Feel free to skip to the quotes, if you already have an understanding of the background.

A few days ago, Glixel.com published an interview with Respawn CEO Vince Zampella, who you may remember was screwed over by Activision after his team finished developing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. He ended up founding Respawn, and Activision competitor EA agreed to publish the Titanfall series.

First, remember that EA was responsible for the Xbox One exclusivity deal for the original Titanfall, unintentionally keeping it from being available on what was--and currently still is--the most successful console. Now, a Titanfall game is finally available on the PS4, but the sequel was released a week after Battlefield 1, and a Week before Infinite Warfare, the new Call of Duty title. In a further odd twist of fate, a slightly more expensive version of Infinite Warfare was released that includes a remake of the first Modern Warfare title. In a sense, Vince Zampella's new game is competing with his old game.

Despite very positive reviews--including a five out of five from some website called GiantBomb.com--there is a concern that the game isn't selling well. While Battlefield 1 has already been sold for around the 35 dollar mark, Titanfall 2 has been on sale for a little less, and has been on sale a fair amount more often. Sales figures haven't been released yet, but some fans are already worried. People were wondering if Respawn was upset with EA for the release date they were given, and the way this interview concludes indicates that is a strong likelihood.

http://www.glixel.com/interviews/qa-titanfall-2-creator-on-what-makes-a-great-shooter-w450709

Glixel: You've referred to Call of Duty as "your baby." Is it weird to have Titanfall 2 come out so close to the remastering of Modern Warfare?

Zampella: It definitely feels a little odd. Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare is from my old studio, that I built. And they're repackaging my old game that I built, on a brand that I built. So it's kind of like you're throwing it all against me. OK, I can live with it.

Glixel: On top of that, Titanfall 2 was released right after Battlefield 1, a historical military shooter, which is a genre you helped pioneer.

Zampella: If the question was, "Would I rather have this window to myself?" Well, of course. I'm not foolish. I'm not foolish that way, anyway. In other ways, probably.

Glixel: But you knew who you were going up against when you chose this window.

Zampella: Yes. The exact timing, we didn't know.

Glixel: Do you think you're getting enough support from Electronic Arts? Respawn ownsTitanfall, while EA owns Battlefield. You once suggested you were concerned that publishers would put more of their muscle behind the games they own.

Zampella: It's always a concern. That's what I'll say. Especially when you have two games on top of each other.

...

Glixel: Will you make another Titanfall game?

Zampella: We don't know yet. The game is, critically, a huge success. We're really happy with all the reviews and the positive sentiment. Sales, it's too early to tell. We'd definitely like to tell more of the story and the universe. I think it's pretty safe to assume that we'll explore more of it. EA might have announced more. Devin?

[Devin Bennett, a publicist for Electronic Arts, interjects, "What we've said is we're committed to the franchise."]

Zampella: So, whatever the fuck that means.

I hope it means "we realize we screwed up," but I guess only time will tell. The game has been on sale a lot lately, but aside from the possibility of poor sales, another possibility is that they have big DLC plans, and they want as many copies out there as they can sell. For those who don't know, all maps, weapons, and game modes are going to be free for all players. This was announced months before the game was released. With that being the case, there might be some Overwatch style cosmetic DLC plans that they want to make available in randomized loot drops.

I'm very interested in the conspiracy theory that EA was willing to fund development for Titanfall 2 just to release it at the same time as their primary shooter Battlefield, just to try and make a dent in COD sales.
The public reception of the COD:IW and BF1 reveal trailers isn't something EA could fully predict, but it's something they could react to, COD would sell well regardless with help from the packed in remake, and BF1 would do well as it's Battlefield and was garnering the most excitement due to its unique setting, Titanfall is similar to COD in a lot of ways so is big business ugly enough that they'd make this game just to attack COD? Regardless of how small an impact it could have?
If it were to impact COD sales, i'm thinking EA would jump on the opportunity to say "COD sales are down, here buy our interesting new shooters!".

While it's not weird for EA to be screwing over it's developers the way they've been acting towards Call of Duty is just childish. Does anyone remember this mess?

Anyway, cant blame the guy for being a little bitter but at the same time you have people praising T2 and MW claiming they bought the latest COD because of it. That must feel pretty good.

I don't at all think that there is a 'strong likelyhood of them being upset' based on reading those couple of lines of interview.

I know observers like to think that they are more savvy business people than the multi-million dollar publisher choosing the date. And so we want Respawn to also be upset with the date to help validate that notion. And maybe that is the case. But those quotes aren't saying that to me.

I'm not going to lie, this part is pretty awesome:

[Devin Bennett, a publicist for Electronic Arts, interjects, "What we've said is we're committed to the franchise."]

Zampella: So, whatever the fuck that means.

It shows a disconnect between the publisher and the developer to me. That doesn't necessarily mean things will go bad, but it's pretty clear from this quote that whatever strategy EA is trying to use, is not clear to Respawn at all. Sounds like one of those lines you would hear your date saying to you to keep you hooked. Everything's fine, but we leave room to change our minds whenever we want. I really like how Zampella gave so much insight in their relationship with one sentence.

I'd be pretty angry if I dedicated two years of my life working on a game only for all that work to be undermined by something as simple as the release date.

Respawn will get sick of pooping out Titanfall and Star Wars games without much support, leaves EA, goes to Activision to start a new IP?

@gundogan: That would be quite the twist.

@zevvion: You're reading too much into it. Zampella has always publically portrayed himself as a douchy prick and that was the douchy prick way to respond to the PR speak answer the PR guy gave. Don't really see anything in the interview that shows he has a problem with EA. It's easy to make assumptions when you're only looking at a small piece of an interview.

It worked for me. Ghosts was the only COD title I've skipped since the original Modern Warfare, and between the Infinite Warfare beta and being able to play Titanfall 2 instead, I decided to skip COD again this year. That's fine by me, as I'm having way more fun with Titanfall 2.

But yeah, there are only a few reasons to launch the game when they did. Holiday sales, 4th quarter profits, and wanting to directly compete with COD come to mind. Whatever the reason, it seems like it would only be potentially good for EA, and not Respawn or the success of their game. I also have to wonder if it would have been better to launch the game in early December.

Which would have been better "let's just wait for COD, it's only a week later" or "Been playing the new COD for a month now, but Titanfall 2 looks cool!"?

Or maybe that would have been "I don't want to wait a week for COD" and "No Titanfall 2 for me, I've already had the new COD for a month now."

Either way, it's hard to know. I also edited the thread title a little bit, because I agree that Respawn's feelings on the situation are still uncertain. Still, between the combination of "I'm not foolish" and "Whatever the fuck that means" Respawn certainly doesn't seem to be defending EA's decision.

I agree. More than a date, it sounds like a line someone would use in a relationship when they want to make someone feel that they're committed, but they don't actually want to commit. One person wants a proposal, and the other can only offer "you know how much I care about you!"

Wow, that's a pretty telling interview.

Zampella comes across as a badass with the way he reacted haha.

It takes a lot of restraint to take those questions and not vocally express frustration over the release....

Now the business reasons for releasing two pillars of popular shooters back to back may have been a decision made a long time ago. Who knew whether a World War I shooter would be a great game and popular? Perhaps EA hedged their bet this year and expected one to make up for the other. Time will tell whether any of the three will actually meet the expectations of the publishers because as we all know, they are all three great and very different from one another.

I've beaten all three of the campaigns at this point and they are all awesome.

@hunkulese: You know what they say, though: behind every joke is a kernel of truth. I'm not discounting the idea that Vince is playing into "his character," but I think it would be wrong to discount the idea that he's pretty openly honest about the fact that Titanfall's future is uncertain right now outside of EA's noncommittal statements and that he has some frustrations over that.

Now obviously it would be crazy to look at this and assume that Respawn and EA are fighting or the Star Wars game is in jeopardy, and I don't think anyone's is doing that. But I think it's safe to say from reading his statements that, joking or not, Vince is a little unhappy with EA's handling of Titanfall 2.

"Respawn owns Titanfall, while EA owns Battlefield."

That was all i need.

Titanfall is not owned by EA, So it becoming a huge success might make it harder for them to make Respawn under their wing.

... unless i am losing my mind

I think you are. Respawn isn't going under anyone's wing. They own the Titanfall IP. EA still benefits from the success of Titanfall, because they're the publishers. Intentionally trying to sabotage the game would be crazy, because EA's largest commitment is still to their shareholders, and those people don't like failed games.

I think it's far more likely that EA wanted to cut into Activision's profits at any cost, and seeing the backlash to the first COD trailer, they took a risk and tried to attack COD with everything they had. The release date for Titanfall 2 was announced in June, so this was the plan for a while.

Big surprise, I know, but people who downvote you tube trailers often aren't the same people who will actually buy the game that those trailers are promoting.

If I were respawn I'd tell ea to go screw and see if take two wants to publish a shooter.

This seems like the same kind of bs betheseda used to get the prey franchise.

I imagine it was a case of 'yo guys is Titanfall 2 ready for 2nd Quarter' (April/May release date like the first was).....no? Not until 4th quarter? We'll do our best to fit it in. It doesn't matter if T2 came out a week before or 3 weeks after COD. They are still competing for people's holiday finances. If it came out April/May, it would have sold well...but it was obviously unfinished then. That's why most devs prefer to rush buggy games out (like Battlefield 4). The release date has a huge correlation with sales.

Maybe they should have actually improved upon TF1 instead of trying to appeal to the CoD crowd.

He has a point but I personally just don't think Titanfall is all that popular of a game. First one was not, the sequel doesn't seem to be so different in that regard.

A decent Nov/Dec will yield far better numbers than even an oustanding April/May, if an EA funded AAA MP shooter can't compete with the end of the year heavy hitters then EA or any other publisher would put their money elsewhere. Nov last year BLOPS3, Fallout 4 and Battlefront released within a few weeks of each other each doing 10 million plus in a couple of months, its pretty daming that with COD seemingly down 50% and BF1 doing well but still not hitting the BF3 high that Titanfall 2 couldn't even match the original title you can't just blame the release date.

Hated BF1. Really disliked IF. I hope Titanfall 2 does well despite the dipshittery that is EA.

Yeah I think the low sales seem to be partly due to release date and partly because of how the first game was reacted to.

@artisanbreads: I mean, the first one was fairly popular for a new IP on a console no one wanted but it lacked content and that's not something 2 fixes. If anything there is less content in some parts. They also put out a beta that fans of the first game mostly hated while not even putting that beta out on PC. Then they don't even put it on EA Access even though everyone who bought BF1 got one month free. Respawn kind of just shot themselves in the foot at every turn

@mems1224: Lacked content is a funny thing because Evolve, Battleborn, Battlefront, and Overwatch all had similiar content at $60, but Overwatch never got that lack of content label and Battlefront smashed the lot despite the tag, BF1 didn't have EA access on PS4 which is by far the most popular platform and fans hating the beta can't explain the poor PS4 performance.

@mems1224: Is it Respawn's decision to not put it on EA access?

@colonel_pockets: it's pretty much the only EA game that hasn't gotten a trial so far. If BF1 got a 10 hour trial I see no reason why EA wouldn't give one to Titanfall

@thepanzini: I would say Overwatch and Battleborn are different. They both have a lot more gameplay depth and a large variety of characters to learn. BF1 is also a new installment in one of the biggest franchises in the industry. Not the same as a sequel to a promising new IP. Battlefront is similar. It had incredible presentation and came out right before the new Star Wars sequel so there was a lot of hype around it

TF2 is similar to Battleborn though in that it's unique but not a great game and came out in a window where there are better games to play. The only difference is that the games press really got behind TF2 while they were never behind BB.

Overwatch was a $40 game, not $60. Battlefront is a Star Wars game and very few things can beat Star Wars when it comes to brand recognition/fandom or whatever. Everyone knows what Star Wars is.

Evolve and Battleborn both got marked for lacking content.

I still say that not putting titanfall 2 for a trial access seems like a really bad decision. The release date hassle is probably ea´s fault but I think the decision to not offer a trial of the game is a matter of pure hubris from Respawn. The tech test didnt go down so well with some people (including me) so offering a 10 hour trial version of the game could have helped to sway some peoples minds in regards to the game.

What Respawn and Ea are asking a consumer to do is to buy a 60 dollar game which had somewhat negative tech test withouth offering any chance to try the game out first. Even battlefield 1 had a 10 hour trial and that one is a established franchise compared to the titanfall series which so far has had a pretty rocky road in becoming a established gaming franchise.

It always amazes me that when publishers are trying to create a franchise they often build so many barries for people to get invested into the game. Titanfall 1 had xbox exlusivity combined with the 60 dollar price tag. Now that Titanfall 2 isnt exclusive to the xboxone anymore they still dont want to offer a trial or make the game a tad cheaper so more people might buy the game. A new franchise has a harder time in growing its playerbase if you price it as high as established game series. Evolve and battleborn are some examples of games which should have been priced around 40 or 50 dollars (even on consoles) in order to make playerbase grow faster.

Publisher probably takes a hit with the first game but with a lower price point the first game should have longer legs since the playerbase is bigger.

@gundogan said:

Pretty sure there are some contracts in the way of that but I could be wrong. Of course they could just wait until time comes to renegotiate.

I love Titanfall 2, I really hope it picks up for them.