLI isn't affected.
So, by EA's logic, they'll take this info and rent enough servers to cover around 1 million people.
@Ulf
BF4 is CPU intensive, same as BF3...
No game in history has looked as good in the final product as the reveal footage.
It's simple. Name a game other than a Nintendo game that looked as good on release, AND IN MOTION, as it did at reveal.
I thought EA officially cancelled Dead Space...
All it proves is that the engine doesn't need much hardware to run it well and at high settings.
Classic CoD basically.
Yet console fans are all "looks just as good on Xbox as PC".
*sigh* I really give up explaining this stuff some times.
Hardly a demanding game, as it reeks of CoD.
The developers are ex-CoD makers, so they'll use the same tricks to make the same dull graphics run fast (if you count 60 FPS fast, which it isn't).
It won't take much to run this on max settings on PC. Just like Tomb Raider.
A simple reminded as to why PC will always be best.
Halo does nothing new, ever.
I never understand why it is so popular.
Everything about the game was done before in other games, so it doesn't even add anything new to the genre or gaming industry.
It's just...soooooo bloody boring. You're doing nothing different in minute 7 than you are in hour 7.
6v6 is bloody pathetic.
It's Halo.
Who cares.
They made it catering for console hardware and the console crowd.
Therefore we get a game that requires no thinking, and has a lot of hand-holding and is very streamlined, or guided.
The "freedom" is hardly there.
Typical console rubbish.