• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Highguard Debuts on Steam with a peak CCU of 97k and 21% positive reviews

He looks like I expected.

GSloDnEaUAAo_NK.jpg
He's a +1 Reddit Elemental.
 
Highguard does a bad job of communicating its "boring phase" to players. However, once you understand everything it's reasonably enjoyable. Consider...

1. The chests are "gambles" and are used to build 80% of your loadout.

2. Farming crystals allows you to finish off your loadout by buying expensive gear in the shop.

This system forces the player to ask reasonably fun questions based on time.

"Do I look for more chests and hope I pull a better gun, or can I rock with what I currently have?"

"Do I farm more or is my current economy enough to set me up for the next phase?"
You're like a robot who doesn't understand the concept of fun.
 
Played some more Highguard, 2 matches. My stances on the game remain. No, Highguard is not terrible (and it's not good either, dohohohoho), but it does feel like a mess of ideas that don't really come together all that well in the long run.

There is something that could be pulled out from this, but that's frustrating to think about when multiple public playtests before launch could have identified these issues and led to more time in the oven to refine what they were trying to do into something more cohesive. There is one more frustrating thought that comes to mind, and it's the idea that this launch is essentially acting as the public playtest.

Something I noticed is that mouse aiming doesn't quite feel right, even after some tuning on my part. I've seen others mention this.

No performance issues, so that's a plus.

Mara is hot.

The game's been uninstalled. I gave it a shot, but I at least don't feel like my time was wasted, because now I know for myself. Highguard isn't going to be taking over any desire of mine for multiplayer games, because there are so many other options available. Not when I could be playing, say, Deadlock instead, which recently got a new ARAM-style Street Brawl mode for quick matches and newer players that people really seem to like.

Also, Out of Action hit Steam Early Access a week ago. For $20, it's fairly barebones with little to no onboarding, but it's showing some potential in terms of just sitting a bunch of cool stuff in front of players and letting them have at it. Action Half-Life and The Specialists players should seriously consider looking into this.

 
You're like a robot who doesn't understand the concept of fun.

I mean, this is the same guy who wanted the consoles you interact with in Helldivers to be full blown mini-games. Didn't think they were interactive enough and saw no problem in how that would work while you're getting your ass eaten by an army.
 
Take your wins while you can get them.

Marathon approaches.
No matter if it sells/succeeds im certain marathon topics gonna be:
how-i-met-your-mother-himym.gif

All the meltdowns and drama will be tasty af and i will be there to witness it :D
Speaking bit from outsider pov since i dont care/play that genre, am gonna enjoy the threads nonetheless :messenger_smiling_hearts:
 
these people are really creatively bankrupt. Same soulless aesthetic, no different than AI slop. This is what happens when you put unqualified nutjobs into decision making positions.
 
No matter if it sells/succeeds im certain marathon topics gonna be:
how-i-met-your-mother-himym.gif

All the meltdowns and drama will be tasty af and i will be there to witness it :D
Speaking bit from outsider pov since i dont care/play that genre, am gonna enjoy the threads nonetheless :messenger_smiling_hearts:
If we don't get a half dozen temp bans in the CCU thread post Marathon release it will mean we've all been domesticated like pugs.
 
I mean, this is the same guy who wanted the consoles you interact with in Helldivers to be full blown mini-games. Didn't think they were interactive enough and saw no problem in how that would work while you're getting your ass eaten by an army.
It's the same kind of sick mind that thought several minutes of QTE rock-hitting would be a fun thing to do every god damn match.
 
Am I the only one who thinks Arc Raiders is incredibly overrated? I have 10 hours in the game and am bored out of my mind, I can't even muster enough strength to boot it up anymore. What a waste of money.
 
Am I the only one who thinks Arc Raiders is incredibly overrated? I have 10 hours in the game and am bored out of my mind, I can't even muster enough strength to boot it up anymore. What a waste of money.
A lot of people seem to be enjoying it

I haven't jumped in yet. I really don't like wipes, they make all your progress feel pointless. Arc Raiders tries to mix things up, which is cool but I still feel like the extraction genre is missing a meatier endgame to keep things interesting
 
Am I the only one who thinks Arc Raiders is incredibly overrated? I have 10 hours in the game and am bored out of my mind, I can't even muster enough strength to boot it up anymore. What a waste of money.

I like the concept of it in theory, but the fact that it's third person makes it immediately a no no for me.

in the beta I already saw the exact issues I expected when learning that this is third person...

you just can't have a high stakes shooter in thid person like this, because the corner camping ruins all combat engagements
 
It's now at 7,400. It peaked yesterday at 12,700. So it'll likely top out around 10,000. And middle of the night drop to 3,000-ish.
So if the trend is similar, this game will likely peak at around 9,000-ish and that's it. Middle of the night it'll drop from 4,500 to probably about 3,000-ish.
As I suspected (hey got two forecasts out of 3 correct!), it looks like it topped out at 9,400 today. It's now prime time evening and now on the downslope at 9,000.

Should dip to 3,000-ish late night tonight.
 
I remember when Concord failed, many of the game's defenders were saying it would have succeeded if it were free to play instead of costing $40. I think Highguard failing so terribly, despite being free to play, proves those people wrong.
If it was F2P more people would have tried it, like in this case. But if you want people to stick around the game actually needs to be something that people want to continue to play.
 
Did this forum widely expect Arc Raiders to bomb? If so can you link me to the thread?
I advise you not to read these threads for too long, lest you aquire a super inflated teflon ego like myself.


 
If it was F2P more people would have tried it, like in this case. But if you want people to stick around the game actually needs to be something that people want to continue to play.

concord would have died either way, there was a clear sign it was gonna fail like nothing ever failed before.
that sign? well, Concord's player numbers dropped during the second beta weekend.

why is that significant? because the first weekend was only for people who preordered, while the second weekend was open to everyone.

so the preorder exclusive weekend had more players than the open weekend, which means not only that people weren't interested to test it without any purchase needed... it also means even the people who preordered didn't come back for the second weekend. that right there is a devastating outcome.

then they did the usual "look at all those numbers from our beta! these many kills were done, and these many matches were played", where they tried to use the highest sounding numbers they could.
but people did the math and if you actually broke the numbers down, there were so few people playing the beta, that no interpretation of those numbers would result in a good outcome.
either the numbers show an OK-ish number of players that instantly uninstalled after only 1 match, or it was an ungodly small amount of players that played an OK-ish number of games. both are bad and showed a bad reception from players, before launch and before anyone had to buy it.

after the beta it was basically clear it would be a disaster.
 
Last edited:
concord would have died either way, there was a clear sign it was gonna fail like nothing ever failed before.
that sign? well, Concord's player numbers dropped during the second beta weekend.

why is that significant? because the first weekend was only for people who preordered, while the second weekend was open to everyone.

so the preorder exclusive weekend had more players than the open weekend, which means not only that people weren't interested to test it without any purchase needed... it also means even the people who preordered didn't come back for the second weekend. that right there is a devastating outcome.

then they did the usual "look at all those numbers from our beta! these many kills were done, and these many matches were played", where they tried to use the highest sounding numbers they could.
but people did the math and if you actually broke the numbers down, there were so few people playing the beta, that no interpretation of those numbers would result in a good outcome.
either the numbers show an OK-ish number of players that instantly uninstalled after only 1 match, or it was an ungodly small amount of players that played an OK-ish number of games. both are bad and showed a bad reception from players, before launch and before anyone had to buy it.

after the beta it was basically clear it would be a disaster.
It's crazy when you think of stats like this because you'd think based purely on production values, some YT trailers or Geoff Keighley promos that any game with some level of marketing like this would be guaranteed some decent player demo play. Especially if any are F2P.

But when the turnout is so bad and dropping, it goes to show the game must be so bad, that even a no name game on Steam with zero marketing can do better numbers. Like right now HG has 8,500 players and there's two games called Russian Fishing 4 and Cookie Clicker that have higher CCU. And for that Cookie game it's not even a free download. You got to buy it.
 
ARC Raiders has entered White Rose status. There's like 8 unimpeachable games and ARC Raiders has been added to that list.
Real classics are not held together by content calendars or promises of what is coming next month

Saying it already belongs in the same league as titles that have stood the test of decades feels like hype running far ahead of reality

A roadmap is not a legacy and hype is not longevity

But lets hear these 'like 8 unimpeachable games'
 
.
.


Also, Out of Action hit Steam Early Access a week ago. For $20, it's fairly barebones with little to no onboarding, but it's showing some potential in terms of just sitting a bunch of cool stuff in front of players and letting them have at it. Action Half-Life and The Specialists players should seriously consider looking into this.


Way too floaty
 
I can't believe this was at the end of the Geoffs. Literally a piece of shit no body game was a closer to what is supposed to be the oscars of video games.

Lmao this industry is so backwards in so many ways. Just pure showboating and bollox.
 
Nobody knows multi-player game design more than the people on NeoGAF who hate all things multi-player, right?


I love the typical answer to "so many GAAS games are thrash" is "yeah, but but but there might be some that are really, really good and bring in hundreds of millions"! Ok, however the failure of a GAAS game hurts way more given the initial investment.
 
Currently sitting at 4010 ccu with 24h peak of 9987, we reached milestone of below 10k 24h peak ccu for the first time, bros :messenger_ok:
If you check it drops almost exactly 30% day to day at the lowest point, which is more or less right now. I mentioned yesterday we will have just north of 4K. Probably it will slow down as it goes even lower, but we don't know, it might as well me everybody left just decides to fuck it and go play something else with their mates.
 
If you check it drops almost exactly 30% day to day at the lowest point, which is more or less right now. I mentioned yesterday we will have just north of 4K. Probably it will slow down as it goes even lower, but we don't know, it might as well me everybody left just decides to fuck it and go play something else with their mates.
I think at this low numbers it will accelerate its own demise, coz it will be harder to get a team which will reduce already very questionable fun :P
My prediction of it getting shut down after 3 to 6 months from other thread was way too generous looks like :pie_thinking:
Game is f2p and multiplayer so it needs high playerbase to survive, out of that 10k 24h peak ccu how many whales are there forking up some srs cash on mtx? 5-10 at max, and it will only go down from there :messenger_astonished:
 
One gameplay video of this game was enough for me to swear it off forever. I've never really been an objective mode fan when it comes to shooters, so this looks like my worst nightmare. The horse seemed kind of cool though.
 
coz it will be harder to get a team which will reduce already very questionable fun :P
I think you nailed their plan in going with the 3 vs 3 idea. I which case as long as six people in the entire world are online looking for a match in Highguard then the game is not dead! These guys are brilliant! Now, what are the odds all six are whales...?
 
I played it again last night just to see if I liked it better than my first impressions a few days ago.

Nope, I still just don't find the game very fun.

It feels like an odd hodgepodge of game mechanics Frankensteined together with little rhyme or reason. I honestly think the concept of the game has some merit, like it could work, but I don't think it DOES work in its current state. Not well at least. I still think the maps are too big for 3vs3, I hate the constant quips all the characters make and I find it annoying, theres just so much about the game I do not like.

I've uninstalled it now, I'm done giving it chances.
 
It keeps dropping lower and lower player numbers.

OlUS8EP5A3XKAZ8M.png
What feels surprising to me is that we have 30+ years of videogame history behind us with hundreds of amazing classics to chose from, yet there are around 4000 "people" that would chose Highguard over any of those. :goog_relieved:
 
I've played one game of this, + the uber-boring, unnecessary and frankly useless tutorial.

There is potential, but:

-3v3 makes firefights very one-sided if one player is respawning
-Matches take too long
 
What feels surprising to me is that we have 30+ years of videogame history behind us with hundreds of amazing classics to chose from, yet there are around 4000 "people" that would chose Highguard over any of those. :goog_relieved:
Its f2p, those could be 12yo checking any new steam release only to move on after day or two, lets check end of feb so full month after launch when it losts its novelty smell and new contenter on the block is about to steal its spotlight(marathon launches early march :P ).
 
What feels surprising to me is that we have 30+ years of videogame history behind us with hundreds of amazing classics to chose from, yet there are around 4000 "people" that would chose Highguard over any of those. :goog_relieved:
I'm pretty sure majority of Zoomers would be unable to play an early X360 game, let alone 1990s classic.

"Why doesn't it have a map?"
"Ok, where do I go?"
"Why are there no choices highlighted"
"Why is the combat so hard"
 
First person mounts is a dumb concept, only viable on VR if the camera movement is right.

I don't understand how or why they thought their game loop would be fun.
 
I love the typical answer to "so many GAAS games are thrash" is "yeah, but but but there might be some that are really, really good and bring in hundreds of millions"! Ok, however the failure of a GAAS game hurts way more given the initial investment.
Ubisoft recently recommitted to GAAS native games. Hogwarts Legacy 2 is supposedly a GAAS title.

All these companies are still chasing GAAS because the math makes sense. NeoGAF got this one very very wrong.

 
Last edited:
Top Bottom