Do We Need Another Battle Royale Game? Mavericks: Proving Grounds Argues We Do

Posted by March 25, 2018 Comment


Mavericks is another battle royale shooter in a world filled with battle royale shooters — and that is going to be its biggest obstacle. However, because Mavericks is being run on Improbable’s SpatialOS (using Cryengine instead of Unreal or Unity), its possible Mavericks could make a name for itself by hosting massive, massive matches. Sure, developer Automaton Games has already pitched it as the game to host 400-player and 1000-player free for all matches, but the game could do more. However, adding more players to a battle royale doesn’t change the formula a whole lot more other than making the matches longer and longer.

In fact, it might be better to make Mavericks a proper war game — two sides, with individual players in control of each soldier — than go the battle royale route. We’ve already got Fortnite and PUBG. The battle royale market is pretty much cornered and will inevitably go stale. To their credit, the dev team at Automaton does plan to branch the game out to other modes, including single-player campaigns and various other multiplayer modes.

Because the build at GDC was still rough, the recoil on weapons was insane, the weapons themselves weren’t balanced,and the match was a 5v5 with a very, very quick moving storm herding me into my death. It was fun, but a bit too similar to what we have on the market already.

That said, it wasn’t a bad game, and having a battle royale mode isn’t a bad idea. Its just not the best way to pitch a game at GDC — especially when heavily spectated Fortnite matches are happening at the Unreal lounge a few booths over.

(Last Updated March 25, 2018 12:32 pm )

About Madeline Ricchiuto

Madeline Ricchiuto is a gamer, comics enthusiast, bad horror movie connoisseur, writer and generally sarcastic human. She also really likes cats and is now Head Games Writer at Bleeding Cool.

View All Posts


Send this to a friend