Radical Heights

[HandsomeDead]

Up front, I'm using this as an excuse to moan, because this put me in a bad mood.

 

 

So!  We have another entry in the Battle Royale genre:  Radical Heights by Boss Key Entertainment.

 

 

 

I found out about this on a recent Jim Sterling video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sreEkSGLvn8&t=0s

 

 

And I am just very puzzled at how this game is being recieved.  I normally couldn't give to fucks about what most other gamers think; they're idiots.  But, like Boss Key's LawBreakers this game is getting instant hate and is already a notably down voted video.  Apparently it's a Fortnite rip-off (a mode that was made in six months off the back of PUBG).

 

What is annoying me is why can the Battle Royale genre not be something comfortably iterated on without being worried about the big leader, which pretty much every genre had the luxery of having (or at least not to this extent)?

 

Because PUBG looks a bit too dry to me, and I don't like the look of having to deal with Fortnite's building mechanics so i see this and I think "okay, I'll try that.  Fortnite without the building.  Neat".  And I'm sure it could be more than that.  Because of the lack of building they could play more with level design, for example.  But no, if it isn't Fortnite of PUBG it's a rip=off and should fuck-off.  Screw anyone who would maybe like to play a Battle Royale game but not the ones available.

 

I don't get it.  LawBreakers was a cool game and the folk at Boss Key seem talanted enough to do something cool with the Battle Royale genre, but they can't catch a break it seems.  I've never seen such a small studio pull the kind of hate and cynicism that over takes what the big publishers do (Spyro is back!  Yay!*).

 

 

*I will probably be buying Spyro

 

[retroed]

Watching DrDisrespect play this on Twitch and it seems like a ton of fun. He seems to be enjoying it, too. If it comes to PS4 I'll give it a go. 

[Craymen Edge]

Appearing to jump on the latest bandwagon with a game that by many accounts is too early really to be released yet, even in early access. It gives the impression of being rushed out to cash in, whether that's true or not. It's bound to get a cynical response from many people.

 

After the way Lawbreakers flopped, they probably have good reason to try and rush out their own version of the most successful game out right now, and as quickly as they can.

 

I never played Lawbreakers, and doubt I'll play this either because I'm not interested in the battle royale thing. 

 

I do think there's a limited time for anyone currently developing another battle royale game before they're too late. The same way multiple studios put themselves out of business trying to copy the success of World of Warcraft, and later the flood of MOBA games. 

[HandsomeDead]

4 hours ago, Craymen Edge said:

Appearing to jump on the latest bandwagon with a game that by many accounts is too early really to be released yet, even in early access. It gives the impression of being rushed out to cash in, whether that's true or not. It's bound to get a cynical response from many people. 

 

But I just see this bandwagon as a genre.  Like, obviously so.

 

Imagine if an FPS didn't go far beyond Wolfenstein or platformers didn't go further than Mario.  I just find it weird for so much push back against a different take, even if at the surface it looks a little like the leader.

[Sambob]

The answer to your question is because everybody is an asshole nowadays.

[Hendo]

I watched the Giant Bomb video on it and despite it being very cynically and quickly made, it looks good fun.

The thing that makes it look bad is that it’s very clearly nowhere near finished but they made sure to put plenty of IAP in.

 

I don’t think it’s a greed thing, though. It comes across more like a “oh shit, we need to do something to keep afloat” type of thing.

[Sambob]

I would question your logic of it not being greedy because they have to keep afloat. They arent entitled to make a living from games, and thats the point that if any I object to. Lawbreakers seemed like a good game but didnt do well, not sure really what the exact reason was but there are a few I guess that it could be, Cliffy B factor, over saturation of the market, it tried to take on Overwatch when it was already well established dont know. 

 

Its basically the guy in Monopoly that is about to go broke, but if you just sell him all your blues and greens for nothing he can get back into the game and make loads of money and maybe win, and if you dont sell them to him you are being a bastard and crushing his dreams of winning. Not every game can do well and not every studio can just open up and be guaranteed of success, it seems to me that there is an air of entitlement that like 'hey we are making this game you fuckers, why arent you buying it' kind of thing. 

 

In theory its a great business model, put out a barebones offering and get some money and some customers and then they can pay you to keep making it, and they can give you your ideas to make it different enough from the other games you are competing against. Zero risk, lots of profit, thats why people dont like it.

 

 

[Sambob]

Okay well I meant they arent entitled to make a living full stop. The games industry, as with any software based industry is always always a risk to work in, you can be up one moment and then down the next, and to make a business in that industry you need to come to terms with the reality that you might not make it. Games are high cost and generally speaking bespoke products, you can re-use the engine and some assets in a sequel etc, and you can buy an engine and assets too but if you do then you are risking people saying its a knock off.

The risks are well understood within the industry and so for Cliffy B to make a move like this is probably whats garnered the instant dislike. That and because people just dont like things any more, they hate things.

[HandsomeDead]

1 hour ago, Sambob said:

Zero risk, lots of profit, thats why people dont like it.

 

Hundreds of dead early access games say that it isn't zero risk.  While it may only be five months worth of game it would have still required resources.  It's a mitigated risk but certainly one that comes with its own kind of risks.  It solely relies on good will and that is very risky.

[Sambob]

It is Zero risk because he is Cliffy B and he knows some fuckers will fund it, as they are doing. If you or I or the various companies that are doing it did the same thing then yes there is risk, but in his case there wont be, it will make money because people will pay for anything like this and will see it as a jaunty kickstarter type approach.

[DANGERMAN]

shame they didn't at least get to finish this. I can't say anything Cliffy b makes strikes a chord with me, and both Boss Key's games really werent for me, but it does feel like they didn't get a decent swing

[DisturbedSwan]

Since GoW2 none of Cliffy’s games have resonated with me either until Radiant Heights.

 

I really enjoyed the game and liked the different take it had on the BR genre, but it just needed a bit more time in the oven that we - now know - Boss Key didn’t have.

 

Always a shame whenever a developer closes and folks lose their jobs.