The tired yet young battle royale sub- genre.

While it may be a young sub-genre, it's old and tired by now.

'Battle Royale', a young video game sub-genre of action games is already... Ironically, feeling pretty old and tired. Most of the games in this genre are dime a dozen. Honestly the only game/s I can see having long lives are Fortnite, Apex, PUBG (Bear with me), and Warzone. And at least 3 of these are actually solid games with distinct and thought out art direction... So well thought out, that ALOT (NOT ALL) of 'Battle Royales' end up copying or taking inspiration from them. (CSGO Dangerzone exists, I know, and I love CSGO, but I seriously don't think it's going to be as popular as any of the other guys.)

In terms of basics, a 'Battle Royale' is a game that blends scavenging and last man standing gameplay to create a tense and 'anything can happen' experience, where a large number of players (usually 50-100) start with no equipment and are spread (through different means, though usually by dropping out of an airship of sorts) throughout the map to find and loot (scavenge) gear and other things while also dealing with the threat of other players. Last man or group standing wins.

Being a subgenre, it's formula MUST be set in stone in some regards... Lest you risk it well, not being a 'Battle Royale' anymore. 

You MUST have a large amount of players (ABOUT 50-100), 

you MUST have an incentive to keep players moving and fighting (THE ZONE SYSTEM and THE LAST MAN STANDING WIN CONDITION)

and you MUST have a reason for players to take risks (GREATER LOOT IN HOTTER AREAS and CHANCES FOR RISKY BUT EFFECTIVE STRATEGY)

That's not what makes the genre tired. 

What DOES is the lack of anything too interesting and the complacency of MOST (NOT ALL) of the playerbase that likes 'Battle Royales'. If it's not like Fortnite, Apex PUBG, or Warzone, it will die in a few months or in a year if it's lucky... EVEN then, a copycat can only go so far before players ask themselves... Why don't I just play the other ones? They're all free after all...

And while having four giants isn't as bad as having one game dominate the entire genre... They can get stale. The last Battle Royale I was excited for was Hyperscape. I liked the idea of an uber-fast movement shooter 'Battle Royale' because Apex isn't that... And while it is faster than the others, I WANTED TITANFALL LEVELS OF FAST OKAY.

Of course, Hyperscape died, of many things really, but it also showcased that nothing can get into the sphere of the "Four Giants". 

The player complacency is less of a problem but it still is... This is because I understand that you like one of the giants, and don't want to switch off, maybe because you already spent too much money on it, or you just prefer the gameplay... But damn, there are a lot of ideas that would be cool... But realistically no one would play.

I want a For Honor, Medieval style 'Battle Royale' (Not Naraka) where players are engaged in a savage battlefield with slower movement, methodical combat, with emphasis on smart and well thought out plays instead of flashiness. 

I want a gothic themed, Bloodborne-esque 'Battle Royale' with gnarly melee weapons and old timey guns, fast paced combat with dashing and parries, and hell if it can be implemented a rally system, encouraging agression. 

Or a 'RTS', Military style 'Battle Royale' where players build up and rally forces from different military bases on the map and then duke it out as the zone gets smaller and they move their battalions to clash with each other.

THE ONLY PROBLEM IS... NO ONE WOULD PLAY THEM.

In conclusion. LETS EXPERIMENT PLEASE! EVEN IF IT FLOPS, I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD STILL APPRECIATE IT!

That's all! - Z

Comments

Popular Transcriptions

Forever and Always.

THE MIDNIGHT BALL - A LONG POEM

Prinns Chærmengt - Poems by Elwynn Ward