Good question. Maybe because it's Bungie. And the hype machine is always strong with that one.
I should add that Titanfall was mp only (correct?) and was built with the idea of multiple sequels in mind. Destiny was planned around the idea of expansions, like the newest Taken King, which keeps it fresh in people's mind.
Also, both games failed to meet the very high expectations that they had. But Destiny had that 10 year plan attached to it, so there has always been that very loyal bungee audience that repeatedly insisted that any shortcomings would be fixed via patches and updates. When Titanfall disappointed I think a lot of people just said, "fuck it, let's move on."
I think most of it has to do with the types of games they are. Titanfall is just a straight up shooter while Destiny is more about loot and has an MMO flavour to it so people are going to chat more regularly about what they got, what they want, joining up for raids, etc. Also it kept bringing out more content and stuff more regularly.
Destiny is a great GIGANTIC game that hooks you for hundreds of hours, has loads of content, is an absolute blast to play.
Titanfall is multiplayer with a few maps.
Fuck all devs that want to do away with campaigns.
Might it be that Titanfall was an exclusive so less people played it and it was ignored by the Sony/Nintendo crowd?
gamingeek said:Might it be that Titanfall was an exclusive so less people played it and it was ignored by the Sony/Nintendo crowd?
That too.
Frankly I think it's a dumb comparision. A new franchise, with an intended lifespan of 10 years, from the hands of one of the most talented FPS devs around, compared to a singular game with no clear routeplan for DLC or anything? Oh, the mysteries and hidden machinations of the games industry, will we never fully understand thee?
SupremeAC said:Frankly I think it's a dumb comparision. A new franchise, with an intended lifespan of 10 years, from the hands of one of the most talented FPS devs around, compared to a singular game with no clear routeplan for DLC or anything? Oh, the mysteries and hidden machinations of the games industry, will we never fully understand thee?
Halo does fine without Bungie's talent, and Respawn Entertainment's talent is responsible for a series that eclipses Halo (which, like Halo, does fine without its originator's talent).
The scale is completely different as well. Titanfall, was indeed a fall of Titans. Massive ambition that was dribbled out with very little impact.
Destiny is on it's way to become WoW.
I don't have an investment in either, and indeed,both games sound like a massive pile of shit, but I think the difference is Activision is an Aircraft Carrier, or fleet thereof, and EA at this point is basically tow battleships named SS Madden and SS FIFA.
Foolz said:Halo does fine without Bungie's talent, and Respawn Entertainment's talent is responsible for a series that eclipses Halo (which, like Halo, does fine without its originator's talent).
It eclipses Halo in terms of popularity, but I would take Halo over COD any day of the week. At times I prefer COD's multi-player, but not by a wide margin. And Halo's campaigns obviously outshine COD's by a longshot.
Also, if Halo was a multi-platform franchise like COD, I have no doubt the sales would be similar. Most exclusives in any genre can't match up popularity-wise to a high quality multi-plat game in the same genre. The audience is just much bigger for the multi-plat.
Foolz said:Halo does fine without Bungie's talent, and Respawn Entertainment's talent is responsible for a series that eclipses Halo (which, like Halo, does fine without its originator's talent).
I wasn't really pointing towards its pedigree, but more the difference between how both games were put in the market. The former aiming for an epic adventure with lots of DLC and expansions, the latter being 'just' a very good multiplayer only game.
SupremeAC said:I wasn't really pointing towards its pedigree, but more the difference between how both games were put in the market. The former aiming for an epic adventure with lots of DLC and expansions, the latter being 'just' a very good multiplayer only game.
My exposure to Titanfall marketing/release (previews/reviews and ads) was that Titanfall is going to revolutionise online multiplayer, and attract online shooter fans (CoD players) because Zampella/West are behind it, two dudes synonymous with CoD. As if a CoD fan wants multiplayer revolutionised, or has ever heard of Zampella/West lol...I think that means I agree they fucked up in this area.
edgecrusher said:It eclipses Halo in terms of popularity, but I would take Halo over COD any day of the week. At times I prefer COD's multi-player, but not by a wide margin. And Halo's campaigns obviously outshine COD's by a longshot.
Also, if Halo was a multi-platform franchise like COD, I have no doubt the sales would be similar. Most exclusives in any genre can't match up popularity-wise to a high quality multi-plat game in the same genre. The audience is just much bigger for the multi-plat.
CoD1 and 4 (the only two I've played in full) have solid campaigns. Hell, 4's campaign is less repetative than Halo 1's.
IIRC didn't Titanfall get better reviews?
edgecrusher said:
Also, if Halo was a multi-platform franchise like COD, I have no doubt the sales would be similar.
Devils Advocate, if Titanfall was multiplatform would it have sold as much as Destiny?
Foolz said:CoD1 and 4 (the only two I've played in full) have solid campaigns. Hell, 4's campaign is less repetative than Halo 1's.
I've played almost every Halo and most CODs from 2 upwards to BLOPS 1 - and I would rather play COD. Although yes Halo single player is on the whole better, each game looks and feels so similar I can barely tell them apart at this point. At least some CODs have unique real world settings or are set in a historical period so at least cosmectically it's different.
Did I see posts saying CoD campaigns have better campaigns than Halo. This place has gone insane.
This topic is like asking "why does no one talk about sonic anymore but they still talk about Mario"
I did like Modern Warfare's campaign and bits and pieces of the others...but they are so on rails that it kills my love for them. I like having a bit of freedom.
Dvader said:Did I see posts saying CoD campaigns have better campaigns than Halo. This place has gone insane.
Reading Foolz and my own post back carefully, there is nothing weird or insane about those posts.
Dvader said:This topic is like asking "why does no one talk about sonic anymore but they still talk about Mario"
Comparing Titanfall to Sonic is a little harsh no? 
edgecrusher said:I did like Modern Warfare's campaign and bits and pieces of the others...but they are so on rails that it kills my love for them. I like having a bit of freedom.
Me too but that freedom in Halo has ended up in repetitive, uninventive similar battles, with similar looking environments with similar looking and handling weapons - from sequel to sequel. So in the end you have two franchises on auto-repeat. No one wins. 
Thoughts?
You can say what you want about Destiny & how it plays, but Destiny stayed in gaming's consciousness for over a year now. You look at Titanfall on the other hand and you see that the conversations for it died out just a couple of months after its release.
It gets even more noticeable when you remember how hard EA, Microsoft, & Respawn all hyped it up as the next big thing for this console generation.