Most of us, if not all of us, are playing some form of battle royale game. We fire up Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds and Fortnite every week trying to survive against 99 other players.
Then there are some people who still play that broken game H1Z1, which is funny really.
We have only seen lower tier studios building these simple, yet exciting battle royale games, but what if one of the big dogs start barking and toting their statures to assert dominance?
In 2018, the implementation of a BR mode in a AAA title could very well emerge. The two franchises creating quite the buzz (or lack thereof) are Call of Duty Black Ops 4 and Battlefield. According to Polygon, the next CoD will have no single campaign for whatever reason. Could it be that not enough players are playing/completing the campaign or because they know multiplayer is where the real money is? Or is it because it is so behind schedule that they are botching the whole thing?
We do know they are focusing on zombies and multiplayer because well, that is where everyone spends their time in all honesty.
This is fair though, why spend millions on a campaign not many people are going to play? Or not enough to justify a campaign. Could CoD go down the BR path? I could see it.
They have great mechanics, massive array of weapons, care packages, and a stable multiplayer platform (mostly). The only issue I see them having is supplying a large map for the game mode. They are used to having 12 players on a fast map, that is all they have ever had, small maps for fast paced games. It is tough to think they would make a map large enough for a 100-player halo drop. It could be too large for them and a lot of problems can arise. I can see them implementing a 50-player pool on a smaller map than what we are used to in BR games.
That could persuade me to buy a Call of Duty game since Advanced Warfare, even though it is futuristic.
Battlefield is going to be progressing from World War I to World War II this year. I would be ecstatic if Battlefield went the battle royale route. Parachuting down into the Ardennes Forest, rummaging through snow covered fortifications and building trying to survive in one of the most historic locations in the war. This location is mainstream but if EA handles this the way they handled Battlefield I, then we could hit spots we haven’t seen in any WWII game yet. The battle for Korea and China, skirmishes in Manchuria, fighting off the Russians in Finland. So many opportunities to do something unique with a genre that tends to get beat into the ground.
My point here isn’t to get overexcited about what they bring in single player or multiplayer, but they have the tools to pull off a 100 player BR mode. Their maps are large, not huge, but large. They have vehicles, jeeps, and various types of tanks/fighting vehicles.
Don’t forget destructible environments! I know Fortnite has this too, but Battlefield is just a beautiful game and they do a great job with destroying the scenery they worked hard on.
I believe that Battlefield could be the franchise that dethrones PUBG in their own arena. They would have better visuals, better affects, stable servers (given they can make their maps just a bit larger), and WWII. I believe we would see Battlefield V and Fortnite at the top of the Twitch directory and PUBG slipping.
We don’t know how long the battle royale train is going to keep on chugging along, so if we are going to see a BR mode in either of these titles in one form or another, it will be this year.
Or nothing happens.