Support NeoGAF

[Jubenhimer]

During today's Nintendo Direct, a brand new EA Originals game from Velan Studios (the developers of last year's Mario Kart Live) was revealed called Knockout City, it's coming to PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and PC (no next gen versions yet, but enhancements for backwards compatibility) The trailer was staged as an interview with different gaming character archetypes including a military soldier, fantasy goblin, sprite-based princess, and football player. At first, you'd think it'd be taking a unique approach to its character roster, bringing together these gaming parodies into an all out battle against each other. A sort of Drawn Together, but for video games, that would've been new and interesting...

Then we saw gameplay. Okay, the actual gameplay concept itself looks neat, and I think it'll still be a fun multiplayer game but... what the hell? Talk about wasted potential. You had these unique looking characters in the fake interview making us think this was the character roster, but then you say "just kidding" and expect us to play as these Fortnite rejects instead? What a bait and switch-ridden, dick move EA.

Again, the game will still probably be pretty fun, but I think we're at the point were all these multiplayer party games are starting to look the same. Developers need to start learning that it's not enough to have a fun gameplay premise for your big multiplayer game, a distinctive and cohesive look is also just as important. Just because you can be colorful and wacky like Fortnite, doesn't mean it automatically makes your game colorful and wacky.

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Multiplayer is about design and gameplay mechanics, not art style.

Here's 19 minutes of gameplay.




So it's a 3 v 3 dodgeball game where the aiming and catching is relatively easy to grasp (massive auto aim for throwing, simple timing button press for catching). So they want low mechanical skill players to be interested. But...

I don't really see how teamwork can or will play a role here. It kinda just looks like a chaotic Destruction All Stars where at the end of a match you look at your teammates stats and say "Oh wow, you did (good/bad)".

I'm not out on it, but I have to see the depth first. Maybe a video with coms would help show it off better.

 

[Lethal01]

Multiplayer is about design and gameplay mechanics, not art style.

Here's 19 minutes of gameplay.




I don't really get what they're going for here.

Ugly art will keep tons of people away from a good multiplayer game.
You can find success despite that but why not have both.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Ugly art will keep tons of people away from a good multiplayer game.
You can find success despite that but why not have both.

Fortnite has ugly art.

Minecraft has ugly art.

World of Warcraft has ugly art.

Rocket League has ugly art.

League of Legends has ugly art.

No one cares.

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

All that matters is that the art is relatively clean to look at (easily readable visuals), relatively simple so you can churn out skins for $$$, and that it has wide appeal so you're not leaving important demographics (kids) out.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Fortnite has ugly art.

Minecraft has ugly art.

World of Warcraft has ugly art.

Rocket League has ugly art.

League of Legends has ugly art.

No one cares.

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

All that matters is that the art is relatively clean to look at (easily readable visuals), relatively simple so you can churn out skins for $$$, and that it has wide appeal so you're not leaving important demographics (kids) out.

Multiplayer is about design and gameplay mechanics, not art style.

It's not that it's even ugly, it's that its bland. It looks like the same kind of generic, Pixar/Dreamworks, squishy 3D we've seen a dozen times in other multiplayer games before. Sure it looks fine, but its also calculated and committee-approved. The point I'm making is that I was hoping the game would go for a more original visual style, like what the trailer seemed to promise.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

It's not that it's even ugly, it's that its bland. It looks like the same kind of generic, Pixar/Dreamworks, squishy 3D we've seen a dozen times in other multiplayer games before. Sure it looks fine, but its also calculated and committee-approved. The point I'm making is that I was hoping the game would go for a more original visual style, like what the trailer seemed to promise.

No one plays Chess because the pieces look like Lord of the Rings characters.

You play Chess to play Chess.

Chess players don't care if it's a Dora the Explorer themed board. All that stuff is irrelevant.

Multiplayer videogames are no different. Mechanics and game design rule here.

When I watched that video I was trying to understand the games mechanics. The juvenile art style never crossed my mind.

 

[Jubenhimer]

No one plays Chess because the pieces look like Lord of the Rings characters.

You play Chess to play Chess.

Chess players don't care if it's a Dora the Explorer themed board. All that stuff is irrelevant.

Multiplayer videogames are no different. Mechanics and game design rule here.

When I watched that video I was trying to understand the games mechanics. The juvenile art style never crossed my mind.

Sure, gameplay is what matters in the end. The beauty of video games as a medium is that you can represent that gameplay with whatever visuals you want. So in a world of endless possibility, it's kind of annoying a lot of these new multiplayer games trying to be the next Fortnite, Overwatch, or Splatoon fall back into the same design-by-committee, Focus-group-approved aesthetic.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Sure, gameplay is what matters in the end. The beauty of video games as a medium is that you can represent that gameplay with whatever visuals you want. So in a world of endless possibility, it's kind of annoying a lot of these new multiplayer games trying to be the next Fortnite, Overwatch, or Splatoon fall back into the same design-by-committee, Focus-group-approved aesthetic.

I don't find it annoying at all.

When I played football growing up, we'd always use a ball that looked like this...

I never cared or thought the ball should look like anything else, even in a world of "endless possibilities."

Most developers have to skate on certain aspects of their game to save time + money. Skate on art style, innovate on gameplay. Actually, I wish more developers would do that.

LOOKING AT YOU, NAUGHTY DOG!

 

[Jubenhimer]

Most developers have to skate on certain aspects of their game to save time + money. Skate on art style, innovate on gameplay. Actually, I wish more developers would do that.

LOOKING AT YOU, NAUGHTY DOG!

But I feel that a unique visual style in a predominantly visual medium can help make your game stand out. Sure, if its a puzzle game, basic will do. Nobody expects artistic brilliance from Tetris. But if you're trying to be the next "Fortnite", "Overwatch", "Rocket League" big online multiplayer game that everyone will be playing, then looking the same as your competition aesthetically is more than likely going to make you lost in the sea of competitors.

 

[carlosrox]

Fortnite has ugly art.

I know you're a fan of the game but I don't get why anyone would call Fortnite anything but attractive. The game is a looker, it's gorgeous!

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

But I feel that a unique visual style in a predominantly visual medium can help make your game stand out. Sure, if its a puzzle game, basic will do. Nobody expects artistic brilliance from Tetris. But if you're trying to be the next "Fortnite", "Overwatch", "Rocket League" big online multiplayer game that everyone will be playing, then looking the same as your competition aesthetically is more than likely going to make you lost in the sea of competitors.

Only if you judge games based on their visuals.

Multiplayer gamers don't. Valheim is blowing up the charts right now and some think it looks like an N64 game. It's got awful animations. No one cares. We care about mechanics, balance, and design.

Just out of curiosity, what's your split between multiplayer and single player? I assume you play a lot of single player games? (Not judging)

 

[Jubenhimer]

Multiplayer gamers don't. Valheim is blowing up the charts right now and some think it looks like an N64 game. It's got awful animations. No one cares. We care about mechanics, balance, and design.

I'm not really asking for Last of Us Part II visuals here. I was just hoping the game would do more to distinguish itself visually from others its field, as it stands now, I think it's going to have a tough time finding an audience with how samey it looks graphically, but we'll see.

Just out of curiosity, what's your split between multiplayer and single player? I assume you play a lot of single player games? (Not judging)

I'm usually more of a single player guy, but I do enjoy multiplayer as well.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I know you're a fan of the game but I don't get why anyone would call Fortnite anything but attractive. The game is a looker, it's gorgeous!

To me, Pixar is the standard (a standard). Dreamworks is like off brand Pixar. Fortnite is like off brand Dreamworks.

It's a little too goofy + generic for my tastes.

But again, I never even think about the artstyle in Fortnite. It's completely irrelevant to how much fun I have with the game.

Although, I've probably purchased around 10 skins (outside the Battle Passes) in Fortnite and they're all the cool looking edgelord skins.

I'm not really asking for Last of Us Part II visuals here. I was just hoping the game would do more to distinguish itself visually from others its field, as it stands now, I think it's going to have a tough time finding an audience with how samey it looks graphically, but we'll see.


I'm usually more of a single player guy, but I do enjoy multiplayer as well.

I think the differentiating factor here is the aiming mechanics and the catching mechanics. Both look like two things non gamers could grasp.

This is more Fall Guys + Rocket League than Fortnite IMO.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

One more thing to note:

There doesn't seem to be a vertical axis with regards to your camera. It's fixed at a certain angle. Skill floor drops lower.

I'm intrigued.

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Multiplayer is about design and gameplay mechanics, not art style.

Here's 19 minutes of gameplay.




So it's a 3 v 3 dodgeball game where the aiming and catching is relatively easy to grasp (massive auto aim for throwing, simple timing button press for catching). So they want low mechanical skill players to be interested. But...

I don't really see how teamwork can or will play a role here. It kinda just looks like a chaotic Destruction All Stars where at the end of a match you look at your teammates stats and say "Oh wow, you did (good/bad)".

I'm not out on it, but I have to see the depth first. Maybe a video with coms would help show it off better.

The setting alone is already a fresh change of pace. and the team play looked interesting where your teammates can actually be thrown if there are no balls around. They're pretty powerful, too if they have their super charged up. Game looks to have way more action and stay-on-your-toes gameplay compared to Destruction All Stars.

There's vertical axis for looking, but most of the time it seems that you're locking on to someone else. This game will have a decent chance at gaining a nice player base if it launches on PS Plus or Game Pass.

The trailer/reveal was horrible btw. The "unique" characters in the interview were obvious digs at generic designs lol

 

[harmny]

Fortnite has ugly art.

Minecraft has ugly art.

World of Warcraft has ugly art.

Rocket League has ugly art.

League of Legends has ugly art.

No one cares.

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

All that matters is that the art is relatively clean to look at (easily readable visuals), relatively simple so you can churn out skins for $$$, and that it has wide appeal so you're not leaving important demographics (kids) out.

i know what you are trying to say but let me tell you a couple of things. apart from minecraft none of those games have ugly art. in fact wow and fortnite are top class in the art department.

and with the things that matter you forgot two of the most important things and the things that are actually making those games look "ugly" to you, performance and longevity.

those games aim to be massive, and that means that the game has to run well (and look good) on a potato becuase everyone needs to be able to play it but not everyone has a 3080.
and you need an art style that is able to endure the passing of time because you want your game to be around for years without looking outdated. that's why most of them are stylized instead of let's say photorealistic. and that's why wow is 17 years old and it still looks good whereas far cry 1 looks like shit

so your point is true, in multiplayer games the priorities are different but that doesn't mean that the art direction / art style is bad or that it doesn't matter. it matters a lot. especially if you want to make money selling art (skins).

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[Kagoshima_Luke]

I know you're a fan of the game but I don't get why anyone would call Fortnite anything but attractive. The game is a looker, it's gorgeous!

 

[carlosrox]

You're crazy. The game looks amazing on PC and next gen.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Fortnite has ugly art.

Minecraft has ugly art.

World of Warcraft has ugly art.

Rocket League has ugly art.

League of Legends has ugly art.

No one cares.

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

All that matters is that the art is relatively clean to look at (easily readable visuals), relatively simple so you can churn out skins for $$$, and that it has wide appeal so you're not leaving important demographics (kids) out.

What? Multiplayer gamers do give a fuck about art direction. Its why skins sell so well for MP games, because people want to look cool, cute, or badass. Do you even know what you are talking about?

 

[Lethal01]

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

I'm a multiplayer gamer, I and other "multiplayer gamers" avoid tons of games because we don't like the art. Many of the ones I do play I would play far more if they had art that I loved. If Apex legends looked as good to me as Mario Kart I would never put it down, If brawlhalla looked as good as guilty gear I would play it non stop.

Every multiplayer game is trying to have appealing art, many just fail. Minecraft and Valheim are both using aesthetics that lots of people like, You may hate it but tons of people love the retro look.

This is like thinking that people don't care about netcode in fighting games and they just want good balance and art, since so many of them have shit netcode. But then Guilty gear strive comes out and gets nothing but praise and attention due to it.

It may not be the absolute number one priority and tons of games are successful regardless but any game would do better with good art and the more money that game is already make the more they are losing out on by keeping away a percentage of their audience. So yes, this is an obvious missed opportunity, how could it not be.

Not even talking about whether this specific game looks nice or not. The idea that art isn't a focus for multiplayer games is crazy.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Nah, art doesn't matter in multiplayer.

Fortnite, Minecraft, Rocket League etc... prove that.

It's a single player thing.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

So in a world of endless possibility, it's kind of annoying a lot of these new multiplayer games trying to be the next Fortnite, Overwatch, or Splatoon fall back into the same design-by-committee, Focus-group-approved aesthetic.

I think the truth is that good art style and direction isn't easy at all.

Of the three games you listed, Overwatch and Splatoon have immense art direction, it's genuinely staggering (to me) how good they made it and is a big part of the reason why there's a burgeoning community of people making fanart for these games.

Fortnite's is pretty good and highly functional in terms of getting all sorts of wacky crossovers to gel together and not look out of place. Still, I'd rate it behind those two, they're simply phenomenal in that aspect.

As for Knockout City...it's way behind all three IMO. I try not to post negative things on here but it really isn't close and I think the team knows it as well, they just don't know how to achieve it, it happens.

 

[Fuz]

Of the three games you listed, Overwatch and Splatoon have immense art direction

Overwatch is a Pixar ripoff.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Knockout City Breakdown And Hands-On Impressions

After spending a few hours tossing dodgeballs, here's what you can expect from EA's surprising new multiplayer title.

www.gameinformer.com

One of many written articles on the game.

I'm more or less in full agreement with the closing paragraph based on the IGN gameplay footage:

Knockout City looks decent from a fidelity standpoint but it's attempt at a “cool” vibe feels somewhat soulless, especially since it lacks defined characters. It has personality; it just isn't an interesting one. Velan says there’s a lore to the world, but that’s told through environmental cues and I’m not particularly interested in learning more. If Knockout City finds an audience, it’ll be because the dodgeball itself is enjoyable.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

This is like thinking that people don't care about netcode in fighting games and they just want good balance and art, since so many of them have shit netcode. But then Guilty gear strive comes out and gets nothing but praise and attention due to it.

Just my two cents: when it comes to fighting games, the most likely reason for being interested in one is because a character's design resonated with you. Could be anything from their promo artwork, the way they play or how their moveset looks.

Caring about balance and all that only comes when you've finally decided to hunker down and invest time, money and effort into that fighting game.

 

[Lethal01]

Just my two cents: when it comes to fighting games, the most likely reason for being interested in one is because a character's design resonated with you. Could be anything from their promo artwork, the way they play or how their moveset looks.

Caring about balance and all that only comes when you've finally decided to hunker down and invest time, money and effort into that fighting game.

I agree, but now imagine if I went way beyond and said that a game with cool designs but bad netcode and terrible gameplay isn't a missed oppurtunity.

It having some great aspects is exactly what makes it a missed oppurtunity.

 

[MiguelItUp]

I think the game looks fun. So there's that. Unique gameplay is unique gameplay, even if it's just a bit different. I appreciate it when I see it, especially these days. I'm not all in or anything, just cool to see.

Fortnite has ugly art.

Minecraft has ugly art.

World of Warcraft has ugly art.

Rocket League has ugly art.

League of Legends has ugly art.

No one cares.

Art direction matters to single player gamers. Multiplayer gamers don't give a ****.

All that matters is that the art is relatively clean to look at (easily readable visuals), relatively simple so you can churn out skins for $$$, and that it has wide appeal so you're not leaving important demographics (kids) out.

I wouldn't say multiplayer gamers "don't give a shit." Some don't sure, but that's neither here or there. The art direction can contribute to the overall aesthetic of the game, which means a great deal to a lot of players. I feel like with some of those titles, majority of the players are children and have no real concept of art design or concept. Or just DGAF because they're children.

I can personally say that I'm tired of the certain art style that lingers in a lot of modern games, hell even the past few years. A lot of it is super exaggerated, too many colors, obnoxious ass characters, etc. Not every game has to be TOO colorful and have characters yapping ever 5 seconds.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Overwatch is a Pixar ripoff.

The world could use more Pixar ripoffs when it comes to artstyle.

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Like I said, the game at least stands out with the cartoony, retro-futuristic 1950s style and environment. If EA can manage to convince people to look at this like a cartoon Back to the Future, it might work.

They fumbled the reveal though, that's for sure.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

I agree, but now imagine if I went way beyond and said that a game with cool designs but bad netcode and terrible gameplay isn't a missed oppurtunity.

It having some great aspects is exactly what makes it a missed oppurtunity.

Oh yea no disagreement with you on this. Like I said in my other long reply in here, I think the team knows their artstyle is off, they just don't know how to make it great.

I think even with regards to stuff like gameplay and netcode (okay maybe not so much this one), sometimes devs just hit a wall and at some point they just gotta push forward.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Like I said, the game at least stands out with the cartoony, retro-futuristic 1950s style and environment. If EA can manage to convince people to look at this like a cartoon Back to the Future, it might work.

They fumbled the reveal though, that's for sure.

Did you change your earlier post in this thread? Pretty sure I read something, which I'm guessing you edited out for NDA reasons?

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Did you change your earlier post in this thread? Pretty sure I read something, which I'm guessing you edited out for NDA reasons?

Roommates participate in betas, people talk on discord etc. Rather not derail lol but I’m looking forward to playing the game myself when it comes out. Sounds and looks fun once you ignore the character customization stuff.

 

[Hawks Eclipse]

Roommates participate in betas, people talk on discord etc. Rather not derail lol but I’m looking forward to playing the game myself when it comes out. Sounds and looks fun once you ignore the character customization stuff.

Yea I remembered the details but didn't want to spell it out just in case.

Keep us up to date with impressions in here in the meantime, thanks!

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I think the game looks fun. So there's that. Unique gameplay is unique gameplay, even if it's just a bit different. I appreciate it when I see it, especially these days. I'm not all in or anything, just cool to see.


I wouldn't say multiplayer gamers "don't give a shit." Some don't sure, but that's neither here or there. The art direction can contribute to the overall aesthetic of the game, which means a great deal to a lot of players. I feel like with some of those titles, majority of the players are children and have no real concept of art design or concept. Or just DGAF because they're children.

I can personally say that I'm tired of the certain art style that lingers in a lot of modern games, hell even the past few years. A lot of it is super exaggerated, too many colors, obnoxious ass characters, etc. Not every game has to be TOO colorful and have characters yapping ever 5 seconds.

I definitely used exaggerated language but I think the point stands.

League of Legends has an older audience and this is what it looks like...

No one complains because the depth of the mechanics are what matter.

Art direction and graphics are the packaging. Design depth is the content of the packaging.

 

[MiguelItUp]

I definitely used exaggerated language but I think the point stands.

League of Legends has an older audience and this is what it looks like...

No one complains because the depth of the mechanics are what matter.

Art direction and graphics are the packaging. Design depth is the content of the packaging.

Ah, I also meant to add that I don't think there's any doubt that games (like League of Legends, Fortnite, etc.) being free play a huge factor as well, haha.

If a game is even moderately fun and completely free, a lot of people won't say much and will play anyway.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Ah, I also meant to add that I don't think there's any doubt that games (like League of Legends, Fortnite, etc.) being free play a huge factor as well, haha.

If a game is even moderately fun and completely free, a lot of people won't say much and will play anyway.

No doubt free to play allows for significantly faster growth of a game.

I'm not sure how much free to play matters to people who continue playing said games.

The vast majority of people who play free to play games have purchased games in the not so distant past, got bored of their shallow mechanics, and returned to the game that offers real depth.

Btw, is Knockout City going to be F2P?

 

[Lethal01]

League of Legends has an older audience and this is what it looks like...

No one complains because the depth of the mechanics are what matter.

Lots of people like the way LoL looks so they don't complain, Lots of people stay away from LoL while playing other multiplayer games because they immediately stop caring about LoL due to the visuals, so you won't get complaints from them either on account of them not playing the game. Saying "this ugly game is popular thus visuals don't matter" is silly. You are generalizing to much when it comes to multiplayer gamers, I think due to your personal stance on it.

Even if we were to agree that LoL has almost objectively bad visuals, the point is that it having bad visuals is a huge missed opportunity since it would do better with better visuals so yeah, it's a missed opportunity.

Good visuals are more than the package, The package stops being relevant once you start using the product. They are a topping on a pizza. Some people don't care either way if their is pineapple on their Pizza. Many will instantly put it in the trash. Some don't eat it unless there is ham.
You can't go "tons of people like Pineapple on pizza, thus, people who eat Pizza don't care about toppings".

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Lots of people like the way LoL looks so they don't complain, Lots of people stay away from LoL while playing other multiplayer games because they immediately stop caring about LoL due to the visuals, so you won't get complaints from them either on account of them not playing the game. Saying "this ugly game is popular thus visuals don't matter" is silly. You are generalizing to much when it comes to multiplayer gamers, I think due to your personal stance on it.

Even if we were to agree that LoL has almost objectively bad visuals, the point is that it having bad visuals is a huge missed opportunity since it would do better with better visuals so yeah, it's a missed opportunity.

Good visuals are more than the package, The package stops being relevant once you start using the product. They are a topping on a pizza. Some people don't care either way if their is pineapple on their Pizza. Many will instantly put it in the trash. Some don't eat it unless there is ham.
You can't go "tons of people like Pineapple on pizza, thus, people who eat Pizza don't care about toppings".

I fundementally disagree with your entire post here.

People who play these monster GAAS multiplayer games do so because the mechanics have so much depth.

Making Fortnite or League of Legends look like a Yoji Shinkawa or Mayazaki work would do next to nothing to help those games reach a bigger audience.

What it would do, is make a certain number of people check the game out for a very brief moment.

The meat of multiplayer is in game mechanics, design, balance.

 

[MiguelItUp]

Btw, is Knockout City going to be F2P?

Honestly I was wondering the same! Just looked it up, apparently it will be $20 and that price includes the nine seasons as well. A free trial will be available when the game launches.

 

[Lethal01]

What it would do, is make a certain number of people check the game out for a very brief moment.

The meat of multiplayer is in game mechanics, design, balance.

Some would check it out for a brief moment and if it sucked they would give up on it. Others would love the gameplay and be happy to come back to the world and the gameplay for years upon years. I fundamentally disagree with you trying to act like people who play big multiplayer games are unified in not caring about visuals it just doesn't match up with what they say.

Gameplay may be the meat but the visuals are the way that meat is cooked.

lots of people are attracted to Fortnite specifically because of it's visuals and some would have only played it for a day or two if they hated the style. Visuals can be both what attracts people to the game and what keeps them having fun.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Some would check it out for a brief moment and if it sucked they would give up on it. Others would love the gameplay and be happy to come back to the world and the gameplay for years upon years. I fundamentally disagree with you trying to act like people who play big multiplayer games are unified in not caring about visuals it just doesn't match up with what they say.

Gameplay may be the meat but the visuals are the way that meat is cooked.

lots of people are attracted to Fortnite specifically because of it's visuals and some would have only played it for a day or two if they hated the style. Visuals can be both what attracts people to the game and what keeps them having fun.

Art direction in multiplayer...

VS

The inside is what makes work stand the test of time, not the cover.

 

[D.Final]

A normal story

 

[IbizaPocholo]

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Giant Bomb was comparing this to.. Splatoon for some reason.
... And with this facial expression

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

"Knockout City is based on position and timing, rather than position and aiming."

That's big.

My hype levels are rising for this thing.

 

[Gentle]

During today's Nintendo Direct, a brand new EA Originals game from Velan Studios (the developers of last year's Mario Kart Live) was revealed called Knockout City, it's coming to PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and PC (no next gen versions yet, but enhancements for backwards compatibility) The trailer was staged as an interview with different gaming character archetypes including a military soldier, fantasy goblin, sprite-based princess, and football player. At first, you'd think it'd be taking a unique approach to its character roster, bringing together these gaming parodies into an all out battle against each other. A sort of Drawn Together, but for video games, that would've been new and interesting...

Then we saw gameplay. Okay, the actual gameplay concept itself looks neat, and I think it'll still be a fun multiplayer game but... what the hell? Talk about wasted potential. You had these unique looking characters in the fake interview making us think this was the character roster, but then you say "just kidding" and expect us to play as these Fortnite rejects instead? What a bait and switch-ridden, dick move EA.

Again, the game will still probably be pretty fun, but I think we're at the point were all these multiplayer party games are starting to look the same. Developers need to start learning that it's not enough to have a fun gameplay premise for your big multiplayer game, a distinctive and cohesive look is also just as important. Just because you can be colorful and wacky like Fortnite, doesn't mean it automatically makes your game colorful and wacky.

I really hear you on this. It feels like there are a bunch of games being made by committees. And it’s true there are. And those games are generally far less intellectually stimulating as say something like the witness or stardew.

But they are also what has driven the markets for their product to everyone outside of us hardcore nerds. Which then gives all of us a bigger platform to play on.

So I honestly don’t mind because it means that some
Of these tools are going to become so well defined that we are going to see them accessible to indie developers. I am so excited to see a truly great indie multiplayer experience

Committees always let you down by trying to appeal to the market leaving their depth an inch deep and a mile wide.
sorry for the bad formatting I’m on my phone.

 

[JeremyEtcetera]

I don't know how or why, but there's something about this game that is reminding me of a game called S4 league(an old free to play korean deathmatch/team deathmatch game) and that's not a bad thing because I thought S4 league at the time was pretty fun:



It also had fun music too(sort of a mix between JSRF with a blend of arcade-like music):







Regardless I like what I'm seeing and I'm hoping for some fast and fun arcade-style action with a bit of depth to it and a good soundtrack.

 

[Areiz]

During today's Nintendo Direct, a brand new EA Originals game from Velan Studios (the developers of last year's Mario Kart Live) was revealed called Knockout City, it's coming to PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and PC (no next gen versions yet, but enhancements for backwards compatibility) The trailer was staged as an interview with different gaming character archetypes including a military soldier, fantasy goblin, sprite-based princess, and football player. At first, you'd think it'd be taking a unique approach to its character roster, bringing together these gaming parodies into an all out battle against each other. A sort of Drawn Together, but for video games, that would've been new and interesting...

Then we saw gameplay. Okay, the actual gameplay concept itself looks neat, and I think it'll still be a fun multiplayer game but... what the hell? Talk about wasted potential. You had these unique looking characters in the fake interview making us think this was the character roster, but then you say "just kidding" and expect us to play as these Fortnite rejects instead? What a bait and switch-ridden, dick move EA.

Again, the game will still probably be pretty fun, but I think we're at the point were all these multiplayer party games are starting to look the same. Developers need to start learning that it's not enough to have a fun gameplay premise for your big multiplayer game, a distinctive and cohesive look is also just as important. Just because you can be colorful and wacky like Fortnite, doesn't mean it automatically makes your game colorful and wacky.

I've found it pretty original so far