Support NeoGAF

[LegendOfKage]

The game is a martial arts themed battle royale, but also offers a mix of PVE and PVP modes, including some non-BR PVP content.

PlayStation users, PS Plus members, and veteran Game Pass members will all be getting separate rewards. You can learn about them all here, at around the 27 minute mark:

 

[Roman Empire]

This game should have gone F2P a long time ago. It was cool when it launched but it lacks long time incentives to keep players invested.

 

[[Sigma]]

They put Max and Benny in the game lol.

 

[LegendOfKage]

This game should have gone F2P a long time ago. It was cool when it launched but it lacks long time incentives to keep players invested.

In what way does this F2P game lack incentives to keep players invested? It seems that they've added new modes, new characters, PVE content, etc. What do you think they should have done instead? What are they missing? As someone who hasn't had a chance to play yet, it seems like they're doing a lot of things right, but I'd be interested to hear you elaborate.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Why do they always insist on using this type of music in antiquity/fantasy settings for game trailers?

 

[LegendOfKage]

Why do they always insist on using this type of music in antiquity/fantasy settings for game trailers?

The only example I've ever seen of it working:




And if they're going to do this sort of thing, why not license some Wu-Tang Clan! How perfect would that be?

 

[Roman Empire]

In what way does this F2P game lack incentives to keep players invested? It seems that they've added new modes, new characters, PVE content, etc. What do you think they should have done instead? What are they missing? As someone who hasn't had a chance to play yet, it seems like they're doing a lot of things right, but I'd be interested to hear you elaborate.

Haven't followed the game after two months of its release, then I say that it was released back in August 2021. Man, does time fly?! I should check out what they added since. Maybe I should reinstall it later today.

 

[Party McHardy]

I’ve been waiting years for this to come to PS.

 

[fuck_diggity_cunt_ingdon]

Hang on, this wasn’t a f2p game? They expected money for it?!?!?

 

[Stamps1646]

Maximilian_Dood collaboration content + Benny <3

 

[Luigi Mario]

Why do they always insist on using this type of music in antiquity/fantasy settings for game trailers?

Especially weird because the song is from 2016 and not even something currently charting.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Especially weird because the song is from 2016 and not even something currently charting.

These nu kids will call this, "back in the day."

 

[adamsapple]

Why do they always insist on using this type of music in antiquity/fantasy settings for game trailers?

For the cool kids.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

FUCK ftp GaaS garbage like this. I hope all that shit fails miserably.

 

[Rudius]

For a moment I thought Bluepoint was making a free to play game and said: oh crap!

 

[LegendOfKage]

Maximilian_Dood collaboration content + Benny <3

That was some amazing animation. Someone put some real love into that. It's too bad the actual in-game representation of Benny is quite limited, though. But that does make sense. It's not as if the game has a pet feature, although those would be some crazy popular cosmetics.

 

[01011001]

you can't make an MP only game and not make it free to play these days... that's just instant suicide.

I bet it helped that it was at least on Gamepass, but still...

 

[ElCasual]

I read Bluepoint Is going free to Play.

 

[Party McHardy]

Finally! I hope it finds a decent player base. I damn sure won’t be spending till I see how it fares.

 

[Lasha]

Hang on, this wasn’t a f2p game? They expected money for it?!?!?

Iirc Naruka was F2P in china and b2p everywhere else.

 

[Tams]

 

[DForce]

RIP Benny.

 

[LegendOfKage]

So this is available now. Anyone try it? If you're not a BR fan, how are the other PVP an PVE modes? If you are a BR fan, how does this game compare? It's it nice to play something different, or is it too different for you? If you're a Souls PVP fan, or a For Honor fan, how does this melee combat compare to those games?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

And now it's back on Game Pass.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

you can't make an MP only game and not make it free to play these days... that's just instant suicide.

You still have to pay for Rust, Ark: SE, BattleBit Remastered, Rainbow Six Siege, Dead by Daylight, Diablo IV, Fallout 76, and Elder Scrolls Online.

Overwatch was pretty successful too, and that only recently went free to play.

 

[LegendOfKage]

You still have to pay for Rust, Ark: SE, BattleBit Remastered, Rainbow Six Siege, Dead by Daylight, Diablo IV, Fallout 76, and Elder Scrolls Online.

Overwatch was pretty successful too, and that only recently went free to play.

Most of what you mentioned are not PVP only titles, which I'm guessing is what was meant by "multiplayer only." And I wouldn't consider Siege "these days." BattleBit though is definitely a notable exception.

And now it's back on Game Pass.

It's now a free to play game, so it's everywhere. If you had it on game pass, I'm guessing it's still on game pass. I know game pass subscribers also got some extra content to thank them for supporting the game as well.

 

[Barakov]

Played it on PS5 and the screen tearing made me uninstall it. I'll check it out on PC.

 

[01011001]

You still have to pay for Rust, Ark: SE, BattleBit Remastered, Rainbow Six Siege, Dead by Daylight, Diablo IV, Fallout 76, and Elder Scrolls Online.

Overwatch was pretty successful too, and that only recently went free to play.

Diablo 4 is not a multiplayer game... it's just a shitty game with always online restrictions.

and most of the others you listed are multiple years old. Rainbow Six came out 8 years ago!
Ark came out 5 years ago, Overwatch and Dead by Daylight 7 years ago, and Elder Scrolls is an MMO which is not the same type of MP game I'm talking about, and games relying on established IPs have it easier to get the initial launch population up.

as time went on it became less and less doable to release a multiplayer game that is not free to play, simply due to the fact that the market is massively saturated and having a buy-in price is a massive obstacle to draw in players.

Nakara Bladepoint is especially affected because Battle Royale games need a gigantic playerbase to work properly.
in a 5v5 game or 4v4 game, all you need is 8/10 players to get into a good match...
in a battle royale you need 60 to 100 players to get a match that works as intended by the design of the game... for a single match...

Rainbow Six or Overwatch could easily work with a playerbase of less than 100 active players, as that would still be enough for 10 filled match lobbies!
Nakara Bladepoint with 100 active players would mean 1 full lobby and 1 lobby that's barely above half filled.

Of course surprise successes like BattleBit can happen, especially when a game fills a niche which was recently abandoned by another big game (in this case Battlefield).
but that is a massive gamble. because if Battlebit falls below a playerbase of 1000, it too will get into a situation where only a handful of lobbies can be filled.

 

[Larxia]

I was about to try it during a free weekend a few months ago on Steam, but I read on the steam forums that you apparently need to fight against bots for like 60 hours before being able to play online, so I said fuck it.
I also heard about some security issue on PC, about having to turn off stuff in the bios and such, so yeah, multiple reasons to not try it.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Diablo 4 is not a multiplayer game... it's just a shitty game with always online restrictions.

and most of the others you listed are multiple years old. Rainbow Six came out 8 years ago!
Ark came out 5 years ago, Overwatch and Dead by Daylight 7 years ago, and Elder Scrolls is an MMO which is not the same type of MP game I'm talking about, and games relying on established IPs have it easier to get the initial launch population up.

as time went on it became less and less doable to release a multiplayer game that is not free to play, simply due to the fact that the market is massively saturated and having a buy-in price is a massive obstacle to draw in players.

Nakara Bladepoint is especially affected because Battle Royale games need a gigantic playerbase to work properly.
in a 5v5 game or 4v4 game, all you need is 8/10 players to get into a good match...
in a battle royale you need 60 to 100 players to get a match that works as intended by the design of the game... for a single match...

Rainbow Six or Overwatch could easily work with a playerbase of less than 100 active players, as that would still be enough for 20 filled match lobbies!
Nakara Bladepoint with 100 active players would mean 1 full lobby and 1 lobby that's barely above half filled.

Of course surprise successes like BattleBit can happen, especially when a game fills a niche which was recently abandoned by another big game (in this case Battlefield).
but that is a massive gamble. because if Battlebit falls below a playerbase of 1000, it too will get into a situation where only a handful of lobbies can be filled.

I don't know... Among Us, Street Fighter VI, Monster Hunter Rise, Valheim, It Takes Two, the Destiny expansions, Splatoon 3, Sons of the Forest...are all primarily multiplayer games and none of them are free.

There seems to be a number of publishers all over planet earth who still think charging for multiplayer is viable. If it was suicide, as you suggest, wouldn't we see the entire industry move away from the model?

Btw, I'm a Fortnite guy. I love F2P. I just don't think we're going to stop seeing P2P multiplayer anytime soon.

All publishers would rather charge to pay. There seems to be a certain formula on whether or not they can pull it off though.

 

[01011001]

I don't know... Among Us, Street Fighter VI, Monster Hunter Rise, Valheim, It Takes Two, the Destiny expansions, Splatoon 3, Sons of the Forest...are all primarily multiplayer games and none of them are free.

"primarily"
I am someone who legit bought the first 2 Splatoon games mainly for the campaign
I liked the TPS/Platforming mix and ink mechanics.

SF6 even has a full campaign mode, and VERY IMPORTANTLY local multiplayer.

It Takes Two for example is also a local coop game. you are not reliant on an active online playerbase. THAT IS THE KICKER RIGHT THERE.

if you sell a multiplayer only game, that relies on an active playerbase of dozens or even hundreds of always active players to work, then there will be a risk for the player to buy a game which will be unplaybe in a few weeks should it not catch on.

this risk is IMO a big hurdle these days as more and more multiplayer games fight for relevance.

even if Street Fighter 6 had no campaign and was purely VS, it still would ve a viable buy for many because you A: only need 1 single dude online to get a match going, and B: you can play it purely offline with friends.

Btw, I'm a Fortnite guy. I love F2P. I just don't think we're going to stop seeing P2P multiplayer anytime soon.

All publishers would rather charge to pay. There seems to be a certain formula on whether or not they can pull it off though.

I feel like battle royale is the one genre that just doesn't work as a pay to play game whatsoever. it is such a risky proposal for any customer to buy a game that needs 60 players to even function properly.
to function properly and do so without massive matchmaking times it's actually more like 1000 players, since regional matchmaking is a thing and you can't connect to an already ongoing match either.

so I think a game that's mainly 5v5 could work, but a BR in this day and age? I highly doubt that could have long-term success

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

"primarily"
I am someone who legit bought the first 2 Splatoon games mainly for the campaign
I liked the TPS/Platforming mix and ink mechanics.

SF6 even has a full campaign mode, and VERY IMPORTANTLY local multiplayer.

It Takes Two for example is also a local coop game. you are not reliant on an active online playerbase. THAT IS THE KICKER RIGHT THERE.

if you sell a multiplayer only game, that relies on an active playerbase of dozens or even hundreds of always active players to work, then there will be a risk for the player to buy a game which will be unplaybe in a few weeks should it not catch on.

this risk is IMO a big hurdle these days as more and more multiplayer games fight for relevance.

even if Street Fighter 6 had no campaign and was purely VS, it still would ve a viable buy for many because you A: only need 1 single dude online to get a match going, and B: you can play it purely offline with friends.




I feel like battle royale is the one genre that just doesn't work as a pay to play game whatsoever. it is such a risky proposal for any customer to buy a game that needs 60 players to even function properly.
to function properly and do so without massive matchmaking times it's actually more like 1000 players, since regional matchmaking is a thing and you can't connect to an already ongoing match either.

so I think a game that's mainly 5v5 could work, but a BR in this day and age? I highly doubt that could have long-term success

So you are changing your tune a little bit. Your original comment was "You can't make a multiplayer only game today and not make it f2p." Now you're saying it has a lot to do with server population size.

I guess the question becomes...if there was a secret explosive device unknowingly implanted in your chest, and it would go off the moment a large scale, 60+ player servers, p2p game released...would you sleep well at night?

I wouldn't.

F2P excels when people look at a game and go "Ah, what the hell...I'll give it a shot."

P2P excels when people look at a game and go "That looks awesome. I can't wait to play it."

I don't think anything has really changed there over the years.

 

[01011001]

So you are changing your tune a little bit. Your original comment was "You can't make a multiplayer only game today and not make it f2p." Now you're saying it has a lot to do with server population size.

I guess the question becomes...if there was a secret explosive device unknowingly implanted in your chest, and it would go off the moment a large scale, 60+ player servers, p2p game released...would you sleep well at night?

I wouldn't.

F2P excels when people look at a game and go "Ah, what the hell...I'll give it a shot."

P2P excels when people look at a game and go "That looks awesome. I can't wait to play it."

I don't think anything has really changed there over the years.

even a multiplayer only 5v5 game is a hard sell today. all I'm saying is that it gets worse and worse the more players you need.
and the extreme example is a battle royale, where even a single match needs a gigantic amount of players in order to work.

but yes there are exceptions, there are always exceptions to everything.
the fact that Naraka goes free 2 play IMO is showing that they also think their game isn't sustainable as a buy to play game... and that is even tho it was in gamepass, which made it quasi free 2 play for millions of players.

 

[Kaleinc]

After tutorial can't play anything cause level too low. What the fuck is player supposed to do, watch paint dry? chinese shit

 

[Party McHardy]

Aside from the jank, and a confusing UI and the worst screen tearing I’ve seen on my ps5 I kinda like it?

 

[TGO]

I've just started playing this, kinda impressed with the Character creator, shame it's limited to just the face and hair and the battle royale is fun too.
The amount of stuff is a bit overwhelming but this seems like a Battle Royale game done right.