3911cf No.16608542
Every other every other multiplayer shooter has death matches with whatever amount of players, like 20 or 30 players. Why does bumping it up to 100 and taking away respawns somehow magically transform it into poor game design?
3911cf No.16608548
Also I don't want to come across like I'm defending fortnite, because I'm not. It's still mediocre, i am only talking about battle royale as a conceptual game mode
6ba087 No.16608550
Forcing you to play a single game mode is shit, period. Remember when people had options?
3911cf No.16608556
>>16608550
Ok then what if it's one of many options? I've seen games get a battle royale mode in addition to what it already offered, and people who liked the game said "oh fuck this, this game has turned to shit" even though they can still play it the same way they used to enjoy.
acd180 No.16608557
3911cf No.16608558
27de3e No.16608561
Because running across a vast open terrain isn't fun for anyone but the sniper who knows you're being forced to run across that terrain by the circle.
It's replacing intentional level design funnels with a vast mostly empty landscape and a randomized centerpoint, resulting in the actual gameplay being almost nothing and the majority of the game being running around looking for cover.
It's fun if you think of it as a hunting game. It's not fun if you enjoy playing shooters for the shooty bits.
3edc00 No.16608569
The gamemode is fine and can be an enjoyable game loop to waste your time for 48 hours and then drop.
The issues lies in:
1.It's popularity which has saturated marketing
2.Everyone and their mother trying to make their own to get a slice of the pie when PUBG and Fortnite were Golden Gooses which makes for even more saturation in both game quantity and marketing
3.Every BR game is the same gameplay loop with very few differences
acd180 No.16608570
>>16608558
>drop into a barren wasteland with nothing to do but pick up shit
>die to a black pixel/ get shot in the back by a guy camping in a bush the whole game because he was lucky enough to spawn/land in the green circle
alternativly in the case of fornite:
>die because you didn't build spam enough
5a0c00 No.16608571
I just think it's really fucking boring.
it's the same shit every single game
3911cf No.16608574
>>16608561
You are describing fortnite, not battle royale. There's a thread here about a Mario royale game that plays practically identically to how origin Mario did, it's just 100 players racing to the finish line.
280684 No.16608577
Tetris 99 is solid, because you have about 10-30 seconds of downtime, and since everyone gets the same pieces, the only random element is who you're targeted by (at which point, every online game can be considered random). It takes care of both the problem of running around for half an hour with nothing going on, and the fact that the game is decided most times by whoever stumbles upon the best weapon. In 99, as well, you get to send more trash lines to people based on how many badges you have, given to you based on kills. Kill someone with a lot of badges and you get all of his. This means there's still a good incentive to play aggressively. You can have an advantage at the end of the match, but it's skill-based, not luck-based.
It's not impossible to handle this situation in an FPS/TPS as well, but you would have to make the map much smaller and take the ideas from 99 into account.
92d01c No.16608579
I tried playin Apex Legends with some friends and alone and the repetitiveness of it killed it for me, every single match played almost exactly de same, you drop, look for items, get some stuff, work with it, kill or get killed. The only moment when it varies from game to game is the moment when you die and if you die.
Also the general attitude of the players is just toxic, everyone play so seriously like they're going to get payed from winning, and they cry like fucking children when they loose. The e-sports mode of thinking killed multiplayer videogames.
I miss when you played games with friends to have fun instead of "win".
3edc00 No.16608580
>>16608574
I really hate how every gamemode is now described as "Battle Royal"
Fucking nigger devs and cuck journos would probably describe Free For All or King of the Hill as "Battle Royal"
8123ff No.16608582
I don't like a game where I run for 45 minutes, shoot for maybe two minutes, and get killed by a guy laying down prone in a bush 200 meters away, so I have to do all of that over again. I much more prefer Quake or something where I'm constantly, y'know, playing the fucking videogame instead of hitting autorun and hoping to not die, or not to get fucked by loot RNG.
e1bc0e No.16608584
>>16608561
>It's replacing intentional level design funnels with a vast mostly empty landscape and a randomized centerpoint, resulting in the actual gameplay being almost nothing and the majority of the game being running around looking for cover.
This, right here!
Battle royal" gameplay has existed as far back as the first Bomberman, and shooters have had a similar gameplay mode for it just as long as they've been around. The only difference NOW is that all that gameplay IS the entire game, not just a small part of the game. Fortnite'' is one of the few games that gets a "pass", though, because the "battle royal" gameplay is just a small part of the title. However, that doesn't save the game from the fact that is already shit.
e1bc0e No.16608589
>>16608584
And, fucked up the text styling.
280684 No.16608590
>>16608584
Fortnite shouldn't get a pass, considering the vast majority of people have never played any other mode of the game, and several versions, including Mobile (the most popular by far) and Switch do not even include the non-BR modes.
acd180 No.16608591
>>16608577
But that isn't battle royale, that's just the verses mode cranked up to 100.
Battle royale has traditionally consisted of a barren open world with lots of shit lot and a big gay green circle.
If tetris 99 or that shitty mario game is considered a royale, games like WoW with it's world pvp or bomber mmo would also be a royale.
In truth, that shit is just nintendo using a vague name as a marketing buzzword.
27de3e No.16608595
570c3e No.16608603
>>16608591
>nintendo
Is fan-made idiot.
e886d1 No.16608608
My sole issue with "battle royale" is that the game mode is predicated on the game having an always online, quickplay, jump in jump out system. This means no offline only play, no bots, no private dedicated servers, etc.
>>16608550
Battle Royale can exist in the context of other game modes, anon.
280684 No.16608614
>>16608591
Well, if BR is defined by being bad, then I guess that answers OP's questions.
d0e3c0 No.16608615
You should be able to customize your loadout before playing. Banking on pure RNG that you will actually find a gun to be even be able to fucking play is retarded.
e886d1 No.16608616
>>16608580
"Free for all" has been called "Battle Royale" in multiple games before, especially Japanese made games. Starfox 64 comes to mind.
67dcd0 No.16608619
>>16608607
Yeah? and when i was young kids, me included raved over pokemon and all that shit and my grandpa called pokemon "creatures of evil".
Only trends change, the principle stays the same
1e54d0 No.16608622
Maybe it could be good, but we will never know because every single game with batttle royale on planet earth is absolute irredeemable indieshit garbage with abhorrent gameplay where weapons feel like peashooters and sound like peashooters too. Also player characters look stupid and childish.
3661ba No.16608630
Battle Royale games are the marxism of gaming.
Everyone has a little bit of fun, but someone having a lot of fun is forbidden.
03eef8 No.16608631
>>16608607
The reminds me of that one fat asshole who took a picture of a kid playing xbox so he could mock him on the internet.
e1bc0e No.16608632
>>16608619
>when i was young kids, me included raved over pokemon
<Not Digimon
4ac9ba No.16608642
its shit. if you actively play from the very start of the match you have a very little chance of winning. its basically gambling.
1d8cb2 No.16608645
The first MGO had a rescue mode with permadeath, it was one of the best game modes. It worked because you had to ambush the enemy like in the offline game, and that created tension instead of these ADHD mechanics battle royale have.
fa53b3 No.16608647
>>16608542
I enjoyed playing PUBG Mobile for a bit. I think that much of the resentment is due to it coming out at a time where monetary models are changing drastically. Some resentment is genuine, but many of the complaints are related to the games themselves and not related to the gamemode itself. >>16608561 for example is critical of PUBG and its clones.
>>16608550
If you support too many gamemodes with large player counts, some might asphyxiate others. PUBG has rotations, where some gamemodes are available on certain days.
f47b94 No.16608653
The Culling was excellent because it wasn't about guns and sniping people, it was about running around and using terrain and setting traps while trying to peg niggers in the head with a rock, at least for the early game and most of mid-game. And then they ruined their own game via bad patches and other shitty games stole the game mode and vomited guns everywhere, the end.
18831f No.16608662
>>16608542
Battle Royale is essentially gambing, therefore it's addictive. Worse yet, it's gambling with false sense of improving your odds as you 'get better', making it that more nefarious. And you won't ragequit as easily either, since most losses can be blamed on bad luck.
You need to be lucky with the loot pickups
You need to be lucky with the barrier
You need to be lucky with other players (snipers etc.)
Skill? Sure, maybe in the 1v1 endgame, if one player isn't camping in a god spot, or maybe you'll learn the chest locations to improve your odds of getting good weapons, but hey, you can count the cards or use probability spreadsheets in casino games too.
3e48c6 No.16608673
>>16608542
Battle Royale as a concept is not flawed, it does sound found that you have 100 people in a shrinking open space to kill each other. The problem is the execution.
Fortnite is the perfect example, the build mechanic sounds fun but is tedious and chances are you won't be able to build anything before being killed by a guy that could build it faster out of luck.
There's also the problem that there's barely nothing else to do, and it's just a single game mode. It's mostly the problem I have with ASSFAGGOTS and why I welcome new modes to most assfaggots.
>>16608580
It's the "Dark Souls" of game genres, I guess.
44f030 No.16608677
>>16608632
>talking animals
That's how furfags are born.
acd180 No.16608680
af6ab8 No.16608696
Here's the thing though, even though these things are pretty bad, they helped to rape AAA dead including Overcuck.
And these are mid sized companies
7b87b9 No.16608699
The current BR games all just look terribly boring. There is so much randomness too that it doesn't even seem satisfying if you won since player skill isn't the main factor a lot of the time. Plus they all look like low effort shit just made to sell skins or whatever the fuck shit people buy in these things.
>>16608647
>I enjoyed playing PUBG Mobile for a bit.
So you're retarded? Thanks for letting everyone know.
8efb9e No.16608717
The concept can still be fun. Apex proved that, imo. But that doesn't mean the genre isn't cancer, it eats up so many resources and produces so many shit games, it's horrible and I wish the trend would stop.
bb5f60 No.16608728
>>16608556
In that case it's because those modes are being added because of the BR fad. It's a shitty cash grab.
3edc00 No.16608737
>>16608717
>The concept can still be fun. Apex proved that
Fuckoff EA
bb5f60 No.16608749
>>16608607
That fortnite dance is fucking cancer.
fa53b3 No.16608752
>>16608699
>So you're retarded? Thanks for letting everyone know.
I avoided smart phones for the longest time, but my new job pretty much required me to have one on me. My boss wanted to play PUBG with me on it, so I tried it out. It wasn't terrible, but after a week of playing I grew bored of it.
e71c61 No.16608777
I'd say it's fundamentally bad, at least in the way it's currently executed as a way to ape Fortnite/PUBG. The biggest factor being the randomization of weapons and drop location, which is a huge draw for casuals since they can get lucky and survive the preliminarys - but doesn't really mean fuck-all for skill. For me, the games take far too long to complete and is largely just a matter of staying out of sight while looking for two other people already engaged in a fight and then taking them both out. And since you only get one shot at it, again randomness and luck play a disproportionately large role in success. If you're playing in an arena shooter or lone-wolves match, you might be killed by a scrub with a grenade while you're engaged with another player - but the second or third or fourth time you run across them, you'll mop the floor with them and they'll end up at the bottom of the scoreboard where they belong until they get better. In a BR, they could turtle up the whole match, horde weapons, and only get a lucky kill or two at the end to win the game and feel like they're king of shit mountain. It's not representative of aptitude at the game.
It also annoys me to no end to be encouraged to stop fighting and go tear down a building for resources so you can build a fucking treehouse. But even outside of Fortnite, I don't like having to fumble around with inventory management like I'm sorting materials in a fucking JRPG while in the middle of a deathmatch.
But I'm not going to lie. If they made a Battle Royale game with cute animu girls like a Bullet Girls spinoff where you shoot to strip your opponents and collect their panties - I'd probably play that.
d55904 No.16608796
Honestly? I reckon if you went back in time to before this whole fad started and posted battle royale as an idea for a game on /v/ you would get people on here saying it sounds like a cool idea.
It's not about being contrarian, since not liking every fucking game dev jumping on a bandwagon is actually understandable, especially after the appeal of the idea wears thin. But that's true of any idea that sounds cool until it gets run into the ground.
1b6c45 No.16608804
In my opinion, it is fundamentally shit and uninteresting, just like MOBAs.
3a62ac No.16608813
>>16608579
> The e-sports mode of thinking killed multiplayer videogames
>I miss when you played games with friends to have fun instead of "win".
Right on, one of the reasons why I only play TF2 despite its current state.
Only reason why I play multiplayer shooters from time to time now is solely to hear people scream and fight each other because retarded friends invites me
58a81b No.16608836
d1f518 No.16608854
File: 5ad05cc2ac0fb6f⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 202.5 KB, 829x1142, 829:1142, 775169 - Digimon Renamon y….jpg)
>>16608542
Battle royale is fucking gay because you slog through a big map of nothing looking for random item drops. That's 90% of the match and maybe 10% is actual shooting. If you want quick pickup matches, other FPS games do a much better job of giving you actual shooting and tests of skill.
>>16608632
I'll give you something to rave over
bb5f60 No.16608862
>>16608796
>Honestly? I reckon if you went back in time to before this whole fad started and posted battle royale as an idea for a game on /v/ you would get people on here saying it sounds like a cool idea.
You very well might be right but the real problem with BR isn't the basic concept. The problem is the whole package. It's just another lootbox and transaction delivery system.
1f9242 No.16608866
>>16608550
This anon has it right. But, ignoring that and deciding whether the concept has any merit…
I'm just going to put forth the assertion that any game with 100 players in FFA and no opportunity for respawns whatsoever is garbage. Even if you leave and immediately start finding another match, it's still bad. Firstly you're playing the same part of the game over and over again until you get marginally better. Even a MOBA will allow bad or new players to get to the "late game," which is both more enjoyable and more educational for them as they learn to get good. As opposed to a typical BR game like Fortnite or PUBG where you don't even know what the weapons do until you manage to randomly get them, and then die because you have no idea how to use it, then have to start all over. Second, making the player wait for more time in matchmaking is always terrible. I stopped playing Quake Champions during the free beta because I did the math and found I was spending at least 20% of my time in a menu while trying to play a match.
So to me any BR game that takes after those two games is basically automatically shit. I'm willing to wait and see if someone can design a good one, but I haven't seen one yet.
d55904 No.16608879
>>16608876
That probably goes to show how much most people who play vidya don't really care about winning.
bb5f60 No.16608888
>>16608883
>>16608876
I never thought I would have seen anyone on /v/ defend fortnite of all things.
adbf3a No.16608894
>>16608542
>Is the concept of battle Royale fundamentally bad, or do we just hate it because of fortnite?
Yes because of simple probability.
Only one player can win.
The only one person winning outcome was always bad, which is why in the fiction from which battle royale springs forth, characters always tried to resist that outcome.
If you look at things from an admittedly overly simple viewpoint, you can see that there's not much point to playing one at all; 1% of the time you will win, 99% you will lose. It's a gross oversimplification but there's truth to it. You gotta understand that games aren't just competing for your money but for your time. The time sink of playing on the same map over and over again isn't worth it; maybe as one-time challenge, but anymore and you're just wasting your time when you could be playing better games.
Also fuck fortnite kids
5a2b27 No.16608900
Its just boring, you can only play Pubg long enough until you've done everything, used every weapon, won on every map. The same can happen with pvp games, especially no skill ones like cod, but it takes a lot longer for things to get boring in those games than BR type games. And that isn't even mentioning the rng in the game. Its a gimmicky game mode that should stay as a game mode, rather than something to design a game around.
231e62 No.16608910
>>16608607
I can't hate kids like that.
9b6662 No.16608911
>>16608542
It's just an old battle mode that removes restrictions on how many could join and is stretched into an entire game.
bb5f60 No.16608913
>>16608908
You type like a fag and your shit's all retarded.
>>16608910
Then you're a nicer person than I am.
bce038 No.16608919
>/v/ actually has people defending fornite now
gook shills go home
ed1963 No.16608930
>>16608919
The purpose of the thread is to articulate just WHY it is bad. There are occasional threads on this same topic with MOBAs/ASSFAGGOTS games. It's important to know why to hate instead of just randomly spouting off an informed opinion, you fucking knave.
fbe513 No.16608946
>>16608876
>>16608908
>>16608930
Sure is summer in here.
b5f964 No.16608948
>>16608930
But how will I get /v/eddit karma if I don't shallowly hate things? Especially things I've never bothered to try?
ca8708 No.16608949
>>16608542
Battle Royale as a mode offered alongside others in a game? I'm OK with that.
Battle Royale as the only mode in a game? Fuck that nonsense.
b5f964 No.16608950
fbe513 No.16608954
>>16608950
Read the thread you illiterate nigger, you've got enough reasons why BR is shit and cancer, now fuck off back to reddit.
b5f964 No.16608956
>>16608954
>still no argument
132a4f No.16608962
>>16608542
Arena shooter:
>player 1 spawns near a strong weapon and starts hunting
>player 2 can only reach a weak weapon in time, gets killed
>player 2 spawns elsewhere, finds another good weapon, kills player 1
>this cycle repeats for half an hour, so the effects of spawn RNG are more or less evened out by the end of the match
BR:
>players 1 and 2 find only short-range weapons
>player 3 finds a sniper rifle, and immediately rushes to a vantage point with 500m of open ground in all directions
>player 1 is immediately sniped and gets to sit on his ass for half an hour
>player 2 tries to avoid player 3, but the safe zone mechanic eventually forces him into the open (where he immediately gets sniped)
>the winner of the match is player 4, who camped until even the other camper got bored and came looking for him
b5f964 No.16608972
>>16608962
I think you're way overestimating how effective snipers are in any sort of BR mode.
a7d2c8 No.16608973
>>16608888
>these digits going unchecked
Heresy.
ca8708 No.16608991
>>16608972
He isn't entirely wrong though. My nephew was Player 4 when he had a thing for BR.
fbb3ce No.16609001
its RNG shit on some huge ass map with many players, people hate it because they mostly spend 10 minutes walking around looking for shit only to get sniped by some nigger or instantly die because some fag also got to the same dropzone. there is no skill involed, if you have better gear 9/10 you've already won the game
db6b64 No.16609039
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>16608908
Sorry kid, I have to disappoint you. Your hero is a cheater.
4cfd07 No.16609139
It's a dumb game mode with ONE terrible map and pants on head retarded design featuring a circle that keeps getting smaller as time goes on which kills you if you're outside it.
Regular deathmatch is much better because it doesn't rely on stupid gimmicks and you have tons of maps to play on.
>>16608908
Do you really think a top streamer actual companies are pushing forward wouldn't cheat to get to the top and stay there?
Do you think they wouldn't purposefully make him cheat and overlook it?
There is so much money involved there is no way they would leave his wins to chance or skill.
Professional sports have cheating involved at times for money, why wouldn't video games?
8eea2c No.16609178
>railroading and hurry up mechanics to rush players so they'll finish the game, forcing you to make yourself vulnerable to not die
>unwinnable scenarios ('safe zone' is too far away)
>gear and resources depends on whether you got lucky or not (remember you have 1 life)
>rewards opportunistic play rather than skill
>constant 'balance' patches to (((keep things fresh))) push you towards the new FOTM garbage, like with ASSFAGOTS
it's awful.
9c080f No.16609190
Battle royal is bad because it's glorified Last man standing or team LMS.
It fails gameplay diversity that even fucking HALO has.
c542fb No.16609192
>>16608888
checked
fuck captchca
0f1d15 No.16609193
9c080f No.16609195
Also like what was mentioned earlier in the thread, maps are too fucking big, and games would take to long, which is why the fuck-dome exists.
9c080f No.16609201
Also and this is technically a separate issue to shit like fortnite, but matchmaking systems are rigged to carry certain players to the top to groom as community figure pieces.
b67ab3 No.16609208
>>16608607
How fucking dare kids enjoy things? We should lock them up on their rooms and force them to do holocaust studies homework until they turn 18.
8eea2c No.16609222
>>16609195
>maps are too fucking big, and games would take to long
who the fuck cares. that's not my problem.
>the fuck-dome
Tetris (Tetris Friends, TOJ) pulled similar shit to keep game length "reasonable". They implemented retarded 'solid garbage': your field's height shrinks periodically. Problem is, after a certain point, spikes (2 quick line clears sending 10+ lines) cause certain death without counterplay (usually you can defend against 5 lines).
BR cancer has similar issues, but it's even worse because it's part of its core design.
>>16609208
>kids doing cringy stuff that will get them bullied, ridiculed, or outright beat up is ok
go back to reddit faggot.
bba484 No.16609223
>>16608542
>much of the game is walking sim over a yuge map that favors camping
>always some unbalanced team mechanic that disadvantages solo players
>personally never much liked FFA modes anyway
Even before the cancer started ramping up, BR had to be one of my least favorite game modes. Bit funny since the previous big thing was MOBAs, which also never appealed to me even when they were just W3 custom maps.
4cad52 No.16609256
>>16609208
The way kids are trained to lose all self control in the presence of the current trendy game or mass-media product is in no way healthy and should not be hand-waved away, especially when it's this bad and involves Chink bullshit like Fortnite does. And before you try some smug gotcha bullshit, no, I don't think it was fine when it happened with previous generations either.
e71c61 No.16609340
>>16608796
>>16609256
>The way kids are trained to lose all self control in the presence of the current trendy game or mass-media product is in no way healthy and should not be hand-waved away
It's been around for a long time, since the late 70's and 80's. Not to imply you're wrong, because the over-saturation of that exact type of marketing is what has led millenials to fill the void in their empty fucking lives with product branding instead of culture and self-improvement - and we're dealing with the ramifications of it now.
Just saying, it's not going to get worse in that particular regard. We've already hit rock bottom. But it should not be allowed to continue.
5798e6 No.16609416
>>16608580
Didn’t that little guy got arrested for organizing fag and tranny hanging mobs?
3a987a No.16609447
>>16608542
It relies on RNG loot. If you ever thought RNG was bad anywhere else, here it is 10 times worse and is gameplay defining.
eeb180 No.16609506
bccd8b No.16609511
>>16608647
>If you support too many gamemodes with large player counts, some might asphyxiate others
That or games could have actual communities instead of just having a raw playercount of people reduced to being indistinguishable and replaceable like consoles have popularised.
9c080f No.16609528
>>16609511
Yeah but if developers let organic communities form how will they control the playerbase and make sure they hop into the next pump n dump
fbc9b0 No.16609587
OK, it's time for a full-on, no-holds-barred, battle royale vs traditional arena shooter comparison. LET'S. GET. FUCKING. AUTISTIC.
First let's talk about the altar on which all this bullshit was sacrificed upon: the maps and player count.
>Arena Shooter
Maps are generally compact. They have hiding places and out-of-the-way zones, but generally, they're designed so that if 6-12 players are on them, encounters will be frequent, and occasionally overlapping. Some are even more compact so that you can go as low as 2 players and still have interesting, unique interactions due to positioning and position control. These maps are generally designed to put valuable resources in places that require some kind of risk to access, and also group resources strategically so that you cannot just camp one area of the map; you have to be mobile if you want to keep your health and armor high, and stock up on weapons and ammo. It's also worth noting that you can carry every weapon if you can find it, and health and ammo caps are also generally very high. There will also usually also be powerups to draw even the most dedicated hoarder out of hiding, and punish them if they don't capitalize.
<Battle Royale
Maps are obscenely, unnecessarily huge, even considering their player count. This means that most of the time, the game has to use external means, usually the Ring of Death(tm) or obscenely loud and bright effects from weapons to attract players to each other. Even with these means, there's basically no reason to not camp like a bitch once you get a good stash of supplies, since these games also cap your inventory. But no matter what you do, you'll spend AT LEAST 2/3 of the game just walking, not fighting, not picking up powerups, not avoiding enemies, just walking from place to place. I watched some streamers play various BR games to verify this, and yes, 2/3 was the MINIMUM. Not the average, the MINIMUM, in the ideal situation of a good player with a good team who is playing aggressively and winning constantly, they're still spending 2/3 of the time doing jack shit. Additionally, the large size of the maps, along with the randomness of item spawns and player dropping points, means that there is no strategy or consistency; some areas have cover, some don't, some areas have high ground, some don't, but these factors are never really balanced to match player spawns and item locations. The only real advantage to all of this is that if you win, you get the E-peen moment of saying you beat 99 other people. When in reality, you probably just beat like 6 people, and had good luck and timing.
So yes, even the one factor that BRs sacrificed so many good game design elements for is a vast downgrade. And things only get worse.
continued…
fbc9b0 No.16609590
>>16609587
Next let’s talk about the weapons.
>Arena Shooter
Arena Shooter weapons tend to be close-range oriented, meaning longer range ones tend to be either specialized, such as the Quake Live Railgun, or considered to be highly contested power weapons, such as the Sniper Rifle and Shock Rifle from Unreal Tournament (or the Quake 3 Railgun). This means that they need to show some variety in terms of how they perform if they want to be differentiated. Dealing damage indirectly, such as through splash damage, knocking opponents around, a travel time requiring prediction, or other, stranger methods were some examples.
<Battle Royale
BRs are pretty schizophrenic in terms of their weapon design. Sometimes it seems that only long range weapons are any use at all, because of the huge maps. But if you have special items or abilities that let you close the gap quickly, suddenly only close range ones matter at all. Either way, all current BR games are basically limited to the standard set of shotguns, sniper rifles, and lead hoses, with very little variety within these three categories. Maybe throw in some grenades or a rocket launcher or something. Most of them don’t even bother with projectile weapons, unless you count bullet travel time. And why should they? If they were to introduce a weapon with a gimmick like that, they’d have no way to balance it properly, it would either be obscenely overpowered or completely useless compared to easy hitscan weapons.
Now let’s talk Time To Kill
>Arena Shooter
Generally arena shooters had very low TTK, but it could be extended by powerups, which made powerups very important. Even so, a skilled player with good aim and timing could take down heavily armored foes quickly, which meant that even with lots of armor, you couldn’t get careless. This made fights short, sweet, and to the point, and if you lose, you respawn and try again. It also meant that there was some weight and tension to a fight when it DOES drag out for a while, and made chasing both more intense and more risky.
<Battle Royale
Well, since you get kicked from the whole game when you die, the TTK can’t be too low or the game becomes unfair in the eyes of the players. This means that either people have to rush each other (and potentially die and get kicked out) or play long range campy games so they can heal up and have cover. This can work in some games, but it makes for a much lamer style of game, in my opinion.
fbc9b0 No.16609592
>>16609590
Let’s also briefly cover movement.
>Arena Shooters
Most of these tended to be highly movement-based. They had to be, since the maps required mobility, but also because being able to stay alive under fire required being a moving and unpredictable target. The only punishment for moving fast is if you fuck up and waltz into an ambush, or fuck up and fall down a bottomless pit. No penalties to accuracy or weapon usability.
<Battle Royale
This is more a problem with modern game design than BRs themselves, but all the current ones we have are stunted in terms of movement. All of them lower your accuracy while moving, and due to the large maps, moving quickly would be a major balance issue, so everyone moves slow as fuck unless they’re using some kind of special item or ability, usually a very limited one. I’m not saying a BR game with good movement couldn’t exist because nothing in the formula explicitly forbids it, but at the moment they all suck.
Now for another factor, and the one and only place where BRs kinda win but not really: player matchups
>Arena Shooter
Due to the nature of arena shooter weapons and their low TTK, a skilled player can completely destroy an unskilled one, even when the unskilled one has a lot of powerups and weapons. Not that the unskilled player will ever get any of that, because a skilled player will also be controlling the map and taking the powerups for himself. This creates an environment where every advantage must be taken, and every mistake must be capitalized on. This also means that it is incredibly unapproachable for newbies, since a new player won’t even stand the slightest chance of accomplishing anything when presented with a skilled player who has mastered the systems of the game already. This is the reason why arena shooters have such a short shelf life; no one wants to be the newbie who gets wrecked. But I’ve been in that position myself. I still am in that position in duels. And let me tell you, when you get wrecked that hard, it’s discouraging, but it also means that every single little victory feels like the best thing in the world. When you spend half an hour going 0 and 20 against someone three times, then manage to go 1 and 18 against them the fourth time, it feels GREAT. And on the day when you finally challenge that player again and you WIN, nothing fucking compares. But no one has the patience for that shit anymore.
<Battle Royale
Due to the loot-and-shoot nature of BRs, the “loot” part has to count for a lot more, otherwise it would feel pointless. Rarely ever does higher skill top a better kit in most BR games. This means that to make things less predetermined, most BRs are designed to fully kit you out by midgame, meaning all the looting mostly goes away and becomes mostly pointless anyway because everyone else will have looted just as much as you. But what this boils down to is that sometimes, an unskilled player can get lucky and stomp on people because they got the golden gun or whatever. Little victories, and even big ones, are much more frequent, giving new players more of a chance. Which is kind of good, but also kind of bullshit because what the hell is the point of getting good at a game when some asshole can just come along with the best gun and you lose anyway?
And finally, one last thing that’s just a huge gripe: downtime. Not talking walking through huge maps here, I’m talking time when you’re just not fucking playing at all.
>Arena Shooter
Once upon a time, it was “join a server, start fragging, die, respawn, continue fragging”. Now you have to find enough people who actually want to play with you.
>Battle Royale
This is the absolute fucking worst. Let’s go through the entire process before you can actually play the game:
Que up
Wait to get matched up with a fuckload of other players
In the case of Apex, choose characters and sit through the annoying intro shit
Drop. This part ALWAYS takes WAY too fucking long
Land. NOW you can start fragging, if you’re lucky enough to actually find a weapon
Oh what’s that, you died? Go back to step 1, asshole. Doesn’t matter if you didn’t even find a weapon before some guy shot you in the back, you get to have no fun.
All of this contributes to a system where living sucks, and dying sucks more. Every risk is a potential time when you could go back to step 1. So why take risks?
TL;DR fuck BRs, they are fundimentally broken in concept and I hope people will start actually TRYING again and play games that require more thought and practice.
000000 No.16609600
3691ff No.16609664
>>16608542
The Culling did it best (before it kneecapped itself). Same start with some options, you don't just get (good) random weapons for free, you get points that let you buy weapons at fixed points, the circle is always closing in on a fixed point and skill is a big part of combat. Fights in the game can go on until the entire map is filled with the toxic gas if both players are skilled enough.
Ironic that one of the earliest and least popular implementations of the modern battle royale format was arguably the best. I still want to try Fear The Wolves because it seems like it's got a lot of unique stuff going on for a BR game.
6a1d82 No.16609740
the concept of battle royale isn't that bad. its basically just ffa deathmatch (or multiple teams in some cases) with 1 life on a giant map with 50-100 players.
Apex, Fortnite, and PUBG are all trash games though.
5f3999 No.16609743
>>16608542
>or do we hate it
>we
Lurk for two goddamn years you faggot pleb.
5ee3c8 No.16609855
What I hate most about these games is the lack of excitement. When I see these games played it is usually join -> spawn -> loot -> die -> disconnect -> join ad infinitum. There is no stimulating scramble to the top, it is almost all entirely luck. It honestly feels like watching someone play a slot machine. They just mindlessly drop a quarter until some positive outcome tickles their brain.
3310ad No.16609892
Bomberman was the original battle royale and its still top tier. Modern devs are lazy cancerous faggots. That's all.
>arena shrinks after time up
>players have one life
>free for all
dc23a1 No.16609935
>>16608542
>slogging through a giant fucking map in a free-for-all with a player count ticking down from at most 100, with everyone having to pick up gear from the ground
>fun
It's rather telling that the fiction from which this sort of gametype takes its name from considers the whole thing a tortuous ordeal that brings out the absolute worst of humanity.
74c58d No.16609948
I like the general concepts of everyone starting off in the same situation, and skill dictating who wins.
What I don't like are the gimmicks or additions that take away from a skill cap. Like X guy finds a pistol, but Y finds a Minigun. Or classes.
While things like Mordhau and Chivalry have their flaws, they are definitely better takes on the battle royale idea.
c8667c No.16609985
>>16609855
Wow, I think you've really hit the nail on the head here. Another form of gambling system is exactly what it is.
00d9de No.16610057
boring ass dogshit
BR is worst than fucking moba game
f5632e No.16610090
>>16608542
>Why does bumping it up to 100 and taking away respawns somehow magically transform it into poor game design?
>magically
It doesn't. Can anyone name anything else interesting about any of those titles besides the fact that they're all Battle Royales?
There are no movement quirks to play around with, no fancy gunplay, barely any exploration, no sense of progress, no discovery to be had other than chasing that next win. From the gameplay clips I've seen, It's just an MMO for the new generation.
On the other hand, if they had a Battle Royale game where
>movement is almost k-style autistic
>lots of interesting and stylish weapons
>set in a dense urban environment for maximum gorilla warfare
>lots of hidden places to explore
>vehicles with decent handling characteristics
>tons of fashion
I would be up for playing that.
37aa28 No.16610100
>>16608542
Nah, it's just jewish parasites destroying it with predatory capitalism. The foundation of Battle Royal can never be destroyed, they can only pile shit on top of it.
dff7ec No.16610102
Concept is old all ready. For some reason every game have one and same map. If they went all out whit maps maybe then we could be on something. Make real vertical map too, enough whit just horizontal maps. Make floating island map and make battle zone/buble random . So one point every one might need to run completely different island to survive.
But yeah map/level desinge is boring and if devs finally started to true 3d levels maybe then BR games could be something. But we can't have that can't we, it would slightly break balance at first. That would make people mad.
2cb808 No.16610148
I'll bite, game design is a fun thing to think about.
I think it it flawed in the way it's take a certain game mode and expanding it in some not great ways. Like all BRs boil down to very long drawn out King of the Hill games. I'll try to make a cohesive bunch of gripes on this.
The idea itself isn't too bad, it's not good but 100 man king of the hill could theoretically work. The first main flaw comes in the maps, they're all too big to really be well designed or complex outside of very small pockets (Which is what we see to an extent, no big surprise). So a lot of the combat that happens outside of these areas is going to very simple with maybe a couple trees or structures for cover, maybe for verticality to think about but no real map knowledge or mastery required. Like how most koth maps in other games have a central point you can always go to and all the weaving smaller areas you use to flank other players while watching for others doing the same to you. The big open areas boil it down to a 'Be alert at all times and hope nobody has a sniper rifle' deal 90% of the time and a cramped feeling clusterfuck the rest of the time.
How they handle guns is also pretty bad. Looting works in RPGs because it's a progression, feels good to get a good sword after grinding a boss or find a rare item. They try to mimic this in the small bites but it results in the game being RNG dependent with loot centers being the closest things to choke points or resource points the games have. And since they don't respawn there's never an urge to defend. So you might lose just because you found someone with a vastly superior gun even if you're better than them since you need 100 hits they need 1.
Then it's a whole 'Never stop moving forward' thing, there's no real lull when this is combined with the giant open areas and mass players. Even your downtime between fights you're stressed about someone popping up or sniping you or needing to run forward. The pacing is all screwy with a long of static and sudden short bursts of activity.
The gunplay is usually just passable too, the movement and shooting isn't exactly super in depth with the guns being lackluster. You have a few guns that play more or less the same, maybe one or two exceptions like a crossbow or explosive projectile. No really good movements either, run, jump, sprint, maybe crouching and going prone. I think Apex had a jetpack or other cooldown specials but those don't really help so much as make it more annoying with unpredictable movement over snappy movement.
So basically none of them can get map design right, rely on RNG over player skill, have poor pacing, and lackluster mechanics.
Now if you wanted to fix this there is a way. For one get rid of the giant maps, make them relatively small and designed in a coherent fashion. I'd say make 1/4th a map and connect them together so 25 players can play in their branches with the main goal being at the center. No need for the walls to press in or anything, instead make the objective to be the last one standing with any gunfire being visible on the map. That way you can sort of control how much fighting you get into and even lure people into traps.
Make the movement fast with good models, nice blocky dudes who are fun to shoot, think Doom. More guns but give each a role. The pistol is the starting gun and works decently no matter what, an assault rifle for all out fights, a shotgun for short range surprises, rocket launcher for groups (Make the explosion show on the map and not the firing for more trap potential), a crossbow for sniping (Hitscan sniping just won't work here), and some weird ones like a melee, a flamethrower, maybe some tools, etc.
eca5fb No.16610149
remember minecraft suvival games
2cb808 No.16610151
>>16610148
Also should go without saying: No RNG, give players static resources. Each map has set spawns for weapons and ammo, a health regen spawn (You either stand in an area or just get healed on the spot, no carrying it for later), and maybe a couple of power ups. I'd say speed and silence would make for good ones since they let you get to a fight faster and fight without drawing attention respectively.
Doubles as a thing for players to want to defend for a while and gravitate towards. At the center you can put a big buff that needs to be activated and alerts the entire map. Whoever grabs it when it finally spawns gets to be strong as fuck for a while and clean up, if they die the buff can be made again with the same effect. This could give the winner of the first fight a victory lap or give whoever kills them a 'Fuck yes!' moment.
0b9f30 No.16610152
>>16608542
Any game that kicks you out of the session after dying once is objectively shit.
8e2e45 No.16610160
>>16610102
fortnite is as vertical as it gets. Also the final circle can shift around and people have to keep building.
dff7ec No.16610251
>>16610160
Vertical by building. Also fortnites level desinge sucks.
I'm talking about truly vertical level desinge. Also maps that are way out there, like 2fort in quake 3. Just pair of floating islands in space. Not just bland open world maps that every game has.
7e3ceb No.16610286
>>16608542
It was initially supposed to instill some form of comradery back when it was just an ARMA mod, now it's just down to who can be the niggest.
3b7a7f No.16610289
ed9222 No.16610300
>>16608579
>toxic
Fuck off. You are a massive faggot for complaining about "toxicity".
f0138c No.16610326
>>16608607
The kids start dancing before fortnite is even said…
dbf661 No.16610341
>>16610149
The hunger games approach still is superior to me to whatever BR shit we have now. Yeah it still has the randomized loot gamble, which sucks to a degree, but paired with minecraft's limited items, generally small maps, and the deathwall pushing the game to end faster than most BR's first quarter result in more time the game is actually played instead of running in open fields waiting to die for 20+ minutes.
cc4070 No.16610350
>>16609222
>kids doing cringy stuff that will get them bullied, ridiculed, or outright beat up is ok
Nigger complaining that kids do cringy stuff is like complaining that water is wet. They're kids, that's how they learn social interaction, by the way of experimentation and seeing what works and doesn't.
cc4070 No.16610354
>>16610349
It's a low-hanging fruit. I'm not saying you can't joke about it but I don't think it's that funny seeing that every kid is a flaming faggot by nature.
218a60 No.16610374
>>16609222
>kids doing cringy stuff that will get them bullied, ridiculed, or outright beat up is ok
Fun fact in the current year you get beat up and ridiculed if you DON'T play fortnight or pay 100s of dollary doos for repaints and costumes.
<Polygon - Fortnite is free, but kids are getting bullied into spending money
>https://archive.fo/rtB3v
<Deseret News - 'Fortnite' premium skins could be encouraging bullying. Here's what you need to know
>https://archive.fo/V2rPa
<THEGAMER - 'Default' Is Now A Hurtful Classroom Insult Among Kids, Thanks To Fortnite
>https://archive.fo/ou2cf
<Daily Esports News - Kids are being harassed if they can’t afford skins in Fortnite
>https://archive.fo/OSixW
73cfbc No.16610378
>>16609340
>already hit rock bottom
Oh, you! Give it another generation and you'll be parroting what the boomers were saying and what their parents were saying etc. It's why every new generation is dumber, more androgynous, more promiscuous at a younger age, less self sufficient, less dedicated to their profession, have problems concentrating and overall worse than the one before it. It's because a hard line isn't drawn and kids aren't being beaten into shape, which also applies to you too.
0a7fb4 No.16610440
>>16608542
I don't hate br, it's my casual fun
9544f8 No.16610477
>>16610374
Oh fuck.
Sometimes I'm really glad I'm not a kid any more.
>>16610360
>the cope autist is back
Go get treatment for your assburger's.
4b3983 No.16610478
These kids know that competitive FPS games have the potential to be great. Fortnite especially is a solid FPS game buried under pixar graphics and cheap mass culture gimmicks. It simply takes a lot of practice or FPS skills carried over from another game to be good at it, and a skilled player can win a lot. It's trashy because it's taking something real and using it in a cheap way, but it's the closest thing to an actual popular competitive FPS game around and gamers in general feel how much potential these games do have.
240a15 No.16610490
We hate it because of fortnite and there is nothing wrong with it
4b3983 No.16610504
>>16608908
>Fortnite is bad because its skill ceiling is too high
inb4:
>Fortnite can't take skill to play because I dislike it
You could either play another FPS game, get good at that, and then transfer those skills over to Fortnite, or you could just practice at Fortnite for several months and you'd also get good. It's not the game's fault that children are better at it than you; you are just worse than children at a relatively simple FPS game.
4b3983 No.16610546
>>16610525
>but it's third person
It has the same mechanics, it plays the same way. You are nitpicking.
>CS:GO
Extremely played out game, has been figured out for years.
>Fortnite is absolutely NOT the "closest thing to an actual popular competitive FPS", and that really is a laughable thing to say.
Has a far higher skill ceiling than any other current FPS game besides the totally stale CS:GO (which was never really good to begin with.)
218a60 No.16610573
>>16610477 checked
I thought it was bullshit when I heard about it and consulted my brother, who was in middle school at the time, and confirmed pretty much all of it. I laughed pretty hard that day. These niggers are having dick measuring contests with fucking skins in a game that might not exist 5 years from now. Everyone who says these zoomers are "based and redpilled" are fucking retards.
4b3983 No.16610586
>>16610561
You could take any existing FPS game and add an optional third person camera. This would affect the balance but not make it a different game entirely. Yes, you are nitpicking.
4b3983 No.16610621
>>16610602
>muh definitions
>I havent even played any of these games
7e1b09 No.16610646
>>16610621
A game that isn't in first person is by definition not a first person shooter.
It's still a shooter, sure, and bears many similarities with an FPS, absolutely.
25835d No.16610652
Even if battle royale was good, it has now been ruined by normies. And don't fuckinf tell me that I shouldn't let other people ruin things for me. BR is an online genre, meaning I have to play against normies.
4b3983 No.16610663
>>16610646
>I will not stop arguing besides the point because of a definition which is not perfect.
The genre could have been named 'competitive shooters' or something else that would have been technically more accurate but definitions are rarely perfect like that.
9544f8 No.16610673
>>16610663
Christ, you are an idiot.
FPS and TPS are separate genres and that's the end of it.
Calling them the same would be like saying that pigeons and eagles are the same – I mean, they both fly and have feathers, right? That means there's no difference.
7e1b09 No.16610681
>>16610652
There's tons of different BRs though. Just take a look at Mario Royale: http://infernoplus.com/royale/#main
>>16610663
Fortnite is a shooter but not first-person.
And sure Fortnite can be competitive. I'm not sure if it has the same sort esports scene as something like CS:GO though? CS:GO is what I think of when people say "competitive shooter" because it has a big esports scene. Hell, even Overwatch does. But if you're saying Fortnite can be competitive then yes absolutely. And I guess you do get tournaments between streamers right? At least I think so, I'm not sure.
4b3983 No.16610709
>>16610673
Third person camera does not make for a separate genre. You are arguing that a definition is outdated while I am comparing the merits of various competitive online shooters. You don't even have a point and are nitpicking that
>but you put Fortnite together with other extremely similar games under an umbrella term to make a point about those games collectively you should have picked a better term my autism is flaring up severely
As if this has any relation to what's being discussed.
280684 No.16610710
>>16610698
Don't be surprised when they lock themselves up in the tranny discords that coddle them, then.
Who didn't do dumb shit when they were kids? Give them a break.
7e1b09 No.16610716
>>16610709
It's not an FPS, it's a shooter but it isn't an FPS, by virtue of the very title of FPS ("first person shooter").
2035bb No.16610726
It's just the new iteration of the cod roulette.
It doesn't matter how good you are. There's always the chance of getting owned by a less skilled player that maxed out its gear before you did. There's always the possibility that a lucky noob out of nowhere got your flank.
There's not a single pro with a postive win/lose ratio. There can't be, because it's a roulette.
9544f8 No.16610729
>>16610718
No anon, you are the autism.
7e1b09 No.16610734
>>16610718
Mate it isn't an FPS, I don't know why you're getting so triggered by that, it's just a simple definitional fact.
4b3983 No.16610735
>>16610729
>I'm going to try to invalidate your point by nitpicking relentlessly
Maybe you're right anon, you could just be a faggot.
074f76 No.16610736
>>16608749
Bet you did the Runescape dance when you were a kid and think it's ok.
4b3983 No.16610748
>>16610734
Fortnite is not a first person shooter. I already said I used competitive FPS as an umbrella term to make a point about the genre. Figures that people who can't win at competitive online shooters can't win an argument either.
2a2e8a No.16610759
>>16608888
>being so shit at video games you're not playing the great arena shooter revival in fortnite
It's the next step of evolution. Casual probably can't even explosive jump outside of team casuals 2.
7e1b09 No.16610763
>>16610748
>I WON THE ARGUMENT EVEN THOUGH I SAID SOMETHING THAT IS WRONG BY DEFINITION
Are you a child? Why can't you just accept that you were wrong? If you had said shooter you would have been right because it is a shooter, but you incorrectly said FPS because it isn't a shooter. Why can't you just accept that you made a mistake? We all make mistakes, it's not a big deal, but your whole "NAH NAH NAH I WON I'M NOT LISTENING TO YOU" thing is really fucking childish.
9f2b07 No.16610765
It is supposed to be an tacked on extra game mode that reuses the assets from the main game. As it stands it became an off-shoot of Day-Z and the likes only to be developed it's own identity which is only slightly less tedious
7e1b09 No.16610766
>>16610748
>>16610763
> you incorrectly said FPS because it isn't a shooter
Isn't a first person shooter I mean.
4b3983 No.16610776
>>16610763
You refuse to argue the content of the post I made and have replied a dozen times over the nitpick that technically Fortnite does not belong to the same genre as competitive FPS. I am simply comparing a group of games and, as you have gone to great lengths to point out, did not use the most autistically correct name for that group of games in my first post.
7e1b09 No.16610786
>>16610776
>autistically correct
It's not autistic mate, it's a very basic and fundamental point that Fortnite isn't a fucking first person shooter. And instead of saying "you're right, I meant a shooter", you said that I was "nitpicking" when actually it's just a basic fucking fact and a fundamental error in your post.
4b3983 No.16610790
>>16610786
>it's a very basic and fundamental point that Fortnite isn't a fucking first person shooter.
Which has no relevance whatsoever to the point of the post you were replying to. It's a nitpick. Argue the point that was made and please stop being bad at shooters.
7e1b09 No.16610792
>>16610790
Hahahaha I already gave you what was wrong with your post in my first post.
>if you're capable of understanding the very basic english words of "first person" then that means you're bad at shooters!
Hahahaha. Cope.
4b3983 No.16610796
>>16610792
>hahaha hahaha
You're really losing your mind over this. Try playing Fortnite until you're good at it.
7e1b09 No.16610804
>>16610796
>he cannot just admit that he was wrong because his ego is too fragile
4b3983 No.16610817
>>16610804
I already did correct that. Stop being a nigger.
e9ef3e No.16610833
It's just bad. ASSFAGGOTS all over again.
e9ef3e No.16610841
But hey on the brightside Quake 2's multiplayer has seen a resurgence recently because of the RTX port (but you don't need RTX to play obviously).
Anyone feel like hosting later? I might if I can figure it out.
7e1b09 No.16610848
>>16610817
No you didn't, you refused to admit you were wrong by saying that I was "nitpicking" and that I wasn't engaging with your argument when I already did in my first post.
4b3983 No.16610867
>>16610848
But you have to get the last word and you're even trying to force an apology. Getting good at games would help you be less of a faggot.
922201 No.16610885
>>16608542
It's not fundamentally bad, but it's fundamentally overhyped and overdone, and it's too weak of a gimmick to serve as the core gameplay mechanic of a game. It worked fine when it was just an ArmA mod but it's not enough to make an entire retail game out of.
7e1b09 No.16610924
>>16610867
No I'm not saying you need to apologise mate. I'm simply pointing out Fortnite isn't an FPS. Simple as that to be honest. Shooter, yes. Competitive elements, sure, although I don't think it has quite the developed "competitive scene" of something like CS:GO, or even Rainbow Six Siege. Maybe there is a big Fortnite competitive scene but I'm not aware of such a thing, besides Twitch streamers having games and tournaments against each other.
But the simple point is that Fortnite isn't an FPS.
Getting defensive and throwing ad hominems doesn't prove anything mate. It just shows that you're butthurt that I was right and you can't stand it.
c60fc9 No.16610928
>>16608550
>Remember when people had options?
I used to design missions for Arma 3, the game that spawned the battle royale genre. Yes, I remember.
Dota 2 seems to be at least trying to recapture some of the magic of the WC3 editor but I haven't fucked around with it myself so can't comment on the features of that particular editor.
Arma's editor might be a pile of shit but it's still a thing of wonder that the fucking thing even exists. Map/level/mission editors used to be a thing of near ubiquity, now hardly any game ships with any sort of developer tools.
8123ff No.16611168
>>16610898
>They're playing a free game because their parents can't be assed to give them anything better to do.
I live in a shitty neighborhood and pretty much none of us had money when we were kids, so we'd just go outside, build camps in different places, fight each other with sticks for practice, then wage kid war against other neighborhoods. We'd also climb construction scaffolding because it was fun. The problem isn't that the parents can't be arsed, it's that the parents in these first world, medium income families have a decent chunk of money, and not enough time, so they just throw a computer or console at the kids, and as soon as this happens to one kid, he pulls all of his friends into it because they start screaming at their parents that Jimmy also has this newfangled Playstation thing and that they want to play with their friends. And the parents just oblige, because they think that'll make their children happy.
This is all talking from personal experience, except that it wasn't a newfangled Playstation thing, it was a computer at age 10, and an internet connection at 11
I figured out how to pirate videogames at age 12, and then I just kinda stopped going outside because I could get everything I wanted in the comfort of my own home
ebebea No.16611336
>>16610928
>I used to design missions for Arma 3, the game that spawned the battle royale genre.
That's debatable as people made Minecraft survival gamemodes that were extremely similar to Battle Royale
581952 No.16615077
>>16608542
Battle Royales are the popcorn/potato chip equivalent of video games. There is nothing worthwhile in these titles and their meteoric rise to popularity is only because of room-temperature IQ idiots who also buy shit like 2KBasketball/Madden/Fifa etc, which unfortunately is the majority of people.
>inb4 HURRDURR BUT FIGHTING GAMES ARE ALSO THE SAME SHIT EVERY GAME
Yes, some dipshit has actually tried to make this comparison in an argument against me.
44a067 No.16615096
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Devstream: How Fortnite represents a design surrender
fbe513 No.16615231
>>16615077
>Yes, some dipshit has actually tried to make this comparison in an argument against me
It's the go-to counter argument for normalfags when defending low effort, yearly release, flavour of the month cash grabs.
b10143 No.16615242
The sole defining reason why every popular BR game is so ungodly terrible is because of the random aspect. They're designed in a way where retards and children with little to no experience can drop, pick up some "legendary loot", and obliterate some lad who only got a pistol.
It's the same bullshit philosophy that governs shit like random crits in TF2, supposedly the good feeling you get from getting these random experiences outweighs the negative feeling you get on the receiving end.
63c05d No.16615246
>>16615242
> They're designed in a way where retards and children with little to no experience can drop, pick up some "legendary loot", and obliterate some lad who only got a pistol.
Isn't this the same principle behind roguelikes? That the game can either end up going very in your favor or, more likely, fuck you over from the start?
e2fdb5 No.16615266
b10143 No.16615281
>>16615246
I figure it's something like that, but I would also say that pve roguelikes are a lot more nuanced in how they hook players compared to pvp BR games. A lot of roguelikes are designed in a way to be beatable with bad or worse gear, for example.
67f83e No.16615284
To think I ever even considered the idea of a Battle Royale game to be interesting thanks to how the GGO anime did it. How naïve I was.
ee0aa1 No.16615286
>>16610698
Shaming kids is not what we should be doing you autistic sperg, it's what other kids their age should be doing. You're just assmad that fortnite dances are actually popular
44a067 No.16615337
>>16608561
Off-topic, but who's the cutie with the baseball bat, and what's she from?