Polygon: Apex Legends has lost its huge momentum

[Famassu]

One of the things that does keep Fortnite interesting are all the changes to pretty much every aspect of the game that keep things fresh. I don't think a Battle Royale has much longetivity (to me) if I had to play in the exact same environments with the exact same weapons and items week in, week out.

New areas both big (season starting big ones completely remake 1/4h of the map nowadays and bring a plethora of smaller changes all over the map) and small (all season long there are some fun small changes in the world that are neat to notice as you explore often trodden paths) can alter your preferred landing spots and routes when going to the next safe area.

New weapons/items and balancing to old weapons can bring in new ways of playing or make old previously useless weapons viable.

New shit altogether that bring in a completely new element. Like most recently they added a hamster ball with a grappling hook kind of thing. While it's not the best item from a balance POV, it's fucking fun and makes zipping around environments feel like you're playing a Spider-Man game, when you're nailing those grappling hook shots and swinging through the air.

Of course this constant change isn't always a good thing when some weapons become ridiculously OP or new mechanics don't take into account that they disrupt the meta perhaps a bit too much or are balanced too poorly. Like planes. Initially they wrecked EVERYTHING by just flying through shit undamaged and you took no damage if you were in one when it exploded, and the accuracy of its guns were maybe a bit too high as well. After a couple of balance patches they became a bit more tolerable. The hamster ball is also a bit problematic, especially in pro games.

 

[Deleted member 11943]

I think it needs Titans. That would have helped. Once the dust settled on their enhancements to the BR formula, you may as well go back to what you were playing before.

It would have been perfect for on boarding new players to the genre, but there aren't so many of those left.

 

[JuicyPlayer]

Stats like kills with ****** weapon or character wins shouldn't be locked behind a battle pass level up.

 

[Hurting Bomb]

That's not what I think of as depth at least. What I mean by lack of depth is that after the first 20-30 games all you can improve at is how good you are at shooting people. You know where all the loot spots are and now you just fight. It gets boring.

I mean compare it to something like Dota. It'll take hundreds of games just to learn the basics of what each hero does. Hundreds more to realize the basics of proper positioning, decision making, what heroes to pick in certain situations, etc.

Same with counter-strike. Learning flash spots, smoke spots, basic strats, positioning, crosshair placement, general map knowledge of 8-9 maps takes hundreds and hundreds of hours on top of being even more aim dependent than apex.

This is true for quake, halo, LoL, overwatch, world of warcraft, even CoD as well.

All of these BR games are incredibly disposable. There's no deep knowledge of the game that keeps you hooked for hundreds of hours. You just move on to the next BR (with fortnite building as an exception).

Click to shrink...

Hmmmm.....

Really don't agree with this, Apex has massive depth in its gameplay. It is a very skilled shooter with a high skill ceiling (the TTK helps), the movement system, the characters that play differently and every game is different.

Also, i see you put COD in there as an example of a shooter with depth.....

 

[Nocturno]

The game took the industry by storm, but no one even understood why.

I'm glad that Respawn did well, but it bothers me that a vastly inferior version of Titanfall got more recognition.

 

[spootime]

Not necessarily! Depth isn't about skill, it's about decisions--and not just the number of decisions available, but the quality of them and how impactful they are.

There's a lot of intricacy to decisionmaking in BR games, from macro-level stuff like what route you want to take to get from A to B, to micro-level decisions like whether you should smoke before you heal. This is really pronounced in a game like PUBG where the map is much larger, mobility is limited, and lethality is high so there's always a clear cause-effect relationship between your decisions and their consequences..

Apex is kind of the opposite to PUBG on all of the above, where they really overindex on micro-level decisions and there's not much strategy per match. So this leads to really exciting, crunchy moment-to-moment gameplay but limited variability between sessions, and in the long term, this means your matches aren't going to be as memorable or interesting. Ironically, this is the same issue they had with both Titanfall 1 and 2.

Click to shrink...

Cant it be about both? Saying its only about "decisions" seems somewhat reductive because some games need you to acquire a good amount of knowledge before you can even make educated decisions (like Moba's). For instance if you don't know a preset angle to throw a smoke in counterstrike there's a decision available to the player but they are unaware of it. I would put knowledge acquisition under "skill" moreso than decision making. The fact that I have an advantage over players who didn't bother to learn and memorize that information is personally attractive to me as a player. Maybe we're just arguing semantics though?

I totally agree with everything else you said. Once you get to a certain level in Apex winning isn't interesting anymore, your only goal is to get as many kills as possible. At that point your only objective is to find routes that maximize the number of people you run into and sprinting towards gunfire whenever you hear it. And yeah, I don't think about things like when I smoke on Bangalore, its a subconscious decision I make in the heat of the moment.

Hmmmm.....

Really don't agree with this, Apex has massive depth in its gameplay. It is a very skilled shooter with a high skill ceiling (the TTK helps), the movement system, the characters that play differently and every game is different.

Also, i see you put COD in there as an example of a shooter with depth.....

Click to shrink...

I'm not saying it doesn't require skill, I'm just saying its not deep. Every game is the exact same - you run around in a preset pattern listening for gunfire or trying to find people and you rack up as many kills as possible.

And yeah, COD does have at least some depth in S&D mode even if its a budget counterstrike.

 

[Jakisthe]

That's not what I think of as depth at least. What I mean by lack of depth is that after the first 20-30 games all you can improve at is how good you are at shooting people. You know where all the loot spots are and now you just fight. It gets boring.

I mean compare it to something like Dota. It'll take hundreds of games just to learn the basics of what each hero does. Hundreds more to realize the basics of proper positioning, decision making, what heroes to pick in certain situations, etc.

Same with counter-strike. Learning flash spots, smoke spots, basic strats, positioning, crosshair placement, general map knowledge of 8-9 maps takes hundreds and hundreds of hours on top of being even more aim dependent than apex.

This is true for quake, halo, LoL, overwatch, world of warcraft, even CoD as well.

All of these BR games are incredibly disposable. There's no deep knowledge of the game that keeps you hooked for hundreds of hours. You just move on to the next BR (with fortnite building as an exception).

Click to shrink...

How does Apex not have a need for map knowledge and gameflow? You could just as easily say that the main Apex map is made up of 8-9 other smaller maps, and there's plenty to wrap your head around with the various items, movement mechanics, in-match progression dynamics, abilities, and projectile ballistics.

I fail to see how some games have what you'd call depth, and then something like Apex doesn't, apparently just because it's map is larger. Do people not run around in preset patterns listening for gunfire in other games?

 

[Arsic]

I'm back in PUBG . I really wish Ring of Elysium took off... that game fixes so many issues with BR. Lack of console and hype buried it.

Spawn with a gun, see if it's a hot drop or not before spawning , runs like butter , and amazing weapon balance. Plus how you can win is slick . Oh and it's a faster paced PUBG too.

RoE deserves better. Apex dying off to me is no sweat. It's like every REspawn product : fun for a month then forgotten.

 

[spootime]

How does Apex not have a need for map knowledge and gameflow? You could just as easily say that the main Apex map is made up of 8-9 other smaller maps, and there's plenty to wrap your head around with the various items, movement mechanics, in-match progression dynamics, abilities, and projectile ballistics.

Click to shrink...

Because there isn't much to learn about the Apex map. You figure out where the good stuff spawns and where to drop and where to go after that pretty quickly. There's more to learn about de_train in CS than the entirety of the Apex map. You dont need to know what surfaces you can shoot through. You can't predict whether an enemy will be hiding in a corner and pre-grenade it (people dont hide in corners in apex anyway). You can't memorize a perfect smoke spot down to the pixel and cut off a part of the map.

What exactly is there to wrap your head around with the various items? Theyre the same items you've been using in battle royale games for the past five years. You've got shields and HP items and weapons.

I'll agree the movement mechanics are fun and engaging, theyre by far the best part of apex.

I dont know what an in-match progression dynamic is. If youre referring to the shrinking circle I dont think thats particularly difficult to understand

I fail to see how some games have what you'd call depth, and then something like Apex doesn't, apparently just because it's map is larger. Do people not run around in preset patterns listening for gunfire in other games?

Click to shrink...

Well I never said that those games have depth and apex doesn't because apex's map is larger. But no, none of the games I listed has their main objective be "run around and try to find people to shoot at." Dota 2 for example has ~500 abilities that you want to have somewhat memorized. That takes months and months. Quake requires you to basically keep five timers in your head running at the same time so you know when items will spawn.

At the end of the day isn't that kind of the appeal of battle royale games? They're incredibly accessible. You don't have to really learn anything - you fall out of the plane, pick up a gun and start shooting.

I'm not even trying to shit on apex, it's a great game and I played a good amount of it when it first came out. I just have no desire to keep playing it long-term. If others feel differently then hey, good for them

 

[nomis]

fortnite is like fucking mcdonalds, they just keep churning out bottom of the barrel cosmetics and the base game isn't even good, but because it's "new stuff", other teams are somehow expected to meet that pace of production, even when they have actual quality standards

 

[Rodelero]

At the end of the day isn't that kind of the appeal of battle royale games? They're incredibly accessible. You don't have to really learn anything - you fall out of the plane, pick up a gun and start shooting.

Click to shrink...

None of the current Battle Royale games are particularly accessible. Most people's first experience of Battle Royale is about as brutal as most people's first experience of a From Software game. There's a lot to learn to be good at any of these games. Yes, the overall concept/objective is fairly simple, but actually succeeding with any consistency requires a wider range of skills than that you need in pretty much any other type of multiplayer shooter.

 

[Jakisthe]

Because there isn't much to learn about the Apex map. You figure out where the good stuff spawns and where to drop and where to go after that pretty quickly. There's more to learn about de_train in CS than the entirety of the Apex map. You dont need to know what surfaces you can shoot through. You can't predict whether an enemy will be hiding in a corner and pre-grenade it (people dont hide in corners in apex anyway). You can't memorize a perfect smoke spot down to the pixel and cut off a part of the map.

What exactly is there to wrap your head around with the various items? Theyre the same items you've been using in battle royale games for the past five years. You've got shields and HP items and weapons.

I'll agree the movement mechanics are fun and engaging, theyre by far the best part of apex.

I dont know what an in-match progression dynamic is. If youre referring to the shrinking circle I dont think thats particularly difficult to understand



Well I never said that those games have depth and apex doesn't because apex's map is larger. But no, none of the games I listed has their main objective be "run around and try to find people to shoot at." Dota 2 for example has ~500 abilities that you want to have somewhat memorized. That takes months and months. Quake requires you to basically keep five timers in your head running at the same time so you know when items will spawn.

At the end of the day isn't that kind of the appeal of battle royale games? They're incredibly accessible. You don't have to really learn anything - you fall out of the plane, pick up a gun and start shooting.

I'm not even trying to shit on apex, it's a great game and I played a good amount of it when it first came out. I just have no desire to keep playing it long-term. If others feel differently then hey, good for them

Click to shrink...

Why isn't there much to learn on the map? What makes it any different from any other map, except that Apex is much larger and has a lot more to learn? Does one not need to know gameflow through the architecture or likely paths of movement? Does one not need to know how smoke grenades block off certain areas? Is there being such a set way to go about it in something like CS a good thing, or is that a limit to the depth because it's already been figured out and is now reduced down to rote memorization?
Not every game has surfaces you can shoot through, but, for instance, you don't need to know which surfaces you can clamber up in CS. You can absolutely try to guess where enemies rotate to in the maps, so pre-grenading is a thing there too. It hasn't gotten to that point because there's less of a need to do so, because the game isn't years and years old, but it's absolutely part of the potential strategy. What makes the items necessarily less in depth than, say, a grenade in Halo? In match progression being how weapon spawns and loadouts for people change and get better over time - something that doesn't happen in CS.

So far everything - absolutely everything - you've said that other games have can be applied to Apex as well. It has utilizing items to impact other players. It has hitboxes which are also down to the pixel. It has movement through maps on both a strategic and tactical level, and a need to understand the game flow. It has handling dynamics. It has meta strategies. It has cooldowns and timing.

I don't think Apex is the end all be all of shooters, but to say that it somehow lacks depth by dint of being a BR and that everything else has just so much of it just smacks of not knowing the genre or game. And I haven't even played Apex.

 

[ByWatterson]

Speaking as someone who barely touched Fortnite, and almost got into Apex, and who has a long history with Destiny, here's my take:

Progression, or something that mirrors it, is crucial to service games - really all games - today. Fortnite doesn't have progression, per se, but the combination of cool cosmetics, building, and constant change makes the game feel as fresh as progression, if not fresher.

Apex nails gameplay only, which is HUGE (hence its initial meteoric success), but lacks a hook beyond that to keep people playing; that is, to keep people invested.

 

[Not Spaceghost]

I still prefer apex to any other battle royale game. It's not perfect but it is what i want. I don't like tons of balance updates, i don't need new maps and guns every month, as long as the game is relatively big free in its normal interaction then i am good.

Granted apex has gotten buggier but it's never gonna be pubg levels of disaster.

 

[Legacy]

I still enjoy the game but battle pass killed my hype somewhat

 

[spootime]

Why isn't there much to learn on the map? What makes it any different from any other map, except that Apex is much larger and has a lot more to learn? Does one not need to know gameflow through the architecture or likely paths of movement? Does one not need to know how smoke grenades block off certain areas? Is there being such a set way to go about it in something like CS a good thing, or is that a limit to the depth because it's already been figured out and is now reduced down to rote memorization?
Not every game has surfaces you can shoot through, but, for instance, you don't need to know which surfaces you can clamber up in CS. You can absolutely try to guess where enemies rotate to in the maps, so pre-grenading is a thing there too. It hasn't gotten to that point because there's less of a need to do so, because the game isn't years and years old, but it's absolutely part of the potential strategy. What makes the items necessarily less in depth than, say, a grenade in Halo? In match progression being how weapon spawns and loadouts for people change and get better over time - something that doesn't happen in CS.

So far everything - absolutely everything - you've said that other games have can be applied to Apex as well. It has utilizing items to impact other players. It has hitboxes which are also down to the pixel. It has movement through maps on both a strategic and tactical level, and a need to understand the game flow. It has handling dynamics. It has meta strategies. It has cooldowns and timing.

I don't think Apex is the end all be all of shooters, but to say that it somehow lacks depth by dint of being a BR and that everything else has just so much of it just smacks of not knowing the genre or game. And I haven't even played Apex.

Click to shrink...

I mean honestly dont you think its a little silly to even have this argument if you've never played the game. Not to toot my own horn but im pretty damn good at apex, none of what you're saying is relevant

 

[Jakisthe]

I mean honestly dont you think its a little silly to even have this argument if you've never played the game. Not to toot my own horn but im pretty damn good at apex, none of what you're saying is relevant

Click to shrink...

Oh please. People can see all kinds of mechanics and depth from watching and reading stuff. I don't need to have played Starcraft 2 professionally to be able to speak to metas, balance and depth. I don't need to be level 100 to have seen pre-grenading, smoking out, rotation patterns, etc. None of your points have covered things like handling, although I also know how the various spray patterns and stats there work too.

 

[IIFloodyII]

I know a lot of saying it's because Respawn, but I think it shows just how good a job EPIC do with Fortnite more than Respawn failing, their continued support led to it blowing up and they've never really slowed down, constantly adding and removing stuff (not always for the better mind, but they hit more than they miss overall), always having in-game events with free rewards, very good BattlePasses, with very fair pricing, buy 1 and you never need to buy another if you play fairly often. They set an incredibly high standard to match up to.

 

[Salty AF]

I play Apex all the time and I love it but Respawn should've been dropping new modes into the game by this point. I don't think we need another character or weapon as much as I think we just need more modes to keep things fun and fresh.

It could be something simple like duos. Or maybe do quads. Anything.

The people like myself who loved Titanfall were also hoping there'd be a mode where it'd involve Titans. Slap a boss Titan somewhere on the map and who ever kills it gets X legendary armor.

This being said - the game isn't dead. It's doing well. But they have to start moving on the fucking updates ASAP.

 

[Ehoavash]

Let me play solo and maybe I'll try it again

 

[Deleted member 18379]

Seemed to me like it's momentum was part manufactured by sponsoring big name streamers and part curiosity due to it being f2p. No surprise that both of those things ran out and people returned to the other things they enjoyed more. A poor battle pass feels like the cherry on top, just an extra reason to move on.

These days, enjoying a game like this for 50 hours or so is seen as a failure. You have to hook people for years. It's screwed up, but also what the gaming industry has been pushing for years. So idk. Maybe Apex will come back, but they need to deliver the service part of their gaas game.

 

[Gestault]

Don't you want the prize for reaching level 25 in your paid battle-pass to be a panel that says your damage count on a loading screen?

 

[Abstrusity]

As soon as I learned you stop receiving apex packs after level 100 for leveling up, I lost all interest. :/

 

[ShrtAttnGmr]

Polygon's article is using twitch viewership as the primary metric for success, and is coupling it with reddit user complaints to create a narrative they want. This is being presented as a fact instead of what it is, potential signs of faltering. They admit that they don't have any information from Respawn/EA and are just playing armchair analyst with anecdotal information. Not really knowing how the game is doing doesn't drive clicks or conversation, and probably wouldn't have gotten this thread made.

Just considering other factors, and the twitch viewership drop makes sense. When a game launches, more people are streaming and watching. EA also paid big streamers to get the visibility of Apex up.

Using Polygon's source, Apex is #5 on Twitch for "Most Watched" games, ahead of CS:GO, Overwatch, and the just released Sekiro. That sounds pretty good to me.

 

[Ωλ7XL9]

Apex Legends has robbed my time from finishing RDR2, starting Nier Automata and Resident Evil 2 :(

 

[PeskyToaster]

For me, the moment-to-moment gameplay of a shootout felt worse than something like Call of Duty (or the main Titanfall games) which made it less fun to play after the initial positive feelings about all the QoL changes. It's like Overwatch, just a chore to kill anyone.

 

[False Witness]

Epic left the STW portion of Fortnite for dead to go fulltime on Fortnite BR to be able to do these things.

Click to shrink...

Very big misconception. Epic has been working on StW the entire time and has added and changed a whole lot of stuff over the last year. They've redone the UI, added an entire story section, regularly rotate in new mission types, completely overhauled the hero loadout system, released multiple mini-story events, and regularly release new heroes and weapons.

 

[Freedonia]

Apex has had issues with its progression system since its launch, and the battle pass was incredibly underwhelming but the rest of the game just does everything so right. Most of my gaming time is spent on online shooters, and it's hard to play anything else without feeling that I'm wasting my time on a game that could be better spent on Apex. Apex nails it's movement physics, TTK, and gunplay, plus you have the coordinated drops, respawns, in-game balance that seeks to make weapons and character abilities situational, a map that is fun to play on, and a more aggressive pace where fights are decided up-close rather than getting one-shot from a sniper. I still don't consider myself much of a BR fan as I honestly prefer more traditional MP, but Apex nails the team dynamic so well that it feels more like a large scale game of squad TDM.

I played Blackout with a friend the other night since we use to play that before Apex, and it's hard to go back to forced fighting behind trees, and getting one-shot by a sniper while I'm looking for the next fight. Same thing with BFV conquest: it's hard to want to carry a 32 player team while I'm dying constantly to people who are camping corners as they go prone with a LMG. I'd rather just go play Apex where I, at-most, only have to carry two people, and if I die then at least it wasn't getting one-shot by a camper that I couldn't see because of some visability issue. Dying isn't even a big issue anyway, since Apex has lighting fast matchmaking compared to everyone else (I also think Apex deserves an award just for getting rid of the waiting room that every BR has).

I'm rambling here, but I still love Apex and think it's a great game. It's the first shooter to give me that jolt since Overwatch and Rainbow 6, and I know I'll be sticking with it. It took Respawn a while to start giving Titanfall 2 the support it needed, but once they did the updates were generally excellent. Hopefully that'll be the case here, and hopefully those updates will come sooner than later

 

[Duffking]

Polygon's article is using twitch viewership as the primary metric for success, and is coupling it with reddit user complaints to create a narrative they want. This is being presented as a fact instead of what it is, potential signs of faltering. They admit that they don't have any information from Respawn/EA and are just playing armchair analyst with anecdotal information. Not really knowing how the game is doing doesn't drive clicks or conversation, and probably wouldn't have gotten this thread made.

Just considering other factors, and the twitch viewership drop makes sense. When a game launches, more people are streaming and watching. EA also paid big streamers to get the visibility of Apex up.

Using Polygon's source, Apex is #5 on Twitch for "Most Watched" games, ahead of CS:GO, Overwatch, and the just released Sekiro. That sounds pretty good to me.

Click to shrink...

Pretty much. The game is obviously still extremely popular with large numbers of concurrent players playing it even though they've hit level 100, regardless of anecdotal evidence of the odd player who stopped. Twitch viewers is a terrible metric, and claiming a game is not doing well because it's "only" comparable to other games which have fucking millions of players is absurd. The article comes across as willing a game that's doing fine in spite of some disappointments to fail, frankly. A failed game gets clicks, a game that just keeps going but isn't doing Fortnite's numbers doesn't.

That's why you don't get articles every day about CSGO, Warframe or Siege on Polygon. They're doing great. But they're not #1, and just because they're #1 doesn't mean they're failing, but they're not gonna get a lot of clicks. But a narrative where one is a failure means lots of articles.

 

[dmgdbug]

if i based dota's lifespan on twitch metrics, i'd call it a dead game too.

 

[Falchion]

I'd rather update slower unless it's game breaking.

 

[Love Machine]

Sad to hear. I wasn't affected by the patch issues, but it does seem wanting for some content/updates in general.
I was probably never going to get the BP, but after seeing the content I felt sorry for friends who were more invested in the game (and had more disposable income).

I still play with them regularly, as it can be really good fun (the only BR game that's held my attention), but I feel the interest is slowly waning. Hope Respawn can keep it alive.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Put me on the list of people that the battlepass killed my hype. Played it religiously for a while but good lord that pass sucked. I still play here and there but I'm not thinking about it all day and constantly itching to play like I was. That said, I've also just been too busy to play much games but they just really shit the bed with that battlepass. I'll play more often if they give me a good reason to. Otherwise it was fun while it lasted.

 

[Garou]

Can confirm the same for me, was quite into the game the first 2 weeks, then fell off hard.

What bothered me the most was the lack of Cross-progression, their official excuse for the lack of it is plain bullshit and simply unacceptable.

 

[nikwhatsup]

Still like the gameplay a lot. However, the battle pass kind of killed the vibe. It feels like the progression is super slow.

 

[Danielsan]

They lost me after the season pass. I bought the pass, but regret it. The rewards are just shit. Also after over 100 hours, shit just got stale.

 

[Nostradamus]

It just shows how difficult it is to sustain such a development cycle. Fortnite, for all its bugs and sometimes bullshit items, is an incredible feat, and most people that complain deep inside prefer such an update cycle. People play these games for tens of hours per week and no matter how good gameplay is, it can become stale.

 

[Serious Sam]

if i based dota's lifespan on twitch metrics, i'd call it a dead game too.

Click to shrink...

What's wrong with Dota? It's healthy #4 on Twitch right now.

 

[Rickenslacker]

I'm back in PUBG . I really wish Ring of Elysium took off... that game fixes so many issues with BR. Lack of console and hype buried it.

Spawn with a gun, see if it's a hot drop or not before spawning , runs like butter , and amazing weapon balance. Plus how you can win is slick . Oh and it's a faster paced PUBG too.

RoE deserves better. Apex dying off to me is no sweat. It's like every REspawn product : fun for a month then forgotten.

Click to shrink...

I tried going back to PUBG, but I can't. Way too slow to get going and it's practically dead in the times I'm trying to play while Apex gets a match started in seconds.

 

[Cynn]

I play Apex all the time and I love it but Respawn should've been dropping new modes into the game by this point. I don't think we need another character or weapon as much as I think we just need more modes to keep things fun and fresh.

It could be something simple like duos. Or maybe do quads. Anything.

The people like myself who loved Titanfall were also hoping there'd be a mode where it'd involve Titans. Slap a boss Titan somewhere on the map and who ever kills it gets X legendary armor.

This being said - the game isn't dead. It's doing well. But they have to start moving on the fucking updates ASAP.

Click to shrink...

I would like Duos mode for sure. I play regularly with a friend and less randoms would be great. Plus I think the game could work very well 2v2. Lots of ability combinations that could be used.

 

[Nostradamus]

fortnite is like fucking mcdonalds, they just keep churning out bottom of the barrel cosmetics and the base game isn't even good, but because it's "new stuff", other teams are somehow expected to meet that pace of production, even when they have actual quality standards

Click to shrink...

The thing is, even these "bottom of the barrel" cosmetics are 1000x better than the ones offered by other games. The Battle Pass of Apex Legends is complete trash for example. Also, Epic has offered free cosmetics or challenges that lead to free cosmetics of even whole Battle Passes multiple times. And as for the overall quality of the game, the core gameplay is ingenious and that's what keeps everyone invested.

 

[qrac]

While I do agree Apex could be updated more often, Fortnite's pace is unsustainable for most teams and are often just change for change's sake.

Click to shrink...

A fun multiplayer game changes those things all so often. Look at fortnite, look at league of legends. If the players need to adapt to subtle changes to keep their top place they will, that is a challenge in itself, to adapt. Bad players can't do that.

 

[Deleted member 2809]

if i based dota's lifespan on twitch metrics, i'd call it a dead game too.

Click to shrink...

Dota is quite dead compared to its peak

 

[BernardoOne]

Dota is quite dead compared to its peak

Click to shrink...

No it isn't rofl

 

[DixieDean82]

The Battle Royale craze has cooled off considerably. Fortnite will be big for years, but I'm really not sure of the rest. And I certainly don't see much appetite for any more contenders.

There are even rumors that MW4 won't have a BR mode at all. Blackout looks like it has underperformed.

 

[Deleted member 34132]

Dota is quite dead compared to its peak

Click to shrink...

Right now it has 629,000 concurrent players... 24 hour peak is 870,000. If this is "quite dead" for you, then every other multiplayer game except Fortnite and LoL is already buried.

 

[Dhuggs_]

I used to play it with my friend constantly and we were super hyped for the Battle Pass. It was a huge disappointment for me and my friend, he still plays it and loves it, but I have no interest to play it hours on end. I'm back to catching up on my backlog. Also, the fact that nothing has been done about quitters has pissed me off as well, my friend and I will have a random who as soon as they die, they just leave. Very frustrating.

 

[Onikage]

I still love the game and play it a lot.

They just need to add a ranking system.

 

[Serious Sam]

Dota is quite dead compared to its peak

Click to shrink...

Bullshit. Dota 2 is #1 played game on Steam.

 

[Pillock]

I honestly had no idea that Battlepasses were so important to these games. I thought greatgame play would be why people played not the carrot of a new outfit.

It still has near 2,5 million people playing according to this website https://playercounter.com/apex-legends/ not to bad really.