A UK indie team are developing a battle royale game four times the size of PUBG

playerunknowns battlegrounds

You barely switch on a PC before stumbling across a battle royale game at the moment. From the staggering success of PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds, to the new Fortnite game mode, to some, ahem, more unique takes. Not to be left behind, an indie studio are looking to continue to quite literally grow the genre.

But which battle royale game is before you? Let us help you figure it out.

Automaton are a UK-based indie studio currently developing a “cutting-edge MMO tactical shooter.” It’s a pretty big project, encompassing a map that’s nearly 150 kmsq that allows for 1,000 concurrent players, all occupying the shared world.

What caught our eye, however, is the 400-person battle royale mode that Automaton are developing as part of their game. That’s right, 400. That’s four times more than PUBG, which might sound like utter madness, but a press release from Automaton confirms it, saying that the game will include “an additional last-man standing Player vs Player arena combat mode, with up to 400 players in direct combat.”

Those games sound like they might very well be utter marathons. More players might lead to more encounters, but the upcoming game’s map is more than twice as large as Bluehole’s first map, Erangel. That could mean a long time spent hiding behind doors with a shotgun.

Paladins
Sign in to Commentlogin to comment
QDP2 avatarAnakhoresis avatarJezcentral avatar
QDP2 Avatar
832
1 Month ago

You could argue the record for most 'players' in a battle royal has been taken (probably forever) by PUBG, with it's TwitchPlaysPUBG, with it's thousands of active viewers 'playing' the game.

It may not have 400 individuals in the world (to me 400 sounds like a joke, PUBG's matches are already long enough), but too high a player count is only going to deter more than bring more (PUBG's great success wasn't enough to avoid player-count problems in the AU server, now imagine the queue times for 4 times as many players in a presumably less-popular title). There's a reason why the MOBA genre settled for 5v5, beyond the simple 'too much to keep track of', it gives each player a greater feeling of impact in a game. Take the Planetside 2 approach and the individuals no longer have any power.

1
Anakhoresis Avatar
593
1 Month ago

Planetside 2 was what I was just thinking of, I'm almost kind of surprised they haven't built their own battle royale mode as an aside to showcase how many players Planetside 2 can hold.

1
QDP2 Avatar
832
1 Month ago

Planetside 2 is all about the server size, but the individual shooter elements aren't strong enough to be worth investing into. There's no drop/loot system for the world exploration (so there's no risk/reward of going to busier areas).

The game works as a war of fronts; almost trench-warfare styled in the way the maps were built for barriers, bridge crossings, low hills and large areas to shoot/run over. By having that relatively quick respawn it worked. They may be able to make a 'last-man-standing' mode, but it wouldn't be satisfying to play.

1
Jezcentral Avatar
515
1 Month ago

It's not that much longer. If everyone kills somebody every 5 mins, than the games will only take 10 mins longer. (Not being a PUGB player, I don't know how realistic that is, but it is still only 2 kill-generations until you are down from 400 to 100.

1