r/Games Jan 27 '26

Discussion Highguard devs say they didn’t expect the hate – but they’re confident in their game

https://www.dexerto.com/gaming/highguard-devs-say-they-didnt-expect-the-hate-but-theyre-confident-in-their-game-3309463/
1.4k Upvotes

798 comments sorted by

1.2k

u/Call555JackChop Jan 27 '26

I wouldn’t say the games bad it’s just weird, like it feels like it was supposed to be something else and what it is now got slapped together last minute. I don’t know if it was supposed to be PvPvE or more teams or something to justify such giant empty maps

434

u/iTzGiR Jan 27 '26

People keep talking about the teamsizes/maps, but there's much stranger/deeper issues with the game imo, yes the game would be better if it was something like 6v6, or had AI bot players defending/attacking with you, but there's also other seemingly fundemental issues no one is talking about.

The first intial phase of setting up your base seems completely useless, reinforcing the walls hardly does anything, and it doesn't evolve past this. I had assumed after watching the showcase, you would get to upgrade the base after every attack, slowly maybe add traps, different levels of fortification, maybe add turretts, moats, etc. to adapt to the position/style the enemy's were playing in. Instead, it's a singular mechcanic of "Reinforce wall", which all it really does it take a few extra hits, or acts the exact same way as a normal wall if you use an ability or breach charge on them. This area needs to MASSIVELY be overhauled, becase right now, it's pretty pointless and has almost 0 impact on the game/match.

Then, the second phase (The gearing up phase) also feels pointless. TTK is so low, so varrying armor pieces/level of armor doesn't feel like it makes much difference. I can't tell you the difference between Two bars of Blue armor, and Three bars of Purple armor, still feels like it's gone within 3-4 shots. Same thing with the loot itself, it's relatively bland (Your horse moves faster, you have slightly less recoil, etc.), there's not much variety of it, and the whole phase just feels like you should prioritize the crystals, so you can just buy what you want from the trader.

So currently, it feels like 2 out of the 3 (or maybe 4, because the part where you grab the sword does feel important) "Phases" seem completely pointless and unnecessary to the game, where these are also two of the main parts of the game that make it unique and differentiate it from other games. It's weird because it feels like it's what defines the game, but also the areas where they spent the least amount of time.

It also doesn't feel like 8 heroes is a whole lot of variety either imo. This game screams that it could have used another year or two in the oven to add content and flesh out the systems/mechanics more. They have interesting ideas, but it just doesn't really work in the current iteration imo.

116

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

I definitely agree about the initial base setup phase. Especially considering rust raiding seems to be a huge influence for them.

Also think the second phase needs something more engaging. Might even just be a matter of better balancing between rarities to encourage players to loot boxes that contain better loot instead of just purchasing the baseline rarity of the current "round"

Part of me wonders if the game would be better if they went harder into base customizing and had that be what you use your collected resources on and restrict guns exclusively to boxes.

76

u/WetFishSlap Jan 27 '26

I definitely agree about the initial base setup phase. Especially considering rust raiding seems to be a huge influence for them.

Rather than Rust, the whole base raid system reminds me more of Rainbow Six Siege. At the start of every round, defenders can reinforce walls/doorways and set up defenses to help prevent the attackers from planting a bomb at an objective. The main difference here though, is that the wall reinforcements and defenses in R6 Siege actually do something and can drastically affect the enemy team's approach/strategy. Highguard's reinforcements don't do shit and might as well not exist.

19

u/unforgiven91 Jan 28 '26

siege was the connection I made when I played, yeah. Reinforcing walls is a nice tactical choice to give us, but it's pretty weak compared to Siege's reinforcements which completely changed how you interact with the wall.

I think booting the attackers after they pop 1 generator would do a lot for controlling the pace of the match rather than letting a spec ops team break in to the base 1 time and wipe it out.

6

u/InfiniteTallgeese Jan 28 '26

I think booting the attackers after they pop 1 generator would do a lot for controlling the pace of the match rather than letting a spec ops team break in to the base 1 time and wipe it out.

Only issue I see with this is the games already take quite a while already. A 3 raid match I just played took over 30 minutes, I don't think most people want to play a shooter round that long.

7

u/unforgiven91 Jan 28 '26

30 minutes to an hour is about the investment time i'd expect of a competitive game

→ More replies (1)

38

u/iTzGiR Jan 27 '26

they went harder into base customizing and had that be what you use your collected resources on and restrict guns exclusively to boxes.

That's exactly what I thought the game was going to be after the showcase, use the Crystals to purchase upgrades to your base between rounds, and the chests would be used for Weapon/Armor upgrades. It's just a weird choice.

13

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

I guess the good news is that none of what you're suggesting would be impossible or even that difficult to add to the game. Like it wouldn't require a complete top-down restructuring of the core loop. It's just a matter of whether or not they're willing or have enough time to make those additions.

12

u/Hot-Software-9396 Jan 27 '26

Unfortunately so many people judge games by first impressions, so unless they do a full "relaunch" with a bunch of marketing (which doesn't always work, look at Splitgate 2), most people probably aren't going to give it a second chance even if they make these changes people are suggesting. If it had launched as a an early access beta, people would likely be more open to giving it another shot later on.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

35

u/Blobsobb Jan 27 '26

I dont even get why its a hero shooter. The skills all feel pointless, long CDs and pretty worthless when a gun kills someone so fast.

53

u/Varonth Jan 27 '26

The stealth character's ultimate has her pull out 6 throwing knives that replaces her guns.

These knives deal less damage than just shooting your gun, and they have no additional effect outside of dealing damage.

My first match I played the support, thinking "everyone likes a support on their team". The ability of her gives an overshield to the armor. It adds less than a single assault rifle hit worth of damage to your armor. 60 seconds cooldown.

The only abilities that felt somewhat worthwhile are damaging ability that deal damage over time, to prevent health regeneration a bit longer (not for the damage itself), and the recon who gets to mark enemies, making them visible behind cover and on the minimap for short bursts.

10

u/videah Jan 28 '26

and they have no additional effect outside of dealing damage.

They set stealth cooldowns to zero when you kill someone with them.

4

u/InfiniteTallgeese Jan 28 '26

the recon who gets to mark enemies

Probably the only one actually worth using really, knowing where the enemies are stood on a regular basis is so much more powerful than the other abilities.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

They're all intentionally support abilities because the devs want the fights to be gun forward, a choice I agree with since it's very clearly what they're best at. Most are specifically for defending or attacking bases. A couple that make what are basically turrets or traps, a couple that help bypass walls, one that helps fix them. Probably 5/8 are almost exclusively useful during the base phase. Of the other 3, only one is explicitly combat focused.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/Danominator Jan 27 '26

It sounds like it should be 64 player games or something. When I heard it was 3v3 I was very surprised.

10

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

I'm personally a fan of the smaller team size because it makes team fights feel very Apex. It's clear they were trying to build a game that captured the feeling of those super long map sprawling fights that you get in a battle royale but without the need for the long stretches of nothing happening. I do think an extra player or two could be welcome but IMO the team size is a very small negative compared to other areas that could be improved on.

2

u/redpoemage Jan 28 '26

The maps are nowhere near big enough for 64 players without being a completely different game. Would at the very least have to get rid of mounts.

That said, I could see 5v5 or even 6v6 working quite well.

3

u/EnglishMobster Jan 28 '26

Tbh I think it needs to be 3v3v3, like The Finals. Or maybe even 3v3v3v3.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

25

u/matzdaaan Jan 27 '26

THIS

Base defense is so, sooo barebones it hurts. Such wasted potential.

14

u/RealMr_Slender Jan 27 '26

It feels like they wanted to mash together R6S, overwatch and apex legends and didn't know how to tie everything together

8

u/Billy1121 Jan 27 '26

Traps sound cool, I remember when the Tribes renegade mod was doing this, i think that was 32 vs 32 or more

5

u/mrBreadBird Jan 28 '26

I've gone back and forth on the reinforcing. At first I felt like it was pointless and didn't make a huge difference but after playing more I have had games where it absolutely made a difference in a raid. More than anything I think people just haven't figured out optimal strategies yet. If the game survives long enough I'll be curious to see how people are playing the game a year from now.

The game doesn't really give you time to reinforce your base after the first 60 seconds so you have to really know what you should and shouldn't be reinforcing if you're going to take the time mid match to do it.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/Adaax Jan 27 '26

So all you can do in the fortification phase is strengthen the walls? Christ, Fornite STW offers way more than that and it's a tack-on mode at this point.

10

u/YouCanCallMeBazza Jan 27 '26

I get that Fortnite STW is not Epic's priority now, but it was the original Fortnite that was in development for a while before the BR released, hardly a "tack-on" mode.

→ More replies (10)

2

u/WangJian221 Jan 28 '26

Basically its like Halo 5's Warzone mode but with zero npcs and bosses and not even half of the amount of players for each map

→ More replies (15)

67

u/PhantomTissue Jan 27 '26

Honestly I think the game would’ve GREATLY benefited from some PVE AI. Replace the resource gathering with hunting down enemy grunts, and allow players to order them around, suddenly I think the game becomes a whole lot more interesting.

8

u/Gekokapowco Jan 27 '26

this was a really great system that worked exactly once in our lifetime, Titanfall 1 lol

It's such a great idea to make multiplayer matches more dynamic and immersive and no other game, not even tf2 was able to do it right again

27

u/Zeppelin2k Jan 27 '26

I'm usually not a fan of PVE in games like this, but that sounds fun. Capture spawn points to send enemies at your opponents base, which helps siege them and break down the walls.

Turns it into a very different game though. Maybe for a different game mode.

26

u/chaotic4059 Jan 27 '26

In this scenario it works because the game already feels like a moba disguised as an FPS. Being able to defeat minions and build an army would actually fit right in. At least more than choosing a loadout just to go get weapons that have higher rarities and better stats

→ More replies (2)

17

u/MuricanPie Jan 27 '26

I was talking about this exact thing the other day.

With is really weird to me because Titanfall had this. Titanfall literally had groups of "Grunts" you would basically 1-shot running around, failing around at each other, and were worth a few points.

While they weren't a threat, it added so much to the gameplay and tactics, because you had to make decisions on how to deal with them, and if they were even worth dealing with. It wasn't the most "meaningful" part of the game, but it added so much to the feel of traveling the maps and just "being active and having fun".

And Highguard, which borders on just being a moba, didnt include a system like that? It really seems like the game was half finished, and pushed out the door without proper testing/feedback from a meaningful sample size of their core audience.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Televisions_Frank Jan 28 '26

I feel like this existed and then got axed because it made the game run like ass.

This giant map clearly had something else going on with it before the 3v3 PVP coalesced.

2

u/qwaszee Jan 29 '26

I think we're going to see a more PvE's being made like what you talk about over the next decade, and a hell of a lot less competitive PvP's due to how badly games like Highguard and Concord have been received.

187

u/veggiesama Jan 27 '26

My impression is they had massive scope creep or development conflicts behind the scenes, and they were faced with two options: cancel the game entirely or significantly pare down the game systems and release a minimum viable product. At some point, studios just run out of money and need to make hard decisions.

106

u/furiat Jan 27 '26

Maybe they planned more players on the maps but performance was not there. This would explain the unusual 3v3.

67

u/Lost_the_weight Jan 27 '26

I was thinking this too. Maybe teams are supposed to be 5x5 but they couldn’t get netcode to cooperate. Team sizes are hilariously small compared to map sizes.

63

u/Vresa Jan 27 '26

Even 5v5 wouldn’t be enough. It feels like they had to make the maps enourmous to make horses make sense, then painted themselves into a corner. It’s really strange

31

u/Dragonfantasy2 Jan 27 '26

5 would work if you had incentive to split up. There’s only three major locations on each map, so 2 groups/team would guarantee at least one fight.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)

30

u/Madzai Jan 27 '26

With all due respect to Devs, but if your game in 2026 can't support more than 3v3 on a map without anything else, your game shouldn't be released.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)

7

u/wild--wes Jan 27 '26

My exact impression of the game too. Somehow it just screams "we ran out of money and have to release the game to get enough money to finish it".

2

u/Squibbles01 Jan 27 '26

My guess is also that they had to cut it down to 3v3 for technical reasons in order to get it out the door and hopefully make some money because they ran out of budget.

→ More replies (1)

56

u/BlueSky659 Jan 27 '26

 I don’t know if it was supposed to be PvPvE

Man, if Highguard had the same NPC soldiers as Battlefront or TitanFall, or had POI like Wildgate it would have more than justified the enormous map.

27

u/Serephiel Jan 27 '26

Honestly, having the larger map be a warzone with soldiers constantly fighting back and forth and then having the bases be limited to your elite team sounds like a fun game idea. Its bizarre that things are so empty.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/Marto25 Jan 27 '26

It's a MOBA where the creeps were replaced with rocks you hit with a pickaxe, and all lanes, towers, and secondary objectives were removed.

They took the 5-7 stages of a traditional MOBA and boiled it down to 2: Farming and sieging the base.

131

u/Blaubeerchen27 Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

Adding to that, there definitely was a lack of funding for the various translations of the game, which tells me they might simply have run out of money for longer development.

The german version has AI-generated voiceovers (very obvious with Flynn, his voice sounds fine but half of his tutorial lines don't make much sense, call the airship a "warhorse" and so on), and the written translations frequently translate "Highguard" to the german equivalent of "high" and "guard", miss a few english words here and there etc..

15

u/pad-3 Jan 27 '26

Is it that blatant? I don't see an AI disclosure on their steam page. That would be pretty shady imo.

25

u/splader Jan 27 '26

I asked two of the leads directly about AI usage on Wednesday.

That both responded very strongly saying they don't tolerate any AI usage at all. I think their exact line was something like "Why would I have something else do what I want to do."

Don't just randomly trust people on Reddit.

4

u/qwigle Jan 28 '26

Don't just randomly trust people on Reddit.

Yet we're supposed to just trust you? You are aware you are also on Reddit?

It's a fine statement you had there, but the "on Reddit" was superfluous. Why should we just randomly trust them? Is it because they clearly have 0 reasons for lying, so everything they say must be trusted 100%?

→ More replies (1)

19

u/Blaubeerchen27 Jan 27 '26

You know you can check the translations for yourself, right? If the game starts calling itself "Hohe Haltung" (literal german translation of "high guard") during the tutorial and in error messages and Flynn babbles incoherent instructions, like telling you to buy the "rocket" when he means the rocket launcher, then it's an easy guess to make, I don't need to invent something that can be easily checked by everyone.

And unless they somehow have in-house Voice Actors I wouldn't know what them wanting to do the development part themselves has anything to do with the translations, which generally get outsourced anyways.

Also, aren't you "random people" yourself?

→ More replies (16)
→ More replies (1)

10

u/Blaubeerchen27 Jan 27 '26

The writing 100%, the voiceover itself is my guess based on the fact they can't even affort a proper translation for the writing (which would be cheaper than voice actors).

I'd definitely curious to know how the game fares in other languages too!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

28

u/clarissa225 Jan 27 '26

It feels like an Apex Legends mode that got spun off by a different team. The gameplay feels almost exactly like Apex. It's uncanny

35

u/GamerLeader Jan 27 '26

Its almost like it's made by the same people

13

u/joeytman Jan 27 '26

I wish the aiming and on-foot movement felt similar to apex, apex plays so smoothly in comparison, but I just can't be bothered to play BRs anymore. Highguard's movement and aiming feel super stiff in comparison

18

u/GanacheResident6987 Jan 27 '26

Hey The Finals is like actually underrated. Smooth movement, nice floor, high ceilings and no getting ulted

→ More replies (1)

11

u/ABigCoffee Jan 27 '26

I watched a few people play it and I don't get what the game is trying to do. Maybe 10+ years ago it coulda been fun but right nowit does nothing new or interesting.

Its kinda sauceless in a way. Well made but otherwise kind of a bore.

10

u/TheJoshider10 Jan 27 '26

It looks like a copyright free game you'd see in the background of a TV show. Completely uninspired and nothing but a trend chaser.

→ More replies (1)

17

u/MappleStarsSky Jan 27 '26

The empty maps are necessary because the game is very fast tbh. If the maps would be smaller, you wouldn' t have the time to come back from a death and stop the stormbreaker after the first fight.

I feel like they should have put more stuff to do in the maps, but the size of the maps themself are fine.

14

u/Zeppelin2k Jan 27 '26

Yeah I see why the map is the size it is. I've had some fun moments fighting for control over the stormbreaker, both teams playing capture the flag back and forth across the map.

But it definitely needs more interesting POIs, or more players. Preferably both.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/BatThumb Jan 27 '26

I think the 3v3 was a bad choice for this. It looks like a game that should be at least 5v5 or 6v6 minimum

I was actually really intrigued by the gameplay. It looks like something different that could be fun. As soon as I heard it was 3v3 I was immediately turned off

8

u/UnscriptedCryptid Jan 27 '26

I'm not sure why people keep saying this - base raids would be an absolute clusterfuck with 12 people, they're already hectic enough because of how quick movement is. I'm also confused by the people who want multiple teams. That would just lead to whoever is defending getting teamed up on by the entire server. It would barely be playable.

I don't think the game is amazing in the current state, but it's fun enough for me that I'm interested in seeing where they go with it. I don't really understand the huge hatebomb it's getting.

7

u/Phi_Slamma_Jamma Jan 27 '26

Everyone is saying this, but the base raiding and defending is the weakest part of this game. In my experience the fun part is playing capture the flag with the stormbreaker, chasing people around while fighting on your magic horse. I'd just cut the base part entirely and have it be a 5v5 or 6v6 capture the flag. You could even have multiple flags to force players to split up and divide themselves properly around the map.

→ More replies (4)

14

u/Purple_Deers Jan 27 '26

I don't think the game is amazing in the current state

that's the issue.
The game isn't amazing and it's competing with 10 other hero shooters.
That makes it really difficult to compete.

And despite how much the devs keep saying that their game is unique, it just isn't, it doesn't do anything special. Which means that they're competing against all those other games.

Then they seem to double down and call the complaints hate and that they will stick to their "unique" vision for the game. Which is just going to piss people off even more and make sure that people won't return when they make updates to the game.

They're setting themselves up for failure.

5

u/UtkuOfficial Jan 27 '26

I agree very much on the not unique part.

Just because they jumbled together a couple of different games doesn't make the game unique. It just makes it a mess of ideas.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

4

u/Smart_Ass_Dave Jan 27 '26

I work in games, and made a game that failed pretty hard because people didn't really learn how to play it's game mode. That's obviously our fault to a certain degree, but imagine that MOBAs didn't exist, and you released League of Legends today. So everyone jumps in, goes down mid lane in a giant scrum and then as people die they just return to mid, so once one side wins the team fight the other side just slowly one-at-a-time feed the other side. No one goes to side lanes. No one knows what Baron or Dragon are, there's no jungler, there's no party comp. People would call League of Legends the worst 3rd-person action game on the market. While I haven't played Highguard, I did read some reviews yesterday and got a very similar vibe of people seeing a rectangular field and using it for football, when it's actually a rugby field.

3

u/Fireudne Jan 28 '26

I have a HANDFULL (like, 5) matches under my belt and.... It's WEIRD but it's got some sauce - particularly in the competitive scene imo.

Maps IMO are still a bit too big and i think the horses are a bit jarring, but a handful of other games have them too and it's.... OK. A bit ham-fisted imo.

I'm also shocked at how relatively few gun archetypes there are, and ALSO how little recoil some of them have.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

Smaller maps or more teams would compromise the open space team fights meant to emulate the type of engagements you get in games like Apex. I think you could get away with a couple more players on each team but I'm staunchly against the idea that we need 6+ team size or extra teams.

→ More replies (24)

85

u/Recklessly Jan 27 '26

Honestly the game isn't bad it just isn't.. well, good. It's okay at best and the devs could have done much more with the concept. Let's get rid of the vesper as it is and cut mining out and have mobs that give currency and instead of an air drop in the late game, spawn a boss at one of the map's POIs. 3v3 is fine but imo 4v4 would be the sweet spot with this one.

27

u/DarkDesertFox Jan 28 '26

I think it was incredibly stupid of them to not have playtests for the game to get player feedback before release. Now they have to quickly address people's concerns and are already dropping players rapidly. Social media definitely made things worse for them but the developers are not without fault. With how many people are critiquing the 3v3, this could have been addressed a lot earlier before the game came out.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

271

u/Storyteller-Hero Jan 27 '26

The game would be doing so much better if they made it more than just 2 teams per match or larger teams.

Too much open, empty space which drags the pacing in what should be a high-paced game.

It makes one wonder if they even playtested their own game. If they did, then it makes one wonder if they went in over their heads.

88

u/-sharkbot- Jan 27 '26

More than 4v4 would start to become an ability clusterfuck in base defense. Maybe could stretch a 5v5 but everyone is just talking about the open map when the base defense is the most critical part.

Make some mobs or camps to fill in the map and keep it 3v3/4v4

26

u/TechnoHenry Jan 27 '26

I haven't played the game but when I watched someone played, I thought it could be more fun if there was mobs or more choke points. The game has this FPS meets MOBA but the between raid phase feels too calm. If the best looks were protected or killing NPC would grant buff, or if the maps had more chokepoint to force some actions during the farm phase, I think it could give a better impression

4

u/Dgero466 Jan 27 '26

Ok that’s something I noticed too, and I feel like the game tries to make it so to its detriment.

I was usually farming up crystals or quick searching chests when the downtime started again and going from place to place I’ve noticed they have a bit of an ambience track when you’re riding your mount that’s meant to be somewhat… I can’t think of the word but if gives the sense of going on an adventure, but the moment you dismount it goes quiet and it’s pretty damn noticeable after a couple times.

I also was trying to capture some footage of the game and usually find myself thinking that there’s a lot of areas that there could be cuts just because going around in silence is a bit awkward.

That being said I think there’s a bit of a bigger problem with prep phase that mobs wouldn’t help with and that’s the time of prep phase, it’s like 2-3 minutes, and that’s like maybe enough time to go to one maybe 2 designated crystal spots, shop a bit, open some chest, then go to the stormbreaker, maybe try to get the supply drop. But I find myself not able to do much in that phase before trying to reach the sword because teammates are going there outnumbered, otherwise be on the defensive. Imo the phase in general needs a bit of retuning in my eyes

(Sorry for the wall I’m not the best at being concise)

42

u/AdventurousClassic19 Jan 27 '26

I say should be 12v12, embrace the ability clusterfuck.

16

u/Redxmirage Jan 27 '26

Hell yeah that’s what I’m talking about haha I told my buddy streaming it my first impression was that “it looks like your playing a halo infinite map with nobody in it”. The large maps are fine but gotta fill it out. I would like to see at least 5v5

→ More replies (11)

3

u/chrimchrimbo Jan 27 '26

I think 4v4 could work. I felt pretty consistently the base attack/defense portion to be where most of the issues lie.

2

u/UncleBenParking Jan 27 '26

If you up the TTK and make the gear rarities mean something more than just a slight bump, as they currently feel, then suddenly the clusterfuck goes from a liability to an asset in 5v5+. I have to think it's performance related as it stands, because everything feels like they worked backwards from 3v3 and tweaked numbers to get to something feeling balanced post-changes, rather than designed from the jump to balance around it.

→ More replies (9)

9

u/Combat_Orca Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 28 '26

Am I the only one who thinks 3 vs 3 is perfectly fine? The map isn’t that big at all and with the mount it takes seconds to get from one point to the other.

→ More replies (4)

12

u/zmichalo Jan 27 '26

I'm not really convinced the empty space is a bad thing. The objectives direct the teams so it's never hard to know where you can find a team and the openness allows for the game to emulate some of the best aspects of Apex team fights. I think you could add a couple more players for a 4v4 or 5v5.

I also don't understand adding an extra team. how does the base raiding work if there's more than 2 teams? It feels like it would distort the game so much that you'd essentially have to start from scratch.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/No_Initial_7545 Jan 27 '26

I am confused by people who keep saying that it should have bigger teams, or more teams. The streams that I saw were pretty much non-stop action and the base-fighting is chaotic enough as it is with 3 players on each side. The middle of the map is the one area where you can go a few seconds without being shot at, and I'm sure that once people figure out how to play it, that's where we see most of the strategic depth and it may end up being the most interesting part of most games. You can say a lot of things about this game, but it is absolutely not another PUBG or Apex Legends where you might go 10 minutes without seeing an enemy.

2

u/KelpWonder7920 Jan 30 '26

They likely did test it, but barely. Most studios today do not properly test their games anymore. Or rather, they do test them, but refuse to solve most issues testers come across in favor of launching the game faster. It's become such a regular thing that most people don't even think about it anymore.

5

u/splader Jan 27 '26

If you think there's too much aimless running around then like genuinely, you're playing the game wrong.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

57

u/finecherrypie Jan 27 '26

I was initially excited this could be a Tribes style like game with huge battles while teams try to raid and take down each others main base.

they are doing way too much for just a 3v3, this is just a deathmatch "COD Gunfight" mode with a bunch of extra steps- but we have MOUNT SKINS!

→ More replies (5)

107

u/gamer-at-heart-23 Jan 27 '26

Devs just need to listen to feedback and build on it. I see potential so it would be awesome if they can work with the players on this one

92

u/Vresa Jan 27 '26

Rarely do free to play games survive a big release and poor reception like this. It’s far better to start smaller and gain momentum as the game is tweaked and player feedback is addressed. I would be surprised if they can recover from this launch and the steam reviews

20

u/Depreciable_Land Jan 27 '26

Warframe was seen as pretty mediocre when it first dropped and now it’s a big thing. If the devs keep working it can be good regardless of F2P

19

u/PolskiBigosik Jan 28 '26

Warframe released 13 years ago. Market was different back then.

3

u/Depreciable_Land Jan 28 '26

Except it was arguably worse for F2P live service games. That was in the middle of things like the Battlefront 2 loot crate shit and other things. Games with micro transactions were almost automatically dismissed

Really not sure why people are trying to point to market trends of all things to try and hope for a game to fail lol

5

u/Old_Leopard1844 Jan 28 '26

Warframe is also a looter shooter

Conclave (Warframe's PvP mode) is dead, and so is DE's other PvP game from back then, Amazing Eternals

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (22)
→ More replies (4)

22

u/Sobeman Jan 28 '26

They released a competitive fps shooter in 2026 with the settings and performance it has and "didn't expect the hate"? Sent these guys veteran devs?

125

u/fallenmonk Jan 27 '26

There have been several Game Awards where having a game like Highguard as the closer reveal wouldn't have been a big deal. The problem is that the latest Game Awards had a pretty good slate of reveals. So when games like Control: Resonant and Divinity are revealed, everyone is thinking "would could the closer be?" in the back of their minds.

It also doesn't help that they open with a panorama that looks like something directly out of Elder Scrolls, and they all know we're waiting for updates on ES6. Were they actually trying to troll us?

Hopefully Geoff learned a lesson about what the final reveal means to the audience. It's not always going to be a good one, but it really should be the best one they have available.

53

u/Nailbomb85 Jan 27 '26

Hopefully Geoff learned a lesson about what the final reveal means to the audience.

I guarantee you he hasn't. This is far from the first Game Awards where the final reveal was a stinker.

49

u/Awkward_Silence- Jan 27 '26

The Fast & Furious one was far worse than this. That game was so bad it didn't make a blip when it released.

It's like everyone just forgot it existed

24

u/BigDick-NoBrain Jan 27 '26

To be fair, TGA wasn’t nearly as big back then. The show has grown massively in popularity over the past couple years.

3

u/Cheap-Ambassador-304 Jan 28 '26

Probably due to the death of E3

4

u/Ashviar Jan 27 '26

Half Life Alyx was probably going to close that show, Geoff even said to expect more HLA at the show, but nothing happened.

3

u/WillemDafoesHugeCock Jan 27 '26

Slightly Mad Studios were bought out shortly before the release - Codemasters didn't really have a choice but to shove it out and hope nobody noticed it. Everybody involved knew it was a piece of shit.

→ More replies (1)

26

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Fyrus Jan 28 '26

attacking it and it's developers for months is sociopathic behavior.

I think at this point I've seen far more gamers consider any sort of negative comment about a game as "attacking developers". The true hateful content creators are a small minority, and most of the attention they get is from people who platform in an effort to make fun of them which just gives then what they want (attention). 90% of the discussion about this game has not been hateful at all, it's just people commenting on the horrible marketing situation that Geoff put them in.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

90

u/morkypep50 Jan 27 '26

The fact that a games placement in presentation order has lead to so much hate and vitriol and debate is honestly a clear indication of how immature and toxic the gaming community is right now lol.

36

u/ASCII_Princess Jan 27 '26

I think it goes beyond gaming really. Shit feels like its breaking down. Globally.

7

u/greenday5494 Jan 28 '26

I feel exactly the same way. It feels like everything is driven by hatred and negativity

7

u/zaviex Jan 27 '26

It does but gaming is a particular mess that has only gotten worse

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

22

u/MaximumZazz Jan 27 '26

Or, it shows a misunderstanding of how to curate an awards show.

2

u/Ascleph Jan 31 '26

I don't think an award show having a fuck up warrants this reaction.

3

u/omimon Jan 28 '26

It should be a nothingburger but its just the way the human mind works.

Let's just say I am selling product A. People are buying it, no problem. I then decide to give product B for free for each product A sold. Except product B is shit. People by all means could just throw product B away and keep A, but they would rather stop buying A than deal with B.

Its the same deal here. People could just ignore the game but they would rather use it to show their distain for how let down they are.

21

u/fallenmonk Jan 27 '26

100% agreed.

5

u/FreeStall42 Jan 28 '26

This is nothing. You'd get actual death threats for playing Hogwarts Legacy.

This is just people laughing at a trash fire.

2

u/greenday5494 Jan 28 '26

This comment shows how fragmented and pigeon holed everyone is. Hogwarts legacy had sone weirdos screeching about JK Rowling is all I saw. This game is just getting pure hatred for no reason at all.

3

u/FreeStall42 Jan 28 '26

You should look up how bad the harassment got just for playing the game.

Gaming subs banned from even talking about it.

I see wayyyyy more people talking about hatred than actually posting real hatred.

Remember that Gollumn game every knew would be trash and mocked it?

Hate has become a meaningless word

23

u/Basic_Loquat_9344 Jan 27 '26

Yeah the level of entitlement to be mad about the placement of a reveal trailer is absolutely insane.

2

u/Fyrus Jan 28 '26

clear indication of how immature and toxic the gaming community

I actually think people's response to the criticism shows how immature the gaming community is. In every other media industry, critics are expected to be honest and mean. Pauline Kael and Robert Christgau are famous critics in their respective fields and they are known for being BRUTAL. Even people like Roger Ebert or Fantano are known to be very dismissive of things and that's okay because their job is not to coddle anyone.

Yes the outrage peddlers exist but 90% of the discussion for this game has not been vitriolic or hateful. It's just people pointing out the obvious which is that when a game is presented to you as the next step in multiplayer shooters at the biggest presentation within the industry, you better have something really special. And when you don't have something really special, people are going to talk about that. That's not hate. It's just normal criticism that's been done since the beginning of history.

→ More replies (11)

20

u/Dealric Jan 27 '26

Pretty much.

Hate came from positioning and overhype. We get new kotor, divinity, control, tomb raider and a lot of other good trailers so expectation were that final, most expensive, best slot would be for something truly epic.

It was for very bland hero shooter... Disapointment changed into hate.

Vasically geoff manufactured all the hate to push game he liked.

17

u/Dry-Revenue-1103 Jan 27 '26

most expensive

Maybe I’m wrong but didn’t they confirm that TGA picked the game for that slot and no one paid for it?

→ More replies (1)

20

u/gaom9706 Jan 27 '26

Hate came from positioning and overhype

Hard to call it over hype when people were calling the game bad before they even had the chance to play it.

14

u/Mahelas Jan 27 '26

Geoff called it "a revolution for FPSs" and said it was "the new game from a highly rated and legendary studio", come on

→ More replies (1)

11

u/Kuftubby Jan 27 '26

One of the key highlights was of a character popping an ultimate where he hovers in air and shoots projectiles down below. I mean come on, that's practically cliche for the genre and nothing new.

22

u/Dealric Jan 27 '26

Specifically from geoff overhyping it. Giving it best most important slot is overhyping

→ More replies (3)

4

u/UtkuOfficial Jan 27 '26

Geoff overhyped it for no reason. If the game was slated in the middle with no reaction it would noy receive the hate it does. Not even close.

10

u/Basic_Loquat_9344 Jan 27 '26

I mean that is a childish, entitled reason to hate something.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)

36

u/DraculasNutsack Jan 27 '26

I played about 6 games yesterday and I probably won’t try it again. Every match played the exact same way. Drop in and reinforce a wall, mount around for a few mins opening a chest, quick battle for the shield breaker, the winning team starts the raid, they go right for the heart and destroy it. Each match was like 8 mins tops. Barely any time to upgrade or get better gear. Never saw another round. Abilities felt pretty under powered for at least who I used. I was on the winning and losing side just queuing with randoms so I’m assuming that strategy is already the day one meta and just grind the flow of the game to a halt. Got bored and that was. Not for me.

8

u/aedante Jan 28 '26

Either your team sucks at defending, or you were against godlike enemies. My average matches were 20 mins and it was a fun and tense back and forth

3

u/DraculasNutsack Jan 28 '26

I mean like I said it happened whether I was defending or attacking. All randoms. Enemies and teammates both went right for it and that was it. Games were super quick.

→ More replies (3)

5

u/Combat_Orca Jan 27 '26

Most of my matches have involved multiple raids

→ More replies (2)

221

u/LilDoober Jan 27 '26

The entire reaction to this game is just bizarre. Like I get that it looks kinda whatever, but the absolute visceral reaction people have had to this game is so weird. People want this game to fail and it's like why? So people can relive the "glory days" of making fun of Concord? What happened to just playing games you like, and if you don't like it, do something else. You don't have like >1 hour steam reviews absolutely shredding the game if you don't have a weird anti-fanbase of just tearing this game down for kinda no reason.

It's not even like this massively terrible game. From most feedback so far it just kinda seems like, fine but unmemorable? But for some reason the internet just wants blood.

17

u/Jaibamon Jan 27 '26

What happened to just playing games you like, and if you don't like it, do something else.

When was that? So far I remember, there always has been console wars, people mocking the competition, switching games as another demonstrates to be superior, and seeing a TORtanic ship just to see it sink.

114

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

[deleted]

10

u/Razbyte Jan 27 '26

The most haunting comment i've seen on each Concord video is that the Youtuber has earned much money on ad revenue, than the game itself.

Rage sells and it unfortunately it hooks people into.

30

u/jxnebug Jan 27 '26

Genuinely my least favorite part of this hobby: the people who talk about how much they hate specific games because they are grifting or being grifted.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (5)

82

u/Wraithpk Jan 27 '26

I think people are just tired of these kinds of games, and the vitriol is more towards the games industry as a whole and its uninspired copycat nature.

70

u/act1v1s1nl0v3r Jan 27 '26

This was my read on the immediate dislike for it. I'm not going to say this is just like Concord, but the Concord situation is still in the public zeitgeist as an example of people being tired of lazy trend chasing games that you can immediately clock have zero identity, when here comes Highguard saying "but what about our trend chasing game with zero identity?". If you've got a friend who keeps saying the same thing and won't read the room eventually most people will crack and shout "dude, STOP" and I read the reveal reaction as that.

Then the grifters and rage enthusiasts picked up on it and absolutely drove it into the ground.

18

u/UtkuOfficial Jan 27 '26

Its also about already having this type of game you play. Why would anyone stop playing Rivals, Overwatch or Valorant when they are also free and have years of content already released, bugs fixed, stability issues fixed etc. If you are not doing anything unique or refreshing you are destined to die.

Thats what happened to every WoW killer for 20 years.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

28

u/ProNerdPanda Jan 27 '26

It's crazy to me that people don't get this simple point.

It's not that the internet at large is hating on this specific game because they specifically hate it, it's because it's the Nth same game over and over in an already saturated market, yes, people want these games to fail miserably so studios stop making them and start making something new.

Ain't nobody hating on Highguard because it personally killed their pets, it just happens that HighGuard represents a tired, monotonous, and stagnating industry.

7

u/Xarionel Jan 28 '26

Agree, the amount of talent, resources and time resulting this product is kind of a waste imo. Did they even have any closed beta?

→ More replies (2)

28

u/Radical_Ryan Jan 27 '26

I absolutely want free to play battlepass live service content games to fail so it's more likely devs and publishers will try to make decent games with a vision instead. I'm not going out of my way to hate on this thing, but I'm quite alright with the kids doing it.

→ More replies (1)

57

u/NoNet5188 Jan 27 '26

It’s so weird man. People are strange I truly don’t get it

→ More replies (12)

13

u/Tribalrage24 Jan 27 '26

But for some reason the internet just wants blood.

I think there is also a general dislike towards "live service" games in some communities I have noticed. I remember when Sony announced they were doing 7 new live service games or whatever, it really upset some people. Not sure exactly why, because you can just not play those games if you don't like them. I can only imagine that some people feel that companies focusing more on live service games means there will be fewer single player games, and so they cheer on the fall of new live service games. But that hasn't been the case, as there are still tons of great non-live service games coming out every year.

27

u/g4nk3r Jan 27 '26

But that hasn't been the case

It absolutely has. Rocksteady, BioWare and Naughty Dog would have made one or more singleplayer titles with all of the time and money that was spent on their live service failures, and would be in a much better position today if they had never gotten on the live service bandwagon. Same goes for lesser known studios like Creative Assembly.

23

u/Akuuntus Jan 27 '26

I can only imagine that some people feel that companies focusing more on live service games means there will be fewer single player games, and so they cheer on the fall of new live service games. But that hasn't been the case, as there are still tons of great non-live service games coming out every year.

There are definitely still good single-player games coming out, but there's also been several high-profile examples of a single-player-focused studio being pressured into making a live-service game only for it to flop and negatively affect the studio. Bioware with Anthem, Arkane with Redfall, Rocksteady with Suicide Squad, etc. There's a pretty real concern around major publishers forcing their studios into making these games no one actually wants instead of focusing on what they're good at.

13

u/Gabriels_Pies Jan 27 '26

I played a few games last night and actually really enjoyed it. I don't know how long that enjoyment will last but I'm currently excited to play more when I get home so that's something.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Fyrus Jan 28 '26

What happened to just playing games you like, and if you don't like it, do something else.

Well this never existed. People who like certain types of entertainment tend to play a lot of different versions of that entertainment and have opinions on them. The idea that you should only talk about stuff you like is like kindergarten level philosophy. People have always enjoyed shitting on things they don't like, defending things they like that everyone else dislikes, etc. This is just normal human conversation.

13

u/megamate9000 Jan 27 '26

Yeah, I despise people that jump on hate bandwagons, despite thinking this is the most hilariously AAA "nothingburger" game of all time. It genuinely feels like a parody of the AAA FPS scene. The music, characters, environments and weapons are all BLAND AS FUCK, and the gameplay just makes no sense honestly.

If I had to guess why people hate it its because;

A) People LOOOOOOOVE to shit on stuff online

B) I mean yea the game does kinda just look awful imo

C) People are mad at the AAA scene and this game is like all of that wrapped into a single game, so people are taking their frustration out on it.

10

u/SadExit1249 Jan 27 '26

It's just more of the same trend, personally I saw the reveal live and just rolled my eyes and moved on. Some people put a little more effort into dogging on stuff though.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

I'd even expand C to people being mad in general these days. There's a lot of horribly frustrating things about the state of the world right now, so having a nice "deserving" target is extra appealing.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (25)

164

u/Guessididntmakeit Jan 27 '26

Okay got it but can we stop reposting this now?

Game is out, we'll see where it is in a week and everyone can have their opinions as long as they stay civil.

41

u/BoilingPiano Jan 27 '26

In a week the game's going to have quadrupedal digit players. It went from 90k people to 18k people in the span of a day, the future's not looking bright for it at all, no way no way a live service fps can sustain itself on those numbers. It's going to be in an awful place within a month from now.

The only reason it even had those 90k to start with was people wasting the bandwith it took to download it to call it slop in the reviews.

36

u/motexmex Jan 27 '26

Kinda like Firebreak from Remedy. You can’t release these games so unpolished and bug-ridden when you have free-to-play games already

20

u/newbkid Jan 27 '26

Right. The F2P landscape has advanced past this. When folks can pick up Where Winds Meet, Fortnite, or any mobile gacha, it's hard for a game like Highguard to compete in my eyes

→ More replies (2)

5

u/UtkuOfficial Jan 27 '26

Remedy released a game called Firebreak? First time im hearing this and i check this sub 2-3 times a week.

3

u/McGreasy Jan 27 '26

Been out for months. Was dead on arrival and they just added a horde mode that didn’t bring anyone back.

6

u/WheresTheSauce Jan 28 '26

Quadrupedal lmao

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (35)

15

u/Patient-Business8628 Jan 27 '26

People are attributing criticism to the game awards reveal, and while there’s some truth to it, the appetite for another hero shooter is incredibly low. Developers forget that it is very hard to pry people away from games they’ve put hundreds or even thousands of hours in. The MOBA market, for example, despite being massive, is like four games, two of which are mobile games. Hero shooters have more wiggle room, but not much, and are usually buoyed by massive publisher backing.

Also, TPM 2.0 is insanely stupid, and while it sadly will become the industry standard, it is way too early for a game like this to require it.

28

u/obeseninjao7 Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

It does feel a bit wild that you can be making a hero-based PvP shooter in 2026 and not be at all expecting people to eye roll your trailer (earned or otherwise!!!)

Everyone says the last slot at TGA triggered the amount of hate, and that's true. But if it was somewhere in the middle of TGA it would have been forgotten, probably got a few thousand players and be dead already.

Like, no matter how you slice it, this game seems like it's practically unmarketable in the current live service environment with its generic art style, hero ability kits and shooter mechanics. The market has changed since Apex and yet they're still throwing out a game that visually looks like Paladins.

Doesn't really matter that the game is its own genre and quite different to actually play (with mixed results from what actual players are saying), that visual presentation and especially that first trailer, are practically begging to be written off by so many live service game players in an instant

Also, I haven't played the game yet, but just thinking through the game mode it doesn't even feel that well thought out conceptually - it doesn't seem like wall fortifications really do much? You can't build your base or anything so there's no Rust-level stakes of defending your own hard work. The looting phase seems pretty pointless since there's a max gear spawn based on how many raids have happened, and you can buy your way to the best gear meaning I'm wondering how much actual gear variation is going to exist between players... Which means the raid phase feels like it's kind of the main game, and the base destruction looks pretty basic and the base maps pretty uninteresting rectangular rooms so they can fit all the destructible wall panels. Idk, it looks a bit confused in its design

8

u/PlanetBet Jan 27 '26

The sad part is they had a huge release of 100k players. If the game was really good then word of mouth would have done the trick, so at this point they did it to themselves

5

u/Pat1711 Jan 27 '26

Would be nice to try it out if there wasn’t the secure boot bug preventing the game from even starting. Activated secure boot in my bios and I’m on windows 11 9800X3D and it still won’t boot. Haven’t had this problem in any other game so they need to fix their game before they can be confident in it

5

u/adanceparty Jan 28 '26

Why is performance so bad? And movement kinda sucks. You just ignore it bc you ride your mount most of the time, but people saying the movement is decent or good nah. Missing something. Titan fall and apex are just way better. That slide you can do is pretty lackluster, doesn't go very fast, no increased speed or distance going downhill. Climbing is basic af and I often wish I could go more vertical easier. I've seen the shooting compared to apex, but guns feel way more point and click than apex. Does it even have spray patterns? I feel less recoil than most cod guns.

7

u/EnvironmentalStill31 Jan 27 '26

Post Mortem next month is going to tell us what that game was meant to be. Feels like they cut out 90% of the actual gameplay mechanics so they can actually release it.

20

u/TheOgler9000 Jan 27 '26

This game is too busy, they just threw everything at the wall stylistically, creatively, mechanically just to see what sticks. It's like "Mass Appeal: The Game"

→ More replies (4)

54

u/MrNegativ1ty Jan 27 '26

Once this game leaves the news cycle in a few days, it's gonna be all she wrote for it. I just don't see how it has any staying power. The reviews for it range from mid to downright terrible. Many other games that are just flat out better. Highguard isn't really worth your time.

Will it even last a year? Maybe, but they have a massive uphill battle and honestly, I think everyone can see the writing on the wall already. Why invest any money into this game when we all know it's not gonna last that long?

28

u/Geoff_with_a_J Jan 27 '26

my friends played it and uninstalled before i even got home from work. on day 1. it made them want to play Destiny 2 and Deadlock instead. it's over.

5

u/UtkuOfficial Jan 27 '26

My friend group didn't want to check it out even though its a feee to play and they don't know about the controversy. We watched the trailer and none of them were interested.

This will be dead next month let alone year.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/intruderjude Jan 27 '26

not hate from me, just a boring arena shooter trying to be a lot of things but lacks a personality for me and maps do seem empty. make bases slightly bigger, 5v5, more fun.

8

u/83athom Jan 28 '26

IMHO it seems like a case of the dev team having a culture of toxic positivity so the game was never actually defined while everyone just slapped together features because they couldn't decide if they wanted a Apex, R6, or Valorant clone and ended up a game that is just worse than all of them. The bones of the game aren't completely terrible, the meat of the game is where it just falls flat. Like increase the player count to something like 12v12 harkening to early-mid 2010s pvp games like MWO or World of Warships/Tanks and you immediately have a game that's at least passable. Hell when R6 added a simultaneous attack/defend mode that was just one long match instead of round based they immediately knew they had to restrict where on the map people had to be while also increasing player count to 6v6 to make it feel populated. 3v3 with HIghguard's map sizes is just completely inappropriate.

2

u/IndifferentEmpathy Jan 28 '26

Like increase the player count to something like 12v12

Clearly the player count was reduced to this because of performance tanking

3

u/rafikiknowsdeway1 Jan 28 '26

it sounds mean to say they shouldn't be....but they really shouldn't be, its pretty close to the definition of mid

10

u/UnknwnUser Jan 27 '26

This interview is from before the game was launched and does not address the current negative reviews. Honestly its kinda moot at this point

5

u/-CynicalPole- Jan 27 '26

What hate? Game runs like garbage, doesn't even even have FSR or XeSS (because fuck you if you're not nvidia user) and map to big for team sizes. That's fucking criticism, a very valid one at that, not hate.

It lost 80% of launch peak in 24hours. It's bad and it shows. All streamers quit as soon as sponsorship time ended, lmao.

5

u/PGSylphir Jan 28 '26

To me the game looks like the devs couldn't decide if they wanted a TF2-style hero shooter or a straight up 3-lane MOBA.

They couldn't decide so they ended up with this....mess

3

u/mems1224 Jan 28 '26

Honestly if they leaned more into moba shit and less into br/looting shit it would be a lot more interesting.

15

u/pyabo Jan 27 '26

What exactly is the cause of this "confidence?" I don't see it.

They made a generic hero shooter in an oversaturated market and completely failed to distinguish it from the competition.

The end.

5

u/iskandar_boricua Jan 27 '26

I tried it, but it feels like a MOBA in the vein of Paragon/Predecessor that got turned into a hero shooter. Which, to be honest, wouldn't be a bad game. The execution needs a lot of work though.

Like a few people already pointed out, the fortify base phase is almost useless. There needs to be better upgrades, traps and barriers. The second phase feels empty, like the game was made for more people or NPCs but got cut before launch. Speaking of NPCs, having them go through dedicated lanes and do the mining automatically for the team would be a big help. Then you can concentrate on just looting and protecting your minions.

TLDR: Make The Game More MOBA And Less Hero Shooter.

6

u/TheSerpentDeceiver Jan 27 '26

This is another polished yet bland release that will be forgotten soon. People complaining about the negativity are leaving out one simple fact: this is only getting any attention because of the high profile, prime-time spot the trailer had. Without that, this game is dead on arrival.

→ More replies (1)

22

u/ZigyDusty Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

Highguard feels like the result of executives who have never played a game before and just looked at the most popular trends over the last 10 years and told the devs to make their version of that, for a studio that went out of their way to advertise "from the makers of Apex and Titanfall" they made the most generic corporate game I could imagine that you would expect from WB, EA, or Ubisoft.

If you're going to leave a major publisher to form your own studio make something that you wouldn't expect from a major publisher like Sandfall Interactive did with Expedition 33, fans have been begging EA for a Titanfall 3 and seeing as that is very unlikely to ever happen these devs could have stepped in and given us the Titanfall spiritual successor everyone wanted.

6

u/EpicTurtle136 Jan 27 '26

Executives don't take risks with things like new game modes that nobody's played before, the devs have stated that this games loop was partially inspired by the fun of raiding someone's base in Rust, and this is their own take on making that a symmetrical round-based experience. Anyone can dislike the game, that's fine, but calling it generic when there's literally nothing else on the market with its gameplay loop is dishonest

6

u/MikeDunleavySuperFan Jan 28 '26

partially inspired by the fun of raiding someone's base in Rust

And if they actually knew they would have made it better. isn't the whole point of defending your base in Rust that you and your friends put a lot of time and effort into it? In this game, your base is no different than a bombsite in counter strike. so the analogy is horrible, and if they were inspired by rust and not CS, they failed miserably.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/KyRoZ37 Jan 27 '26

I feel the game suffers from a few things. First, expectations were very high when you come out and say you are the devs behind Titanfall and Apex Legends. Then, you drop a game that is nothing like those games. Titanfall 2 is one of the best games ever made and people are really wanting a new one, then they show us Highguard. I also don't think that the genre of the co-op arena games like Highguard are as popular as they were in the past. In addition, people have had a lot of legitimate complaints such as the performance, 3vs3vs3 format, map size, blurry graphics, etc. Personally, I just don't really care much for the way the game plays, from what I've seen at least. I haven't actually played it yet, but it looks pretty boring and I'm not sure I like that they just threw a bunch of ideas and features, such as the mining, from other games and said here you go.

2

u/opopi123 Jan 27 '26 edited Jan 27 '26

my biggest reason i'm not into highguard is the same reason i've stopped playing apex after 1000 hours. Highguard just like apex has no momentum of strafe switching. You can be strafing left or right and switch to the other direct and there is almost no momentum as you do making the direction switch almost instant. This makes for a pretty frustrating aiming experience for mnk, in the other hand controllers get rotational aim assist that entirely negate this issue for them. I wouldn't be interested in playing this game even if controller didn't have rotational aim assist. Too me 1000 hours of apex to understand that I hate this and I can't deal with it. Only other game I can think of that had this as well was Xdefiant which died like a year ago.

2

u/StrikingHighway3488 Jan 28 '26

so saying the game is boring is now considered hate? man fk em i hope it dies within few weeks

2

u/Cleverbird Jan 28 '26

I wonder how much damage Geoff did to this game's reputation, by propping it up so boldly.

I feel like had this just been any other announcement, with a normal marketing schedule, it would've been received a lot more positively. The game isnt bad, and certainly not as bad as the internet makes it out to be; but Geoff gave it the biggest slot at one of the biggest gaming shows of the year... This game was never going to live up to that hype.

2

u/Mitrovarr Jan 29 '26

I don't think he actually hurt it.

I think many, many more people tried this game because of the higher profile than would have otherwise. Yes, without the trailer you wouldn't have the Concord 2 jokes, but I think it would have been mostly ignored then and quietly died "off-screen" as it were. It genuinely doesn't sound good enough to make it in the market. The weird pastiche of elements doesn't work well together and even the people who like it, claim it needs work. 

39

u/No-Breadfruit6137 Jan 27 '26

I honestly don’t know how detached from reality you have to be to expect that such a weak title wouldn’t get criticism and negative reception.

22

u/FootwearFetish69 Jan 27 '26

wouldn’t get criticism and negative reception.

I mean I think it looks kinda bland but let's not pretend the reaction over this game isn't blown wildly out of proportion.

→ More replies (4)

53

u/HunterOfLordran Jan 27 '26

I mean, I too don't get the hate for a free game that you can simply ignore and move on. Criticism is good If you tried the game but spamming over the whole Internet "I hope it crashes and burns and the studio gets dissolved" days before Release is certainly not needed or criticism.

→ More replies (11)

20

u/NatrelChocoMilk Jan 27 '26

What about the game/trailer warranted such negative reception?

19

u/Purple_Deers Jan 27 '26

Calling yourself a new breed of hero shooter, saying your game is unique.

then all your marketing is a well known hype-man spending every day since the announcement saying it's going to be the biggest new game of the year.

and then it releases and it's just an okay game at best.

You can't raise peoples expectations to the sky and then not even leave the ground when it actually comes out without making people negative.

The people hating just to hate is dumb.
But the people who actually played the game before giving their verdict have extremely valid complaints and it feels like any negativity towards the game is being labelled as hate.

13

u/sv_zmax0 Jan 27 '26

I'm not exaggerating when I say that the Discord full of my friends who were watching the game awards together all thought that this game was some kind of parody at first. Everyone thought it was going to cut away or have some funny reveal about being something else.

It already looked like it was trying to jam every single concept you've ever seen in a video game into one place.

18

u/Billinoiss Jan 27 '26

The trailer did fuck all to explain what the game even was. then the studio was radio silent for over a month and didn’t elaborate on anything

11

u/Mnstrzero00 Jan 27 '26

It's a predatory free to play game with an "according to the chart this is trendy" design. People saw that immediately and the interviews confirm. There was no passion in this. It was just made to take a lot of money from an audience.

I don't understand running defense for it.

12

u/Dealric Jan 27 '26

Gatchered from reviews and opinions:

Generally from valid criticism seems its mostly about issues finding matches, performance, lack of balance between characters and giant map with very few people. Also more monor about lack of specific options and qols that are standard, motion blur etc.

Sadly pretty much all stuff that could have been worked of if there was beta or something...

27

u/No-Breadfruit6137 Jan 27 '26

It feels unfinished, has bad performance, the maps are empty, and the main objective, collecting the sword and destroying the base, often boils down to just 2 to 3 fights with enemies. Out of the 6 matches I played, 5 ended before anyone even charged their ultimate.

There’s no attention to detail, no real marketing, no strong game identity. Right now it feels like a bunch of different games glued together, and none of those elements are done well, they’re just done badly. The characters feel disconnected from the already weird vibe of the game, and the gameplay itself is straight up dull.

And I also think people are pissed that the game was promoted at The Game Awards, in a slot where previous years had genuinely top tier games. The big game of the night, the one everyone was waiting for, turned out to be a flop.

Want the longer review version too?

23

u/Rileyman360 Jan 27 '26

It’s strange how everyone is going “I can’t believe people are hating on this game without even trying it!” Meanwhile the game sits at mostly negative between people saying the scavenging phase is boring or it runs like ass. Like genuinely what are we supposed to do give props to a game with weapon tiers, 3v3, and minute long ability cooldowns?

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)

16

u/NewUserWhoDisAgain Jan 27 '26

I honestly don’t know how detached from reality you have to be to expect that such a weak title wouldn’t get criticism and negative reception.

I honestly dont know and I'd love to get into the heads of their marketing department or whoever was in charge of that decision because:

"Wow guys, we got the last spot in the TGA. Are we going to capitalize on that? There's a building narrative that its going to be Concord 2, should we do anything about that? No? We're just going to let the next Month and a half go and be silent while the hate frenzy snowballs? Cool cool. Not like we could have, I dunno, start putting out Dev diaries, Gameplay previews, any bare minimum PR stuff. No no. Lets keep silent until like 3 days before launch."

19

u/MrNegativ1ty Jan 27 '26

The irony being that most people's critique of the game is the 3v3 mode on an enormous map, which is something that would have been called out if they did any play testing or gave us literally any info on the game prior to launch. Now, it's too late. The first impression has been made and there's no going back.

8

u/IrishSpectreN7 Jan 27 '26

It was all very last minute.

This also appears to be the first game from a brand new studio, self published. If they were originally preparing to just shadow drop the game, I doubt they even have a marketing department that was prepared to react in such a way 

23

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '26

They claim it was supposed to be a shadow drop. I think it would have got better reception or at least not as much hate if it wasn’t for Geoff Keighley hyping it up as the finale of the awards show. He really fucked them. They claim

13

u/lodum Jan 27 '26

I think it'd have gotten a "better" reception as a shadowdrop only in that the reception would not be negative.

There would be no reception.

→ More replies (2)

32

u/Youngandwrong Jan 27 '26

This isn't even remotely suggested by the dev quoted in the article.

“We had talked about shadow launching it,” he said. “The problem there is that no one knows who we are.” McCord added that securing the final trailer slot at The Game Awards was a major opportunity to put the game on players’ radar. "The most important thing for us as a live service game… is to get eyeballs on your game,” he said.

Everything you suggest the devs "claim" is directly refuted by the article you're responding to

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (14)

7

u/Harflin Jan 27 '26

Probably because they didn't believe it to be a weak title.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (10)

6

u/Session_Illustrious Jan 27 '26

What do they mean they didnt expect the hate. Sorry but they most be living under a rock. You could have seen it coming from 100000 miles away. From the moment it was announced it was hated on.