[quote][b]Note: Dead PvP game[/b]
This game contains no meaningful single player content. There's no viably populated servers/active player population. This game cannot be played as intended.[/quote]
This is a laughably bad 2D retrocrap (I'm not completely sure if they were trying to make this pixelcrap or if they were going for an MS-Paint aesthetic... maybe both) where you're in small arenas and you have to knock out the other opponents... there are no other opponents.
It's a dead PvP game, and it's time for us to have a post-mortem to see some of the reasons this failed.
[i]Most PvP games on Steam fail.[/i] Very few of them ever go viral. This game failed because the developer expected it to become "virally" popular without creating any actual reason or compelling features. This doesn't do anything that other games already do better.
There's fierce competition in the PvP game arena... and I'm not referring to players fighting other players. There's thousands of PvP-only games but only a tiny handful of them are successful enough to attract and keep a wide player base. This game failed to compete and didn't get enough people to stay active. Despite being free, it did not have what it takes, it's as simple as that.
First and foremost, there's no meaningful single player content. The developer gambled that other players would be an acceptable substitute for adding storytelling, level design etc to the Game. They lost that bet.
Without a huge community of players or single player content to add a lasting value to the game, the game dies.
Developers must learn that other players are not an acceptable substitute for adding content to a game.
The game is really simple and unambitious in terms of implementation, more of a tech demo or one of those cases where an amateur developer spends $100 to publish something on Steam Direct to see if it's possible. Yes, obviously it's possible. A proof of concept, tech demo, or something that's less than a little blip on the radar isn't offering anything truly valuable to gamers.
In terms of visuals, this features really godawful MS-Paint tier "art" instead of real graphics. It's hard to say if this was because the developer didn't have the skill to do the job of creating 3D visuals, or couldn't afford to hire someone who does, but it also doesn't matter. What matters is that this looks much worse than most other games because of that decision, and that's a major deterrent to gamers. The deplorably bad visuals here come across as an insult to gamers.
Let's talk about pricing and the actual value this has for gamers.
There's no initial download price, but the developer was charging $5 USD for this.
Price barriers, especially on low quality products, can be a direct cause of failure. It seems like a nice gesture for the game to have no up-front cost anymore, but it also tells us that the game wasn't good enough to succeed as a paid product. This is also a bit of a slap in the face to anyone who showed enough questionable judgement to pay money for this... nobody got refunded.
Despite having no up-front cost, this failed to appeal to the 130 million+ gamers on Steam. SteamDB shows this peaked at [b]only 6 concurrent players[/b]... this is a dismal public reception. This was so bad they couldn't even give it away.
All other issues aside (any of which would disqualify this from being worth your time), this is a game that relies on other players for it to be viable, and because there's not enough players, it's not viable. I can't recommend anyone downloads this, it's basically dead.
