[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]
[quote][b][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_flip]Warning: Asset Flip![/url][/b]
"Warfare : Battleground™" is one of literally thousands of creatively bankrupt asset flips infesting Steam and lowering the average quality of all video games everywhere.[/quote]
This was a very lazy Russian asset flip, a bunch of stock FPS assets plagiarised off the Unity Asset Store and dropped on a basic first person PvP shooter game template, accompanied by a price tag and utter failure. I mean, gamers can smell an asset flip from a mile away, and when it's just a contentless ripoff of about 0.5% of other, far more successful games, it's going to be a disaster just like this.
I think every single game developer in the world should be forced to play at least one garbage asset flip like this before they're allowed to publish their own games to get a better understanding about the market that's already saturated with far better products. Do people really think there's a market for a ripoff of someone else's game but delivers less than 1% of the content?
So, "Warfare : Battleground™" is partially or completely made up of stock assets, "borrowed" from asset stores and free asset websites. Little, if anything in this game is the creation of the "developer".
While there's no up front price for this asset flip, the other problem with asset flips is that when developers aren't capable of doing their job and creating high quality assets, it's also true they can't do any of the rest of the job of a game developer either. That's definitely true for "Warfare : Battleground™", and this kind of asset flipping never results in games that have quality or value for PC gamers.
Now on to pricing and value for gamers.
There's no initial download price, but the developer was charging $1 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.
In terms of public reception, this failed. There's over 130 million unique gamers visiting Steam every month. SteamDB showed the game peaked at [b]only 11 concurrent players[/b]... this is a dismal public reception. This was so bad they couldn't even give it away.
Since free games don't contribute to your game collector badge and other profile stuff, is this a worthwhile addition to your Steam library?
Nope. This isn't worth downloading. I didn't pay money, but I still feel ripped off.
