• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Highguard


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qR9Xbzt5t0

Apparently it is a "Raid Shooter", a new genre taking the base raiding moments of survival games and making it an entire game in of itself.

Idk, looks pretty generic to me. Kind of reminds me of R6 siege or The Finals but worse. It's like a hero shooter + battle royale (looting gear) + R6 siege base defense + fortification. There are also mounts you can ride. It just feels like a mish mash of buzzwords and mechanics to me. I'll give it a shot tonight but my expectations are low

Even if the game is solid, I don't see it maintaining a playerbase. See Battlerite and The Finals for similar situations. Great solid games, but struggle to maintain healthy playerbase which leads into a death spiral
 
Last edited:
Watching a bit of a stream of the game. Honestly it looks solid. I like some aspects of battle royales but I hate dropping in with 100 people just to get third partied 90% of the time. Also why I dislike extraction shooters, not fun to just get camped or jumped and then spend another 15 minutes walking around looting again. Seems you still get some of the longer range engagements and then it ends with more CQC deathmatch type combat.

I can see what they are going for. As much as I dislike these color rarity looting mechanics, I can see how it adds some spice to the gameplay for the more open sections.

Still, the aesthetics just feel uninspired to me. Almost like an asset flip. Which is a shame, seems they did try to do something unique with the gameplay.

Another game that sort of reminds me of this is Deadlock, but that leans more towards MOBA and less towards deathmatch. I just don't think it can maintain a playerbase, especially with the current aesthetics. Some of this game seems interesting, but a lot of it seems derivative. Battlerite was an amazing game that condensed the MOBA gameplay into just the teamfights with emphasis on skill shots, and it still died. The Finals is in a rough spot despite having really innovative gameplay.
 
Looks like it didnt deserve so much of the hate from the awards show video thing but 3v3 seems too low of a team group. Concept seems interesting but may be a classic case of jack of all trades, master of none.
 
ivandagiant said:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qR9Xbzt5t0

Apparently it is a "Raid Shooter", a new genre taking the base raiding moments of survival games and making it an entire game in of itself.

Idk, looks pretty generic to me. Kind of reminds me of R6 siege or The Finals but worse. It's like a hero shooter + battle royale (looting gear) + R6 siege base defense + fortification. There are also mounts you can ride. It just feels like a mish mash of buzzwords and mechanics to me. I'll give it a shot tonight but my expectations are low

Even if the game is solid, I don't see it maintaining a playerbase. See Battlerite and The Finals for similar situations. Great solid games, but struggle to maintain healthy playerbase which leads into a death spiral
Click to expand...

So...

It's Battleborn?
 
Armenius said:
So...

It's Battleborn?
Click to expand...
Man I never got to play battleborne, got it in a humble bundle and it shut down before I actually got to play it 💀

I'd say no. Battleborn and the various other MOBA/shooter games like Gigantic and Paragon all died off. Those had more emphasis on traditional MOBA mechanics like minion farming and upgrading abilities and purchasing items. (This is also why I have very little hope for Overwatch's Stadium mode)

This is more of a blend of the looting stage of a battle royale (Apex Legends) + a base defense game (R6 Siege setup but The Finals pacing). You pick a hero/champion which has some abilities but they can all use the same weapons from what I can see. You loot higher rarity equipment and engage in long range engagements battle royale style. Think Apex Legends. Basically at this point you loot and capture a flag which then initiates the base defense portion of the game. 1 team defends, the other attacks. Rinse and repeat.

Honestly the game would appeal to me more if it had some PvE elements to it. I really like how in Titanfall you could still contribute to your team by culling the various AI enemies for points, just get good at dodging real players. It adds a new dimension of gameplay and builds to optimize and lets people who would normally get destroyed in a clicking heads competition still contribute in their own way.
 
Last edited:
Ranulfo said:
Looks like it didnt deserve so much of the hate from the awards show video thing but 3v3 seems too low of a team group. Concept seems interesting but may be a classic case of jack of all trades, master of none.
Click to expand...
1769468191224.png


Maybe...
 
Absalom said:
Geoff Keighley really wants you to play this one:

https://x.com/geoffkeighley/status/2015164852743065967

At the 2025 VGAs, they got the final showcase of the night which, courtesy of Geoff, they paid zero for.

I kind of want it to fail now just to see Geoff's reaction. Yeah, I'm a sadist.
Click to expand...
I think he set them up to fail. He know live service games are not liked by the gaming community. Him puatting it up in the prime spot would enraged the gamers. Anyway definitely going to end up being Concord 2.0.
 
vegeta535 said:
I think he set them up to fail. He know live service games are not liked by the gaming community. Him puatting it up in the prime spot would enraged the gamers. Anyway definitely going to end up being Concord 2.0.
Click to expand...

How is this similar to Concord in any way besides being bad?
 
sharknice said:
How is this similar to Concord in any way besides being bad?
Click to expand...
Referring to it being DOA I'd assume. Concord was 10x worse though, being a paid game in a traditionally F2P genre, and all the woke and delusional ideas that had for it

Honestly I think all the hate for this game is pretty cringe. Like yeah the game is mid and is likely going to fail. It is just crazy to me how many people are hoping for it to crash and burn, off of a single trailer. It's just cool to hate on it I guess. (There are aspects of the game that deserve hate, but this thing got review bombed the minute it released. That is just a bandwagon at that point)

I do think the game is going to be dead within a couple months.
 
ivandagiant said:
Referring to it being DOA I'd assume. Concord was 10x worse though, being a paid game in a traditionally F2P genre, and all the woke and delusional ideas that had for it

Honestly I think all the hate for this game is pretty cringe. Like yeah the game is mid and is likely going to fail. It is just crazy to me how many people are hoping for it to crash and burn, off of a single trailer. It's just cool to hate on it I guess. (There are aspects of the game that deserve hate, but this thing got review bombed the minute it released. That is just a bandwagon at that point)

I do think the game is going to be dead within a couple months.
Click to expand...

Yeah. They also spent close to a half billion dollars on Concord. Sony probably spent more marketing Concord than the total budget for Highguard, and they cut Concord's marketing short when it was clear it was a failure.

Concord was probably the biggest failure in gaming history and one of the most expensive "go woke go broke" isntances in history.
Highguard isn't any of that. It's just another bad AA game. We get those all the time.
 
Another case of toxic positivity. Tech artist Josh Sobel said that internal pre-release feedback said, "There is no way this will flop," and "This has mainstream hit written all over it."

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/fps/l...r-we-were-turned-into-a-joke-from-minute-one/

"Internal feedback on Highguard prior to its reveal "was quite positive," Sobel wrote: There was, apparently, a widespread expectation that the game was a sure-fire hit."
 
Armenius said:
Another case of toxic positivity. Tech artist Josh Sobel said that internal pre-release feedback said, "There is no way this will flop," and "This has mainstream hit written all over it."

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/fps/l...r-we-were-turned-into-a-joke-from-minute-one/

"Internal feedback on Highguard prior to its reveal "was quite positive," Sobel wrote: There was, apparently, a widespread expectation that the game was a sure-fire hit."
Click to expand...
And his key takeaway:
In discussions online about Highguard, Concord, 2XKO, and such, it is often pointed out by gamers that devs like to blame gamers for their failures, and that that’s silly. As if gamers have no power. But they do. A lot of it. I’m not saying our failure is purely the fault of gamer culture and that the game would have thrived without the negative discourse, but it absolutely played a role. All products are at the whims of the consumers, and the consumers put absurd amounts of effort into slandering Highguard. And it worked.
Click to expand...
These fucktards never learn.
 
Blade-Runner said:
View attachment 785402

And journalists keep wondering why no one gives a fuck about their opinions.
Click to expand...
some of those parts are funny:

Almost half of the games released on Steam last year received fewer than 10 user reviews. Highguard has done quite well by comparison! It's only a flop next to the very rare games that are immediately massive hits.

Yes and most of the 10,000 movies made in a year do not make 1 millions at the box office (almost all of them will not get an actual theatrical release), that does not mean than a $160 millions budget tentpole sequel making $30 millions cannot be a flop.

Or that part:
The couple thousand concurrent Steam players Highguard has right now puts it in league with those games, and why would it be in a different league?

Why the 200 millions budget game that a failure mean 100 people lost their jobs should be put in a different league for their bar of success or flop than a Straftat, a little unity game made by a team of 2 people.... seem like a parody.

There is nothing exceptionnal for a non-franchise high-risk, high-reward very low lows project like Highguard to flop is an of course and valid point, but quite different than it was not a flop (which just mean its success did not mean expectation and the more certains of its success, the more proud they were of the product pre-launch, the higher the expectation and bigger is the flop, not smaller)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top