Highguard's Grand Theory: Did Too Much 'Sweat' Scare Off the Casuals, Or Was It a Spell Gone Awry?
AI Gaming News Author · kotaku ·
The designer blamed "sweaty" competitive play
Right, so I’ve been tinkering with the curious case of Wildlight Entertainment’s hero shooter, *Highguard*, all morning, and bloody hell, it’s wilder than it first appeared. You know that feeling when you cast a spell and it works a bit *too* well, but in a way that accidentally closes the portal to half your potential audience? Yeah, that might just be *Highguard’s* story, according to one of its own creators.
A recent piece by Ethan Gach over on Kotaku, sharing insights from the Quad Damage podcast (and found), brought to light some rather candid thoughts from Alex Graner, a senior level designer at Wildlight. His theory for why so many players bounced off *Highguard* faster than a rogue goblin from a spring trap? It was too ‘sweaty’ for casual players. Now, that's a phrase that makes you sit up and take notice, doesn't it?
Graner reckons that the 3v3 duos format, which was core to *Highguard's* initial identity, demanded a level of intense communication and coordination that just left no room for a bit of casual larking about. “3v3 duos is always the sweatiest version of anything like battle royale, objective modes, wingman, you know it, you name it,” he told the podcast. And honestly, mate, he's not wrong. It’s like trying to perfectly choreograph a dragon-slaying ballet with two random blokes you just met in a tavern – noble intention, but usually ends in fire and regret.
From a player's perspective, this hits home like a well-aimed headshot. *Highguard* apparently boasts a high time-to-kill (TTK), partly due to its armour loot economy. This isn't a game where one wizard can suddenly turn into a one-person wrecking crew and wipe out an entire enemy team solo. Nah, if you're outnumbered, you're pretty much toast. The game fundamentally nudges you towards setting up calculated 2v1 scenarios, pressing advantages, and working together like a perfectly synced magical trio. It’s glorious when it clicks, absolutely fair dinkum, but you need that tight-knit crew, probably on voice chat, strategising like your lives depend on it. Trying that solo? Sounds less like a game and more like a frustrating exercise in digital futility.
But the 'sweat' wasn't just about teamwork; it was also the sheer complexity of it all. Graner pointed out that *Highguard* throws a lot of rules and stages at you: looting, chasing objectives, planting objectives, overtime – it’s a whole saga. “It has all these rules, which I think works at a really high level, but when players are first coming in it’s a lot to grasp,” he said. Imagine trying to explain the entire lore of an ancient fantasy world, its complex economic system, and the political intricacies of its various factions to someone who just wanted to bash a few goblins. Overwhelming, right? Add to that a requirement for high-skill movement and shooting, and you’ve got an entry bar higher than a wizard’s tower built on a mountain peak. If your teammates aren't playing ball, or you just have a few off-games, you're going to get steamrolled, and that's a quick trip to the 'uninstall' button for many.
“It’s all designed to be a team-based shooter,” Graner concluded, hitting the nail on the head. “People just kind of turned it off because they didn’t have the team.” It's the human story behind the corporate announcement – players just couldn't find their tribe, or perhaps the game didn't offer an accessible enough way for them to *be* tribal.
Now, Wildlight has seemingly tried to address this, pivoting to 5v5 modes and even introducing a 'Raid Rush' mode that completely ditches the 3v3 format and strips out some of the unique multi-phase elements, turning it into something akin to *Counter-Strike*. My inner digital wizard can’t help but be a little skeptical here. Is this a clever recalibration, or have they, in trying to make it less 'sweaty', thrown the baby out with the bathwater? While a more straightforward 5v5 might lower the immediate barrier to entry, it also risks losing what made *Highguard* *Highguard* in the first place. Are they fixing the 'sweat' problem by simply becoming... another game?
This whole situation echoes similar challenges faced by other complex team-based games (Graner himself referenced *Marathon*). Live-service titles, bless their ambitious hearts, live and die by their ability to attract and retain a consistent player base. When initial impressions are tough, and a major backer like Tencent reportedly bails, it's a grim sign. *Highguard* is currently clinging on for dear life with a core team of just 20 developers. It's a stark reminder that even with genuinely interesting ideas, if the onboarding experience and accessibility aren't nailed down for a broad audience, it's an uphill battle.
So, what happens if you design a game for wizards, but most of your potential players are just curious apprentices? You either teach them a whole lot of spells really quickly, or you risk them wandering off to find a simpler magic. *Highguard’s* journey is far from over, but it’s a fascinating case study in balancing ambition with accessibility. Let's hope those remaining 20 wizards can conjure up a sustainable future.
Original article: kotaku