Wargs is a dead free to play "MOBA" that seems to have been slapped together with a bit of help from the Unreal Engine (and Unreal Engine asset packs, I think). It's a multiplayer only game where you pick your champion and brawl in RPG-like combat against other players.
Or you would, if there were any. According to Steam DB, the games PEAK player numbers were 3, after which the game consistently has had no players on any given day. Because the game cannot be played (a match is required for a game to start and there's no AI), I can just judge on the rudimentary and unpolished interface, locked resolution and controls, which alone are certainly enough to make a game not worth recommending.
It seems the developers put some depth into the back end game design and the RPG system that the MOBA uses. This is a lot of work to embark on after settling on a disastrous business plan.
Why did this game fail? It's video game autopsy time!
The focus of the game is pure PvP, there's no single player content. The developer gambled that other players would be an acceptable substitute for adding storytelling, level design etc to the game. Developers must learn that other players are not an acceptable subsitute for adding content to a game.
This carries the usual important message that some developers simply don't understand. PvP, other players, are not an acceptable substitute for doing the most important part of your job and adding content to video games. Other players are not the same thing as content. Without single player content to hook players into the PvP mode, it's a pure gamble that your horse will win a race against hundreds of other, bigger, faster horses already running. The developers gambled and lost.
The game does seem to be completely free, I couldn't see any kind of monetisation. If true, that shows great esteem from the developers and demonstrates belief in themselves, their product, and is a great service to the gaming industry. Unfortunately, it seems a lot of work was simply wasted here on a bad premise and a lacklustre implementation. I hope the developers can go on to do bigger and better things, perhaps without gambling so much on "going viral".
[quote][url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Response![/url][/quote]
The developer has weighed in to inform everyone they didn't read the [url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Usage Rules[/url] for Steam "partners", or they deliberately ignored the part where Valve says:
[quote]Though it may be tempting, not every review needs to be responded to. A developer response will frequently draw more attention than the original statement, potentially turning a small issue into a much larger community discussion. It's also not a good idea to use this feature to refute customer opinions. Your direct attention can be seen as validation or a defensive attempt to silence your customers.[/quote]
The developer mentions they lacked sufficient budget to develop a video game but tried anyway... this is certainly a questionable approach to game development that is certain to fail, and that's what's happened here.
The developer seems to be proud of their failure, I don't see how this pride benefits gamers.
The developer doesn't care that their game failed and is largely just wasting space on the Steam marketplace that would be better served by games developed by developers who did the right thing by gamers and had a budget and a realistic plan for success.
The developer indicates that the game will somehow change in a month, I don't believe that will change the dead nature of the multiplayer only game or change the peak player count from the somewhat pitiful number "3".
Edit: The developer once more completely ignores Valve's guidelines for developers to reveal a somewhat awe inspiring level of removal from rational fact and reality.
The developer completely, bizarrely ignores all fact and reason to insist their failed, dead game is "not that bad", and attempts to discredit the review by suggesting I'm "not ready for it". Attacking reviewers instead of accepting and being accountable for failure is a classic sign of a failed, incapable developer.
The developer claims the game is a "non-toxic" MOBA. I agree. It's impossible for a community to be toxic if it doesn't exist. Failure this extreme is nothing to be proud of.
SteamDB shows a very dire, tragic history for this failure, with a dismal player count of only three. This is not a metric I have made up, it's an objective fact that supports the findings of my review. It's preposterous to suggest that a game made available for free to an audience of [b]120 million[/b] Steam gamers, which was only ever played by 3 players at the same time [i]once[/i], is anything but a catastrophic train wreck. Statistically, this game is less popular than pancreatic cancer and mercury poisoning.
I do once more agree, however, with the developer, the game is "on fire". It's a dumpster fire.
It's unclear why the developer is blatantly dishonest here. Is this through deliberate denial of the facts, or general inability to accept the truth? Regardless, reviews are about the games, not the developers, no matter the cause of their apparent delusion. The facts remain and are undeniable and conclusive. This is a dead game of pitiful and unacceptably low quality. I cannot recommend this to other gamers.
Edit 3: For a third time the developer blatantly ignores Valve's guidelines for developers, which are there for a reason. The developer simply seems to wants to say they don't know what they're doing. That does explain the complete and utter failure of this game, but it doesn't excuse it.
