That VRAM usage graph is... confusing. In typical circumstances, a game will load a map into VRAM in the background, represented by sudden spikes into tall but flat peaks. Any game with a specific set of maps should do this. There are games that sometimes flex the rule with a constant pop-in or distance drawing, like Elder Scrolls or WoW. For the most part, after having done performance analysis' on 100+ game titles, VRAM usage graphs should look like flat topped mountains.
That graph however indicates a memory leak. It doesn't make sense for a game to load a map and then constantly pile more and more textures into memory in the background during gameplay - that would directly affect mid-gameplay performance, something most devs would actively avoid. It should either bulk-load or do a constant swap while utilising cache. Perhaps they just don't compress their textures (I remember last release they didn't compress their audio either), and use some bizarre texture streaming technology that only they use for reasons unknown.
EDIT: Here's an old graph for Insurgency, a similar-ish kindof game. You can see where I've started new maps and finished games.
EDIT EDIT: Straight from an EA Community manager:
"...uninstall Titanfall 2 and use REVO uninstaller to remove any fragments left from the program and install the game again..."