Steam's new top-selling game is called BattleBit Remastered, and it was made by three...

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,376   +43
Staff
Why it matters: Steam's current best-selling game is a $15 multiplayer first-person shooter made by three people with graphics that look like Roblox. Despite the simple presentation, gamers are lauding BattleBit Remastered for its smooth gameplay and wealth of content in contrast to recent shooters from major publishers.

Only two weeks after its Early Access debut, BattleBit Remastered is shaping up to be Steam's next Valheim-level success. Players have enthusiastically contrasted the online military shooter's success with the disastrous launch of Battlefield 2042 a couple of years ago.

One of the most well-liked aspects of BattleBit that sets it apart from other major shooters is the impressive amount of content it offers for just $15, even at the onset of what the developers estimate to be a two-year Early Access phase. The game launched with 17 maps, eight game modes, 39 weapons, 200 prestige ranks, numerous vehicles, proximity-based voice chat, and a wealth of additional content. The only planned microtransaction is a $20 weapon skin pack.

This monetization model gives the game a refreshing, back-to-basics feel for players who might be weary of the additional costs associated with games like Battlefield, Call of Duty, Overwatch, or Fortnite. While BattleBit isn't free-to-play, many players appreciate the reassurance that a one-time $15 charge provides access to all of its content.

BattleBit's most noticeable feature is its intentionally low-detail graphics. This may have allowed the small development team to concentrate on refining gameplay, optimizing performance, and rapidly generating content. Despite supporting a maximum of 254 players per server in 127 vs. 127 matches, the game seems to maintain high framerates across a wide range of hardware. The recommended system specs list a fourth-gen Intel Core i5 and a GeForce GTX 600 series graphics card – components that are over a decade old. The developers also added a new map and new weapons a few days after the launch.

Many posts in the game's Steam community have poked fun at Battlefield 2042 – the latest entry in the franchise that inspired BattleBit. Upon its release, Battlefield fans berated EA's blockbuster for its lack of many basic features, making it one of the lowest-rated titles in Steam's history. Recent user reviews suggest the game has significantly improved over the past year, but a complete recovery could still be far off. In the meantime, BattleBit seems poised to fill the vacuum.

Permalink to story.

 
Hmmmm... if it was also on console (for those friends), I might be interested.

Also, with it's gaining popularity, I wonder what anti-cheat it has to combat the inevitable increase in cheaters...
 
In the same "graphical" genre, there "Stalcraft" for the Stalker fans like me, it's awesome despite the little flaws it has
 
Well done them, BFBC2 was the last decent Battlefield. Someone needs to show EA and Dice how to do it.

But $20 skin pack as a micro transaction.
This is what has me giving up altogether on gaming. I was talked into getting CoDmw2.
£26 for a battle pass with skin bundle. Skin bundles between £8 and £20 and 20 + skins advertised at one time.
Micro transactions they are not. This is game prices for skins, its not like its the other fifth of game content.

 
I've tried it but not sure if I like it yet. maybe need to give it a bit more time.
 
Well done them, BFBC2 was the last decent Battlefield. Someone needs to show EA and Dice how to do it.

But $20 skin pack as a micro transaction.
This is what has me giving up altogether on gaming. I was talked into getting CoDmw2.
£26 for a battle pass with skin bundle. Skin bundles between £8 and £20 and 20 + skins advertised at one time.
Micro transactions they are not. This is game prices for skins, its not like its the other fifth of game content.

The skin pack is not really meant to represent value, but rather a way of giving more to the devs for their relatively small asking price for the main game. Some like to provide further support to smaller developers and this is a reasonable way to do it.
 
The skin pack is not really meant to represent value, but rather a way of giving more to the devs for their relatively small asking price for the main game. Some like to provide further support to smaller developers and this is a reasonable way to do it.
I can't get behind that logic of paying more than the game for dlc. And its not dlc its just a skin pack.
I know the psycho wallet raping companies think that's worth it.
Capitalism. Greed. I hate feeling mugged off.
And for that reason, I'm out.
 
Most just want total destruction so they can destroy everything cause it's fun, PTFO'ing be damned. I'm not in that camp. Destruction has to make sense. Doesn't need to go over the top. Battlebots will have to do much more than what they are doing to truly threaten a AAA title.
 
I can't get behind that logic of paying more than the game for dlc. And its not dlc its just a skin pack.
I know the psycho wallet raping companies think that's worth it.
Capitalism. Greed. I hate feeling mugged off.
And for that reason, I'm out.
Yea, no one buys that crap...

In its financial results for 2021, Activision Blizzard reports that it made over $5.1 billion from in-game spending, which includes DLC.
 
The skin pack is not really meant to represent value, but rather a way of giving more to the devs for their relatively small asking price for the main game. Some like to provide further support to smaller developers and this is a reasonable way to do it.
why dont they just charge a flat price then?

if they made a great game then people will buy it, im tired of this nickel and diming BS and I wont defend it, at all.
 
I can't get behind that logic of paying more than the game for dlc. And its not dlc its just a skin pack.
I know the psycho wallet raping companies think that's worth it.
Capitalism. Greed. I hate feeling mugged off.
And for that reason, I'm out.
why dont they just charge a flat price then?

if they made a great game then people will buy it, im tired of this nickel and diming BS and I wont defend it, at all.

Buy game $15.
Don't buy skin $__.

What's the difficulty here?
 
It's kind of incredible how much of a low quality wasteland steam gaming is. I mean, 1999's counter strike is perennially the most popular game on steam by miles. with nintendo wii quality graphics it's played by 40 year olds in moms basement.

and now this...thing lol
 
It's as if my text is generating reality when I said that independent devs will eventually bypass triple aaa titles in gamer's preference/ revenue.
 
The skin pack is not really meant to represent value, but rather a way of giving more to the devs for their relatively small asking price for the main game. Some like to provide further support to smaller developers and this is a reasonable way to do it.

Agreed. Tip the devs if you really enjoy the game. If you don't enjoy the game, then you're not tipping the devs anyway, much less buying cosmetic items in the first place.
 
I can't get behind that logic of paying more than the game for dlc. And its not dlc its just a skin pack.
I know the psycho wallet raping companies think that's worth it.
Capitalism. Greed. I hate feeling mugged off.
And for that reason, I'm out.
A $15 game and you're talking about greed? The DLC isn't required to play the game. It's voluntary. If you don't want to pay for it, don't. Easy-peasy.
 
I can't get behind that logic of paying more than the game for dlc. And its not dlc its just a skin pack.
I know the psycho wallet raping companies think that's worth it.
Capitalism. Greed. I hate feeling mugged off.
And for that reason, I'm out.
You do realize that the skin pack is OPTIONAL, right? Why would you feel "mugged off" over this?

Perhaps it is best for you to opt out. Gaming is not for the faint of heart.
 
I'll be trying this, this weekend if I have time. Game sounds a hoot and personally nostalgia 4 me..
 
A game that looks like a game, has loads of content, is cheap to buy, and actually works great.

Seems that someone put their thinking caps on and simply gave people what they want.
 
Buy game $15.
Don't buy skin $__.

What's the difficulty here?
Some people are not possess the ability to resist FOMO (I read its almost the same as gambling addiction, bu cmiiw) , hence why many publisher carefully crafted this micro$ to entice that people (which they didnt associated as people but whale, btw) to buy it
 
A $15 game and you're talking about greed? The DLC isn't required to play the game. It's voluntary. If you don't want to pay for it, don't. Easy-peasy.
Firstly dlc in general.
2ndly still think any dlc above game price is weird.
FML for not giving AF that the game could be good.
 
Agreed. Tip the devs if you really enjoy the game. If you don't enjoy the game, then you're not tipping the devs anyway, much less buying cosmetic items in the first place.
tip the devs?

for what? just make a good game that people will flock too and charge a price that covers its worth and their time developing it.

why are gamers so damn cheap AND loose with their money? no wonder these studios chop their games up and sell them in pieces, gamers are to stupid to realize theyre being tricked out of their money.

I dont care if its 1 piece of optional gear, its the principal of it, if they want that much money for it then just raise the price of the game and cover all your bases in one swoop.
 
Back