Even before BF1 came out I thought it was seemed to be the most hyped holiday game and now that it's here that seems to be very true. People I know who don't even play games know about it. Releasing TF2 so close (it comes out this Friday) always seemed like a bad idea too, do you think EA is cannibalizing themselves with these two FPS releases? Maybe they should delay it somewhere between December to February.

They probably want to make room for Mass Effect if it really does come out in March, but Mass Effect and Titfanfall are different audiences - TF and BF probably has way more overlap. Not to mention there's Gears 4, so for me, Titanfall is the third most interesting shooter this month. If I was a teenage I'd probably love this, but with limited free time the plan is give that to BF1 first (by a mile), Gears 4 second, and maybe rent or buy TF2 in a couple of months if I want something new. The beta wasn't that great, but I'd hate to see the Titanfall series struggle or get overlooked due to bad planning on the publisher side.

TF2 came out almost 10 years ago.

I agree, it's seems like bad business to release both games so close to each other. There's some credence to the idea that the audiences are distinct (I'm only interested in Titanfall 2, for instance), but there's inevitably going to be an overlap audience that either due to lack of time or funds will only buy one of the games. Still, it's probably not as bad as launching near Call of Duty.

I suspect one of the games (most likely Titanfall 2) was originally slated for spring or summer 2016 and the release date slipped. This is probably EA doing what they can to manage a less-than-optimal situation.

I knew someone might get uptight about that abbreviation for Titanfall 2, so what's the proper/common one for this game? Obviously I'm not talking about Team Fortress 2.

Titanfall releases next week?! I thought it was a March release or something.

In 6 days (Oct 28).

@assumedkilla: I heard the original called Tifa once or twice, and thought that was pretty funny.

Seems a bit silly yes.

I would potentially be interested in Titanfall 2, but right now I am deep in Battlefield 1 and cannot get out of it.

personally i havent played enough of battlefield 4 and i just reinstalled that, plus titanfall 2 looks pretty freaking rad. i told myself no more games this year and im currently staring at a deep black civ 6 hole with no end in sight, but i also feel like ill miss the zeitgeist with tf2.

too much game amirite

@sparky_buzzsaw: oh that is precious.

I'm interested in running through the campaign, but between Overwatch and Battlefield 1, I don't need another online competitive fps, for awhile.

I think it is a mistake, and I feel like I've barely seen any marketing this month (granted, I don't watch TV so maybe that's where it is?)

I would've easily bought both. But not both within the same week. Hell, give us a month or something at the very least.

@csl316: Feeling the same. I liked the BF1 beta a lot, but I'm way more into a game like Titanfall 2. That one didn't have a PC beta, so I'll have to see if it's any good on launch. If it is, I'll pick up BF1 later, otherwise I'll buy BF1 next week.

EA is kinda weird here. They still seem to want a CoD killer, but you can't have both your CoD killer and your Battlefield game at the same time.

I made up my mind that Titanfall 2 would be my shooter of choice this fall a while ago. Zero interest in CoD since Black Ops 2. I played a ton of BF4 on XB1, but I just don't feel very hyped for BF1. Played the beta for about a day, just didn't win me over. I played the Titanfall 2 beta for a few matches before deciding that I'll just wait for the full release since that beta was pretty lacking content wise.

And yet here I am, seriously considering buying the Skyrim remaster over both next week...

I don't know, it annoys me cause I wanna get them both but now I'm just gonna wait and see impressions first. But overall I don't think it's too terrible because they are aiming at two very different audiences. Titanfall 2 is appealing to the Call of Duty crowd just based on the way it feels and looks whereas. Battlefield seems to be sticking to what it does best. I've always preferred the grand scale that battlefield tries to go for rather than the very fast paced run and gun Call of Duty and titanfall does. I think they are both shooters but different enough that there won't be too much overlap or loss of sales between them.

I think they got the order the wrong way round. If they 100% wanted to/had to release both this year they should have released titanfall 2 first. That way people waiting for battlefield to come out might have picked it up.

I don't think I have time for Gears, Battlefield and Titanfall, but we'll see how the reviews are.

I feel like the games are different enough that it doesn't really matter but it does seem a bit odd. Having said that, I cannot wait for Titanfall 2 so I'm glad I don't have to wait longer to play it.

I would have maybe bought it if it came out in the spring or summer. It's a rent this time of year.

Well, in my opinion, It's always been a mistake for all the big companies to release their heavy hitter video games all at once near the end of the year. I know dev cycles are what they are, and I'm not saying for them to sit on a finished video game for several months or anything. It's just that the slew of stuff released this time of year gets overwhelming. I guess I shouldn't complain about too many video games. Just space that shit out is all I'm saying.

@assumedkilla: It's not hard.

• TF2 = Team Fortress 2
• Tf2 = Titanfall 2

As for your question. Battlefield is EA's own series and the big title they are trying to push. Titanfall 2 is just a small extra. Whatever they can do to take sales away from CoD/Activision is fine by them. It mostly just sucks for Respawn but then again maybe Zampella still feels the need to compete with Call of Duty in some sort of way.

Yeah it seems Titanfall is destined to be a series people overlook for one reason or another. I find it more interesting than BF1 and COD even though I dont like the changes they've made, i'm still quite curious how it will turn out. But games like this need a playerbase and EA arent helping by releasing these games so close to each other. (and COD)

Also it's Titanfall not Titan Fall so T2 would work and wouldnt be confused for Team Fortress 2. Not that it matters much.

Didn't the same thing happen with the first game?

I think the variety of each game is enough to make them stand on their own. Recently we've seen many people express their dislike for the futuristic approach while others are all about the robots. On top of that each game offers a very unique gameplay experience.

Dammit I JUST got Gears and BF1. I can't do another game in October.

i think they are different enough, and both take some shine away from the competition which is COD. Personally i will stick to shadow warrior 2 but battlefield felt the best out of all the AAA shooter betas i played besides overwatch.

No, two very different multiplayer shooters really. Have to admit I'm liking what I see of Titanfall 2, it'll probably replace Call of Duty this year for my quick paced shooter needs. I liked the original but for the absolute lack of content throughout.

At the end of the day all three games (Titanfall, COD, and BF) are all online competitive shooters that fill the same void for most people. Gears is outside of that since it is 3rd person, people actually play and care about its campaign, and other modes like horde. I've never thought to myself "oh, I'll get a fast shooter and a slower more open one because those are two very different things". It's still looking down the sights of a gun and try to kill people before they get you. Of course, there are some differences (like BF actually needs teamwork), but I think they fill the same void.

I just dont understand why EA decided to release Titanfall 2 between two huge established gaming franchises (Battlefield and Call of Duty). To top it all they dont even offer an early access type thing with the origin access membership which is kinda crazy when you can play 10 hours of bf1 by being a origin access member.

By delaying the release a few weeks EA could have had the fps multiplayer market all to themselves since people might actually think of trying titanfall 2 out when they get tired of playing either bf1 or cod.

I don't know, I kind of feel like EA has just expanded into Call of Duty's territory with two solid shooters that cater to different crowds while Call of Duty seems to be struggling right now with Infinite Warfare being a bit of a steamy pile of poo after impressions from the beta.

I hope Titanfall 2 does well. Even though I didn't like the beta because of how drastically different it feels from the first one, there is a pretty solid shooter in there that feels infinitely better (no pun intended I swear...) than this years Call of Duty.

I have thought that to myself, pretty much every shooter generation. There are absolutely people who play certain types of shooters, or like to have a stable of different types of shooters to play. I juggle Overwatch, Battlefield 1 and now (yay!) Titanfall 2 because I get something different out of all of them. They don't, in fact, all fill the same void beyond the basic act of shoot mans. The games go way deeper than that though and at that level they diverge greatly.

Having just found out that Respawn denied EA allowing Titanfall 2 from being apart of the EA/Origin Access program that is what prevented a potential sale from me more than being next to BF1. I saw potential in the PS4 beta but I bloody hate shooters on console. I wanted to give it a shot on PC and decided I could just try it with the EA access thing but now that's not possible they simply don't get my money.

I hope this game sustains a following for at least a year or so, hopefully more than the first game now that it's on PS4. Worst case scenario if this doesn't sell well off the bat, there are examples like Rainbow Six Siege where a developer can keep a multiplayer community healthy through free DLC and repeatedly putting the game on sale.

I generally do not buy multiplayer shooters (if I do, its for the campaign attached to it), so perhaps I am totally the wrong audience. I've always been horribly bad at Battlefield games (both single & multiplayer) and my last Call of Duty was Modern Warfare (1).. I tried the beta of Battlefield One, confirming I still suck beyond it being enjoyable at Battlefield, I tried the Titanfall 2 Beta and (unlike everybody else it seems), enjoyed it... despite also kind of sucking at it ;) CoD never interested me beyond the original Modern Warfare.

I don't know if there are more, more casual shooter, players like me that are less interested in 'the big two' that Titanfall is suck inbetween.

I bought Battlefield 1, and now (despite thinking it looks really good) I'm not planning on getting Titanfall 2. So yeah I guess it was a mistake if you consider me the rule and not the exception.

P.S. I may redbox T2 since everyone is saying the campaign is so good.

EA have said multiple times that they don't think its a mistake because BF1 and T2 have different audiences... But in my group of friends that couldn't be further from the truth. All of us have picked BF1 over T2, and if EA had just released T2 in March instead I don't see any reason why we all wouldn't have bought both! As it stands now, with GOW4, BF1 and COD (although I think we're passing on this one) all out in such a short period (not mentioning other mainstream big hits like Forza and FIFA) none of us can afford the time or money to play Titanfall 2 as well. Kinda a bummer, considering the game is meant to be great.