Highguard: The New Online Shooter That Could Change Everything [2025]

Introduction: When a New Shooter Launches, Everyone Pays Attention

There's a moment in the gaming industry that repeats itself like clockwork. A fresh online shooter drops, the hype starts building, streamers go live, and suddenly everyone's wondering if this is the next big thing. Then, nine months later, you check the player count and realize the game's down to its most devoted fans—if it survived that long at all.

Highguard is the latest game stepping into that arena, and the stakes couldn't be higher.

Wildlight Entertainment, a studio assembled from the talent behind Apex Legends, Titanfall, and Call of Duty, just launched Highguard on PS5, Xbox Series X|S, and Steam. It's a 3v3 "raid shooter" that borrows mechanics from MOBAs, adds hero abilities straight out of Overwatch, and somehow convinces you that riding a bear into combat makes sense. The game's different enough to catch your attention, slick enough to feel professional, but not so different that you immediately understand what you're doing.

That's both the promise and the peril.

In a market saturated with Call of Duty's annual releases, Fortnite's cultural dominance, and Counter-Strike's ironclad competitive core, Highguard has to answer a question that's defeated dozens of competitors: what gives you a reason to care about this game instead of the others? The answer isn't obvious. But the gameplay, the creative vision, and the team behind it might just be interesting enough to deserve a closer look.

This is what success in the online shooter space looks like in 2025, and what failure looks like too. Let's break down exactly what Highguard is trying to do, why it might work, and why the odds are still stacked against it.

TL; DR

• Wildlight's Ambition: Highguard launches with 3v3 raid shooter mechanics mixing MOBA strategy, hero abilities, and tactical gunplay—a formula no major competitor has perfected yet
• Gameplay Appeal: Smooth movement from Titanfall developers, creative hero ultimates, base defense mechanics, and (yes) mountable bears create a fresh experience that feels different from Fortnite or Call of Duty
• The Competition Problem: Despite unique mechanics, Highguard faces brutal market saturation where even high-quality games like Concord, Spectre Divide, and XDefiant failed to gain traction
• Player Retention Challenge: The complex rule set creates a steep learning curve that works against viral growth and casual adoption, which determines most online shooters' long-term survival
• Critical Window: Launch momentum matters more than features—Highguard has maybe 3-6 months to build a stable core player base before the audience moves to the next launcher

Highguard stands out with high strategic depth and mechanics complexity, though it has moderate streamer appeal. Estimated data based on game features.

What Highguard Actually Is: Deconstructing the Raid Shooter

The moment someone says "raid shooter," your brain probably spins. It's not a term people use casually, and for good reason: Wildlight invented it to describe something that doesn't fit neatly into gaming's established categories.

Here's what's actually happening in a Highguard match. Two teams of three players spawn on a map. Your team has a base that you need to defend. The enemy team has a base you need to destroy. Between you and them sits neutral territory with objectives, gear caches, and environmental hazards. Your goal isn't to rack up the most kills—it's to coordinate enough economy, complete enough objectives, and survive long enough to break through the enemy's defenses and destroy their HQ.

If that sounds like a MOBA, that's intentional. League of Legends and Dota 2 have proven that players love the resource management layer—deciding when to farm economy versus when to group up and fight—added on top of pure action gameplay. Highguard takes that framework and drops it into a first-person shooter perspective.

Each character has their own ultimate ability. One character might summon a massive shield. Another drops a turret. A third locks down enemies in a specific area. These aren't your standard "gain damage for 10 seconds" buffs. They're game-altering, momentum-shifting powers that can turn a losing fight into a victory if used correctly. The character design philosophy borrowed heavily from Overwatch, where every role has distinct strengths and everyone on the team needs to work together.

Then there's the progression mechanic. As you farm neutral creeps (yes, there are AI enemies to kill for resources), complete objectives, and survive skirmishes, your character gradually becomes stronger. You collect gear, unlock abilities, and scale into late-game power. This creates a natural difficulty curve within each match—early game is about positioning and smart fights, late game is about ensuring you have the right items and abilities to execute on a final push.

The bear mechanic is the wildest innovation. Certain characters can ride a massive bear into combat. It's partly a mobility tool, partly a statement about Highguard's willingness to embrace spectacle and fun over strict realism. In a genre dominated by gritty militarism and increasingly absurd cosmetics, Highguard's bright, colorful aesthetic with fantasy elements feels like a deliberate pivot.

What makes all this different from Overwatch is scale and pacing. Overwatch matches are typically shorter, more focused on team fights, and take place in smaller spaces. Highguard's 3v3 setup on much larger maps means there's genuine exploration, flanking opportunities, and moments where you're completely separated from your team. The gunplay itself—the moment-to-moment shooting mechanics—borrows directly from Titanfall's smoothness and responsiveness. Your character feels good to move and aim with, which is the foundation everything else is built on.

But here's the issue: it's complex. Really complex. After a few matches, you might understand the core loop. After a few more, you're starting to see optimal strategies. But for the first two hours? You're confused about the economy system, you're not sure why you can't just rush the enemy base, and you're wondering why that other player got so strong so fast.

The Development Team Behind the Game: Pedigree Matters in Competitive Gaming

Wildlight Entertainment is a relatively unknown studio, but the resumes of its leadership tell a different story. This isn't some scrappy indie team hoping for a miracle—this is a group of people who have shipped some of the most successful multiplayer games of the last decade.

The studio was founded by people who worked on Apex Legends at Respawn Entertainment. If you've played Apex, you know what that pedigree means: understanding of character balance, live service operations, and how to make first-person movement feel responsive and satisfying. Apex didn't invent the battle royale, but it made the royale feel better than alternatives through superior gunplay and movement mechanics.

Other key team members came from Titanfall, which is critical because Titanfall's movement system is arguably the smoothest and most satisfying in any multiplayer shooter. Wall-running, double-jumping, and the general fluidity of character control set a standard that most competitors still haven't matched. If you notice in Highguard that moving around the map, jumping, and strafing feels excellent, that's because people who pioneered those mechanics built the new game.

Then you have veterans from Call of Duty—a series that sells 20+ million copies per year and has refined competitive multiplayer over two decades. Call of Duty developers understand how to make the core feedback loop addictive: the sound design when you land a headshot, the way damage numbers pop, the progression system that keeps you chasing the next unlock.

So when you're playing Highguard and something feels right—the way your gun recoils, the visual feedback when you hit an enemy, the responsiveness of the controls—that's not accident. That's the accumulated knowledge of three of gaming's most successful multiplayer franchises being put into practice.

The problem is that talent alone doesn't guarantee success. Concord, Super Massive Games' 5v5 hero shooter that launched in 2024, had Firewalk Studios behind it—the team that made Destiny 2's best expansions. Concord was shut down months after launch and refunded all players' money. The game wasn't bad. It was well-made, technically impressive, and mechanically sound. But it couldn't break through the noise.

Highguard's advantage is that Wildlight isn't beholden to a publisher's quarterly earnings targets or a franchise's established identity. The team can iterate quickly, listen to the community, and make changes that serve the game rather than a bottom line. Whether that advantage is real or just perceived remains to be seen.

Valorant and Apex Legends achieved high player bases and success ratings due to strong mechanics and market timing, while Concord and Spectre Divide failed to capture audiences despite solid mechanics. Estimated data.

The Gameplay Deep Dive: Combat, Strategy, and Everything in Between

Let's talk about what actually happens when you start a match because that's where Highguard either clicks for you or it doesn't.

Your team spawns at your base. Immediately, you need to make a decision: do you send someone to grab the neutral objective in the center of the map, do you send your strongest player to secure a resource camp, or do you stay defensive and watch what the enemy team does? This decision-making happens in the first 30 seconds of every single match. It's not like Valorant where you're buying weapons. It's not like Fortnite where you're looting houses. You're making a real strategic choice about map control and priorities.

Each character has different strengths. Some are better at securing objectives because they can clear AI enemies quickly. Some are better at defending because their abilities protect areas. Some are better at roaming and looking for isolated enemy players. A well-constructed team comp has characters that complement each other—similar to how League of Legends values having a tank, a carry, and a support.

As you secure resources and complete objectives, your character literally gets stronger. You unlock new abilities. Your weapons deal more damage. Your health pool increases. This scaling creates natural pacing: matches feel like a rising tension arc. The first five minutes are relatively safe—you're gathering resources. The middle phase gets tense as both teams have accumulated some power. The final push is where all the accumulated decisions matter most.

Then there's the hero ultimate ability. Every character has a massive, game-changing power that charges up over the match. Maybe it's a defensive shield that protects your entire base for a few seconds. Maybe it's an offensive lockdown that stuns all enemies in an area. Maybe it's mobility that lets you teleport across the map. The moment someone uses their ultimate, it becomes a coordinated team fight, and the team that uses their ultimate more effectively usually wins that engagement.

Gunplay itself feels great. Recoil is predictable but not trivial—you can't just hold down the trigger and expect to win. Headshots are rewarded with damage multipliers. Footsteps are audio-cued so you can hear enemies rotating. Weapon feedback is crisp. If you've played Titanfall, you'll recognize the DNA here. If you haven't, you'll probably be surprised at how satisfying the moment-to-moment shooting feels compared to other shooters.

The bear mechanic deserves its own paragraph because it's genuinely cool. Certain characters can ride a massive bear as a movement option. It's slower than sprinting but makes you tougher and lets you carry momentum into engagements. It's also visually hilarious—seeing a player ride a bear into the enemy base is the kind of moment that makes Highguard feel less grim and serious than Call of Duty or Counter-Strike. That tonal shift matters for retention. When you're losing and laughing at a bear mount, you're more likely to queue up again.

Why New Shooters Fail: The Market is Brutal and Unforgiving

Let's get real about the graveyard of failed shooters. In the last five years, we've seen:

Concord (2024): A polished, well-designed 5v5 hero shooter from Firewalk Studios. Shut down. Refunded. Gone.

XDefiant (2023): Tom Clancy's multiplayer spin-off that borrowed from Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell, and Ghost Recon. It was free, it was decent, but it couldn't maintain players. Eventually sunset.

Spectre Divide (2024): A tactical shooter from First Watch Games with innovative mechanics where you control two bodies simultaneously in different spaces. Failed to find an audience despite critical acclaim.

Spellbreak (2020): A fantasy battle royale with magic systems and great art direction. The game itself was fun. Nobody played it. Shut down in 2023.

Anthem (2019): While technically not a shooter, BioWare's live-service looter had shooter DNA and massive backing. Spectacularly failed due to lack of endgame content and technical issues.

These weren't shovelware. They weren't made by inexperienced teams. Most had solid mechanics, decent art, and genuine innovation. So what killed them?

The first killer is critical mass failure. Online shooters are network effects businesses. You need enough players to guarantee matchmaking, decent server performance, and community energy. If launch week doesn't attract enough players, the experience gets worse (longer queue times, unbalanced matches), which causes more players to leave, which makes the experience even worse. It's a downward spiral that's almost impossible to reverse.

Second is onboarding complexity. Highguard's raid shooter mechanics are interesting to experienced gamers who want depth. For someone jumping in, they're confusing. Why can't I just land and get a gun like in Fortnite? Why is there this whole economy system? Why did that player become so overpowered? Complexity is fine in esports-focused games (Valorant players love learning the economy), but it's a barrier for casual players. Casual players are where the numbers come from.

Third is streamer dependency. The top 20 streamers on Twitch dictate what games new players try. If the biggest streamers aren't playing your game, new players won't discover it. Concord couldn't get streamers interested enough to stream 40+ hours per week. Spectre Divide's innovation wasn't enough to hold streamer attention. Highguard's novelty might help here—early viewers are intrigued by the bear mount and MOBA mechanics—but novelty fades.

Fourth is release timing. Highguard launched in early 2025, when seasonal content for Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Valorant is ramping up. Everyone's already invested in their game of choice. Asking them to level up a new character and learn new mechanics is a tough ask.

Fifth is live service execution. Even if Highguard launches successfully, Wildlight needs to ship balance patches, new characters, seasonal content, cosmetics, and events. One bad balance patch that makes the game unfair can cause a player exodus. One month without new content and people get bored. The team needs to execute flawlessly for 12+ months to establish a stable base.

The brutal math is this: you probably need 500,000+ concurrent players in your first month to have a decent chance of success. Highguard hasn't announced player numbers, which typically means they're not impressive enough to brag about.

The Hero System: Learning From Overwatch While Avoiding Its Mistakes

Highguard's character roster is where you see the Overwatch DNA most clearly. Each character has a basic attack, special abilities, and a game-changing ultimate. But Wildlight learned from Overwatch's balance problems and took a different approach.

Overwatch suffered from a design problem: some heroes were too good at what they did, creating "must-pick" situations. If you didn't pick the strong hero, you were at a disadvantage. This led to mirror picks (both teams using the same hero) and meant you played who was strong rather than who you liked.

Highguard seems to approach this differently. The characters I've seen in early matches have very different strengths and weaknesses, but none of them feel like a clear "must-pick." That could change as the meta develops—it always does—but the initial character balance seems more thoughtful.

The ultimate abilities are particularly well-designed. Unlike Overwatch where some ultimates are straight damage (kill everyone in an area) and others are defensive (make your team invincible), Highguard's ultimates are varied. Some are truly game-changing (destroying the enemy base instantly under certain conditions). Some are situational (useful in specific scenarios). Some are support-focused (buffing your team). This variety means there's no one "correct" ultimate to use.

What's crucial is that abilities feed into the larger economy system. Your ultimate charges up as you deal damage, secure resources, and complete objectives. This means that in a stomp (one team completely dominating), the losing team's ultimates charge up slower, which makes comebacks harder. But early game when both teams are equal, ultimate availability matters equally. It's a thoughtful system.

The downside is that this depth requires explanation. New players don't understand why they should save an ultimate for the final push instead of using it immediately. They don't realize that certain ultimates combo better with teammates. They don't know that using your ultimate early can actually hurt your team's chances.

This complexity is a feature for skilled players and a bug for casual players.

Highguard's success hinges on its unique mechanics and launch momentum, despite challenges like market saturation and player retention. Estimated data.

Base Defense and Destruction: The Objective-Focused Endgame

Unlike Fortnite where victory comes from being the last player standing, or Call of Duty where it's about killstreaks, Highguard's actual objective is destroying the enemy's base.

Your base is protected by defensive structures. As players on the enemy team farm resources and complete objectives, they get stronger. Eventually, they have enough power and coordination to break through your defenses and attack the core. Your job is to hold them off as long as possible, farm enough resources to match their power, or execute a coordinated defense that kills their momentum.

This is strategically rich. Do you send someone to defend the base while the other two push for offensive advantages? Do you rotate all three players back to defend? Do you ignore the base defense and try for an aggressive counter-attack? Each decision has consequences.

What's particularly clever is that the game prevents one-sided stomps from lasting forever. If one team is completely dominating, the losing team gets a catch-up mechanic. Resource acquisition becomes easier. Ability cooldowns get reduced. The idea is to ensure that even a team that's down doesn't completely lose hope—there's always a path to victory if you execute perfectly.

But here's the problem: this catch-up mechanic can feel cheap if you're winning. You're supposed to win because you're better, not because the game feels sorry for the other team. That's a balance that's very hard to get right.

The Aesthetic: Fantasy, Color, and Breaking From Gritty Realism

Walk into any Call of Duty or Counter-Strike match and you see realistic military equipment, muted colors, and an emphasis on tactical authenticity. This is the aesthetic that's dominated competitive shooters for 20 years.

Highguard goes a different direction. The world is colorful. The characters are stylized rather than realistic. You can ride a bear. There are fantasy elements mixed with sci-fi. It feels more like a fantasy action game than a military simulator.

This aesthetic choice is deliberate and important. It's a signal that Highguard isn't trying to be the next Call of Duty. It's not trying to appeal to players who want photorealistic soldiers and authentic weapons. It's appealing to players who want to see something different, something with personality, something that doesn't take itself too seriously.

The downside is that this aesthetic doesn't appeal to everyone. Players who love the gritty military vibe might find Highguard's fantasy setting off-putting. But the upside is that it creates a distinct visual identity. When you see Highguard footage, you know it's Highguard. That's important in a market where dozens of similar-looking games compete for attention.

The character design itself borrows from fantasy and sci-fi. You've got wizards, knights, rangers, and other archetypal characters. Each one has their own silhouette, meaning you can instantly recognize who you're fighting against based on their visual appearance. Good character design—you can tell who everyone is at a glance—is easy to underestimate and impossible to overstate in multiplayer games.

Monetization: The Free-to-Play Promise and the Reality

Highguard is free-to-play on all platforms. You can download, play, and enjoy the core game without spending a dime.

But free-to-play doesn't mean free. It means the monetization is hidden in cosmetics and battle passes.

This is where live-service games make their money. The actual gameplay isn't for sale—character balance, weapons, and map access are all free. What you can buy is how your character looks and cosmetic rewards.

Wildlight hasn't released full monetization details, but we can guess based on industry standards. There's probably a battle pass (seasonal progression track where you unlock cosmetics and currency). There's probably cosmetic bundles (weapon skins, character skins, emotes). There's probably a premium currency (bought with real money).

The critical question is: will cosmetics feel fair or predatory? Fortnite's cosmetics are expensive (

If Highguard's cosmetics feel like a money grab rather than a luxury, players will resent it. Goodwill in launch week is fragile. One bad monetization decision can tank community sentiment.

Critical mass failure and onboarding complexity are the top reasons for the failure of new shooter games, with impact scores of 9 and 8 respectively. (Estimated data)

The Competition Problem: Fortnite, Valorant, Call of Duty, and CS2

Highguard isn't entering an open market. It's entering one of the most competitive spaces in gaming.

Fortnite (300+ million players, $6+ billion in revenue) owns casual gaming. It's the first shooter most new players try. It has cultural relevance. It has celebrity events. It has a 10-year content roadmap. Fortnite is the baseline—any new shooter needs a reason for Fortnite players to switch.

Call of Duty (100+ million players, $30 billion franchise) owns the action-oriented competitive space. It ships annually. It has esports teams. It has campaign mode for players who don't care about multiplayer. A new Call of Duty comes out every year, and millions of players buy it because they want the new version.

Valorant (25+ million monthly players, billion-dollar esports ecosystem) owns the tactical competitive space. If you want a skill-based shooter with economy mechanics and strategic depth, Valorant is the standard. It's on every college esports team. It's the game serious competitors play.

Counter-Strike 2 (40+ million players, 30+ years of history) owns the hardcore competitive space. It's free-to-play. It has the deepest pro scene. It has no cosmetics inflation pushing prices up. For pure competitive play, CS2 is the default.

Now Highguard arrives and says "play me instead." Why would someone leave Fortnite's 10 years of investment and cosmetics? Why would someone leave Valorant where they're ranked Gold and all their friends play? Why would someone leave Call of Duty where new seasons roll out monthly?

Highguard's answer is: because we offer something different. The raid shooter mechanics, the MOBA-style economy, the fantasy aesthetic, and the bear mounts create an experience you can't get elsewhere.

That's a legitimate answer. But it's not a complete answer. Being different is necessary but not sufficient. You also need to be better in some way or different in a way that appeals to millions of players. Valorant succeeded by being different (tactical, economy-based) AND better at core gunplay than competitors. Apex Legends succeeded by having the smoothest movement and the most interesting character abilities of any battle royale at launch. Just being different? That's how Spectre Divide failed despite great mechanics.

Map Design and Environmental Storytelling

The maps I've seen in early play are well-constructed. They're large enough to allow strategy and flanking routes, but small enough that matches don't drag on endlessly. Resource camps are distributed fairly so neither team has a natural advantage. Sightlines are clear—you can see where enemies might come from.

What's notable is the environmental storytelling. Rather than generic military bases or sci-fi facilities, Highguard's maps have personality. There's a fantasy element that matches the aesthetic. The fantasy world-building through environment design matters—it makes the world feel lived-in rather than like a game you're playing.

This is a small detail that separates good multiplayer design from great design. You don't notice good environmental storytelling—you just feel like you're somewhere. You notice bad environmental storytelling because it feels generic.

The downside is that Highguard launched with a limited number of maps (typically 3-4 maps at launch). The community will get bored with the same maps quickly. Wildlight needs to ship new maps regularly to keep the game fresh. With only a few maps at launch, they have breathing room, but not much.

Matchmaking, Ranking, and Competitive Integrity

For Highguard to retain serious players, it needs good matchmaking. Competitive players won't stick around if every match is a stomp because the skill levels are mismatched.

Wildlight hasn't released detailed matchmaking information, but they've promised ranked mode alongside casual play. This is correct—casual players need relaxed matches, serious players need ranked competition.

The question is execution. Will matchmaking be fast or will you wait 10 minutes to find a game? Will ranked ratings accurately measure skill or will smurfs (high-level players on low-level accounts) dominate low ranks? Will the ranking system be transparent or opaque?

Valor got matchmaking right from launch—queue times are reasonable, skill is accurately measured, and the ranking system is transparent. Call of Duty has made matchmaking more aggressive (faster times, tighter skill brackets), which has angered some casual players but improved ranked integrity. Overwatch struggled with matchmaking in early seasons and it hurt the game's competitive reputation.

Highguard's advantage is that it can learn from these precedents. The technology for good matchmaking exists. The question is whether Wildlight prioritizes it or optimizes for speed and ends up with poor quality matches.

Fortnite leads with the largest player base and significant revenue, while Call of Duty boasts the highest revenue. Valorant and CS2 have smaller but dedicated communities.

Content Roadmap and the Importance of Regular Updates

Highguard's success in months 2-12 depends entirely on content updates. Nobody plays a game with the same maps, characters, and cosmetics for a year.

Wildlight needs to:

1. Add new characters every 4-6 weeks with unique abilities and playstyles, keeping the game fresh and giving players a reason to come back
2. Release new maps every 2-3 months to prevent the game from feeling stale and to create new strategic possibilities
3. Ship seasonal events and limited-time modes that create FOMO (fear of missing out) and give returning players new experiences
4. Balance problematic characters when they become too powerful or weak, which requires data analysis and player feedback integration
5. Expand the cosmetics catalog with skins, emotes, and weapon designs that appeal to different aesthetics
6. Support esports and competitive play with tournaments, ranking systems, and pro player stipends

This is a massive, ongoing commitment. Fortnite ships a new map season every 3 months. Call of Duty ships seasonal content every 6 weeks. Valorant adds a new agent every 2 months. These update cadences require dozens of developers across design, art, engineering, and QA teams.

Wildlight is a smaller studio than Activision or Epic. They might not have the resources to match AAA update cadences. If Highguard's updates lag behind competitors, players will notice. "We're waiting for new content" becomes "I'm bored and going back to Valorant."

This is perhaps the largest risk for Highguard. Technical execution is one thing. Sustained, regular content delivery is another entirely. Many games have failed at launch and were fine, then failed at months 3-6 when the content roadmap showed cracks.

The Streamer Question: Twitch Adoption as a Success Metric

If you want to know if an online game will succeed, check Twitch viewership during launch week. If the top 50 streamers are playing it for 40+ hours per week, the game probably has a shot. If Twitch interest peaks at day 3 and then drops, the game is probably doomed.

Why does Twitch matter so much? Because new players discover games through streaming. They watch streamers, think "that looks cool," and download it themselves. This creates a feedback loop: more streamers = more viewers = more new players = easier matchmaking = better experience for casual players = more players stick around.

Highguard's Twitch presence has been modest but not terrible. Enough streamers have played it for people to see the gameplay. But it's not dominated Twitch the way that Concord briefly did or the way that major Fortnite updates do.

The question is whether that momentum builds or fades. Launch weeks are special—every game gets a bump. But after the initial rush, retention is what matters.

The Economics of Game Development and Long-term Viability

Here's something people don't talk about enough: game development is expensive, and live-service games are absurdly expensive to maintain.

Highguard probably cost $30-50 million to develop based on its scope and team size. Wildlight probably has 2-3 years of funding (based on investor backing or publisher support) to make the game profitable.

What does profitability look like? If Highguard gets 5 million registered players and 500,000 monthly active players, and even a small percentage spend money on cosmetics, the math works. If it gets 500,000 registered players and 50,000 monthly active, the math doesn't work and the game gets sunset within 12 months.

These numbers aren't arbitrary—they're based on industry standards for live-service games. A game needs critical mass to pay for servers, bandwidth, developer salaries, and ongoing development.

The question is whether Wildlight has enough runway and funding to survive a slow start. Some games have. Rainbow Six Siege was slow to gain traction but Ubisoft stuck with it for years and it became a billion-dollar franchise. Some games don't. Anthem got one year before BioWare essentially abandoned it.

Estimated data shows Wildlight's Highguard aims for frequent updates to stay competitive, with 6 character updates and 4 map updates annually. Estimated data.

Comparison to Recent Shooter Launches: What Worked and What Didn't

To understand Highguard's odds, let's look at what's happened with recent shooters.

Valorant (2020) succeeded because it had perfect timing (esports players bored with CS: GO), exceptional gunplay (the best of any tactical shooter), a strong economy system (borrowed from CS: GO but improved), good character design, and a developer (Riot Games) with deep esports pockets. It also had a streamer-friendly competitive scene. Result: 25+ million players, billion-dollar esports ecosystem, ongoing success.

Apex Legends (2019) succeeded because it had the smoothest movement of any battle royale, interesting character abilities borrowed from Overwatch, excellent gunplay, and launched on multiple platforms simultaneously. EA had already proven itself with Titanfall. Result: 100+ million players, stable revenue, though it never became as dominant as Fortnite.

Helldivers 2 (2023) succeeded despite being a PvE game (not competitive) because it had satisfying gameplay, regular updates, optional cosmetics that didn't feel predatory, and filled a niche that other games ignored. Result: 10+ million players, strong retention, ESG recognition.

Concord (2024) failed because despite solid mechanics and developer pedigree, it launched into an oversaturated market, couldn't differentiate itself from Overwatch and Valorant, and couldn't get streamer traction. Most importantly, it didn't have a unique hook. It was "fine" but not "must-play." Result: Shutdown within months, full refunds, estimated $200+ million loss.

Spectre Divide (2024) failed despite being mechanically innovative because the innovation (two-body control in different spaces) was confusing for casual players, it couldn't build streamer momentum, and it launched too close to Valorant's release. Result: Failed to find audience, likely to be sunset.

XDefiant (2023) failed because it was competent but uninspired, couldn't differentiate from Valorant or CS: GO, and the free-to-play monetization felt aggressive. Players asked "why not just play Valorant?" and had no answer. Result: Shutdown.

The pattern is clear: mechanical competence alone isn't enough. You need differentiation + timing + streamer traction + a unique hook + developer resources to support long-term updates.

Highguard has differentiation (raid shooter mechanics), mechanical competence (Titanfall DNA), and likely has developer resources (Wildlight is well-funded). What it doesn't have yet is proven streamer traction and clear timing advantage. It's launching when Fortnite is strong, Valorant is the competitive standard, and Call of Duty is about to ship a new seasonal update.

The Skill Gap Problem and Accessibility

Highguard's complexity creates a skill gap. Experienced players will dominate new players. This is true for all multiplayer games, but it's more pronounced in games with complex mechanics.

In Fortnite, new players can occasionally win because luck and random loot matter. In Valorant, new players get stomped because everyone's better at shooting and economy is complex. Highguard falls somewhere in between—it's not luck-based, but the complexity of the economy system means new players will struggle.

This is a retention problem. Your first three matches are critical for deciding if you'll keep playing. If you lose all three because you don't understand the economy and you're outleveled, you probably won't come back.

Highguard can solve this with:

1. Tutorial systems that explain mechanics gradually, not all at once
2. Skill-based matchmaking that doesn't match new players against veterans
3. Ranked tiers so casual players play casuals and competitive players play competitively
4. Onboarding cosmetics that signal skill level (a new-player skin) so veterans know to respect the match

Valorant did most of this well. New players get a tutorial. Casual mode exists separately from ranked. The ranking system segregates skill levels. This improved retention significantly.

Highguard seems to be implementing similar systems. The question is execution. Will matchmaking actually work or will new players queue into stomps?

Esports Potential: The Long Game for Competitive Shooters

If Highguard wants to last 10 years, it needs esports. Not immediately, but within 12 months.

Why? Because esports keeps hardcore players engaged. Casual players play for fun. Esports players play to compete, climb rankings, and potentially make money. They're the most engaged audience.

Valorant's esports ecosystem is worth billions. Teams like FaZe Clan, Sentinels, and 100 Thieves generate huge revenue. International tournaments draw millions of viewers. This esports presence keeps hardcore players engaged and creates a path for talented players to make money.

For Highguard to build esports, it needs several things:

1. Clear competitive ruleset that differs from casual (BO3 format, map bans, character bans, etc.)
2. Transparent ranking system that pro players respect and can grind on
3. Publisher backing to fund pro teams and tournaments
4. International appeal so the game works for players worldwide
5. Spectator tools so viewers can watch matches and understand what's happening

Wildlight has mentioned competitive focus in interviews. Whether they can execute on that remains to be seen.

The esports angle is important because it separates "games with staying power" from "games that peak and fade." Games that go competitive (Valorant, Apex Pro Series, Overwatch League) tend to retain 3+ year player bases. Games that don't (Spellbreak, Concord) tend to fade after 6-12 months.

Platform Availability: PC, Console, and the Importance of Cross-Play

Highguard launched on PS5, Xbox Series X|S, and Steam. That's smart coverage.

Not including last-gen consoles (PS4, Xbox One) is the right call—the game looks good and runs smoothly, and forcing it to work on older hardware would compromise performance. Not launching on Nintendo Switch is also correct—the game's complexity doesn't suit Switch's install base.

Cross-play between platforms is critical. If PS5 players can't play with PC players, the player pool is fragmented and matchmaking suffers. Highguard supports cross-play, which is correct.

Mobile is notably absent. No iOS (Apple doesn't allow Unreal Engine games easily), no Android. This is a major limitation because mobile is where millions of casual players live. Fortnite's mobile presence was huge before Apple's app store restrictions. PUBG Mobile has 30+ million players. Games without mobile are leaving hundreds of millions of players on the table.

Wildlight could add mobile in the future if the PC/console version succeeds. For launch, ignoring mobile is acceptable.

The Narrative Around Highguard: Betting Against the Odds

If you read coverage about Highguard, there's a consistent narrative: "Talented team made a good game, but the odds are stacked against it."

This narrative is accurate. Wildlight did make a good game. The odds are stacked against it. But narratives matter for player retention.

If players believe a game is doomed, it becomes self-fulfilling prophecy. They don't invest in cosmetics (why buy skins if the game's getting shut down?). They don't grind ranked (why grind if the game's dying?). They don't recruit friends (why introduce them to a dying game?).

Wildlight needs to fight this narrative. They need to:

1. Share player numbers publicly if they're impressive, or keep quiet if they're not
2. Commit to a clear content roadmap showing new characters, maps, and features for the next 12 months
3. Support esports early with tournaments and pro team sponsorships
4. Be transparent about monetization to build community trust
5. Ship big updates regularly to show ongoing development

The narrative can be changed, but it requires sustained positive momentum and clear communication.

What Players Actually Want From Online Shooters in 2025

Let's step back from Highguard specifically and think about what the playerbase actually wants.

Casual players want:

• Quick matchmaking (under 3 minutes)
• Relaxed, fun matches where winning isn't everything
• Regular cosmetic updates so their character looks fresh
• No pressure or complexity
• Crossplay so they can play with friends on different platforms

Competitive players want:

• Stable, fair matchmaking
• Balanced characters and weapons
• A ranking system they can grind
• Low ping servers
• Regular balance patches
• Esports opportunities

Content creators (streamers) want:

• Interesting gameplay that's fun to watch
• Regular patches that make the game feel fresh
• Cosmetics that look good on stream
• A supportive developer community
• Path to monetization (sponsorships, tournaments)

Highguard checks most of these boxes. The question is whether it checks them better than alternatives.

The Three Scenarios: Success, Slow Decline, Rapid Failure

Let's be honest about Highguard's probable futures.

Scenario 1: Success (20% probability)

Highguard finds its audience in month 2-3. Twitch viewership grows. Streamers become loyal. The community builds. Player counts hit 1 million+ monthly active. The game becomes profitable and Wildlight hits all their content targets. By year 2, Highguard is established alongside Valorant and Apex as a game people seriously play. This requires perfect execution, good timing, and luck. Valorant followed this path, but Valorant is the exception, not the rule.

Scenario 2: Slow Decline (50% probability)

Highguard launches fine. Players hit 500K-1M in month 1. By month 3, retention drops to 200K-300K as casual players drift to Fortnite and competitive players stick with Valorant. The core community remains stable at 100-200K players, enough to keep servers running and matchmaking viable. The game never becomes "dominant" but it sustains for 3-5 years as a secondary game people play alongside their main shooter. This is the Apex Legends path—successful but not revolutionary.

Scenario 3: Rapid Failure (30% probability)

Highguard's matchmaking has problems. New player experience is confusing. Streamers don't stick with it past week 2. Monthly active players drop below 100K by month 3. Wildlight realizes the game won't be profitable and makes the difficult decision to sunset it by month 12-18, offering refunds and apologizing for the failed experiment. This is the Concord/XDefiant path.

These probabilities are rough guesses, but they reflect the brutal reality of multiplayer games: most fail or decline. A small percentage succeed. An even smaller percentage become dominant.

The Verdict: Worth Your Time? Worth the Developer's Effort?

Is Highguard worth playing? Honestly, yeah. If you like shooters and you have five hours to spare, try it. The gameplay is solid, the mechanics are interesting, and the fantasy aesthetic is refreshing.

Should you invest hundreds of hours? Should you buy cosmetics? That depends on risk tolerance. If you're okay with playing a game that might get sunset in 12 months, go for it. If you want a game that's guaranteed to have a stable population in 2026, stick with Valorant or Fortnite.

Is Highguard worth the developer's effort? Here's where I'm more optimistic. Wildlight is betting on doing something different, and that's admirable. If they execute well, they could carve out a permanent space for Highguard. Even if they don't, the game will have been played and enjoyed by millions of players. That's not failure—that's just the reality of competitive multiplayer games.

The shooter space is crowded, brutal, and unforgiving. Highguard is a well-made game entering that space with a solid team and some interesting ideas. Whether that's enough? Time will tell. We probably won't know until month 6 when the launch hype fades and the question becomes: did players actually come back?

For now, the promise is real, and so are the perils. Enjoy Highguard while it lasts—it very well might be a year or two, or it very well might be five years and counting. That's the game industry in 2025: nothing's guaranteed except change.

FAQ

What is Highguard exactly, and how is it different from other shooters?

Highguard is a 3v3 "raid shooter" that combines first-person shooter gunplay with MOBA-style mechanics. Unlike traditional shooters like Fortnite or Call of Duty where you drop into a map to hunt kills, Highguard gives each team a base they must defend while trying to destroy the enemy base. You earn resources by defeating AI creatures and completing objectives, then use those resources to become stronger throughout the match. This economy system adds strategic depth—you're managing resources as much as managing gunplay, making it mechanically deeper than most casual shooters but potentially more complex for new players.

How does the raid shooter economy system actually work?

Throughout a Highguard match, you farm resources by defeating neutral AI enemies and completing map objectives. These resources let you level up, unlock new abilities, and upgrade your character's stats like damage and health. The team that manages resources more efficiently typically has stronger characters by late game. This is borrowed from MOBAs like League of Legends, but applied to a first-person shooter. The key difference from traditional shooters is that you can't just land and immediately be powerful—you need to farm for the first 3-5 minutes. Early game matches are strategic positioning and smart skirmishes. Late game is about who scaled better and who has better ultimate abilities charged up.

Why did other new shooters like Concord and Spectre Divide fail despite being well-made?

These games failed due to a combination of factors. Concord had solid mechanics but couldn't differentiate itself clearly from Overwatch and Valorant, and it couldn't get mainstream streamers interested enough to maintain Twitch presence. Spectre Divide's innovation (two-body control in different spaces) was mechanically interesting but confusing for casual players and didn't have enough streamer appeal. Both games also launched into an already-saturated market where players were already deeply invested in existing games like Valorant, Fortnite, and Call of Duty. Additionally, new player onboarding was complex in both games, and neither achieved the critical mass needed for healthy matchmaking and community momentum. The industry standard is that you need 500K+ concurrent players in the first month to have a real shot at long-term viability.

What's Wildlight Entertainment's track record, and why does it matter?

Wildlight was founded by veterans from Apex Legends, Titanfall, and Call of Duty. The Apex Legends connection is significant because that game demonstrated the team understands character balance, live-service operations, and making shooters feel good to play. Titanfall's influence shows in Highguard's movement system, which is noticeably smoother than most competitors. The Call of Duty experience brings understanding of progression systems, cosmetic design, and how to keep players engaged long-term. This pedigree matters because it shows Highguard is made by people who've shipped successful multiplayer games before. However, experience alone doesn't guarantee success—even talented teams can fail if they miss on timing, player acquisition, or community management, as Concord demonstrated.

Is Highguard free-to-play, and how does the monetization work?

Yes, Highguard is completely free to download and play on PS5, Xbox Series X|S, and Steam. The monetization comes from cosmetics (character skins, weapon skins, emotes) and a seasonal battle pass. The actual gameplay—characters, maps, weapons, abilities—is not locked behind paywalls. This is the standard free-to-play model. The question is whether cosmetics feel reasonably priced or predatory. Early cosmetics pricing seems in line with industry standards, but battle pass grind and seasonal content pricing could become an issue depending on how aggressive Wildlight gets. For comparison, Valorant has expensive cosmetics ($20-50 for weapon skins) but feels fair because the core game is so good. Fortnite has expensive cosmetics but players accept it because of cultural relevance.

How does Highguard's skill-based matchmaking prevent new players from getting stomped?

Highguard uses skill-based matchmaking in both casual and ranked modes, attempting to pair you with players of similar ability. The goal is that a brand-new player doesn't queue into a match against veterans with 100 hours of experience. However, matchmaking quality depends on active player count—with fewer players, you get longer queue times or weaker skill-based matching. This is why game size matters. Valorant has excellent matchmaking because millions of players exist in every skill bracket. A game with only 100K monthly players will have matchmaking issues. Highguard's success depends partly on whether they achieve the critical mass needed for good matchmaking. Early player counts will determine if matchmaking works or if new players have genuinely rough first experiences.

What's the likelihood that Highguard will become as popular as Fortnite or Valorant?

Realistically? Low. Probably 10-20% chance. Here's why: Fortnite succeeded through cultural relevance, celebrity partnerships, and being first in the modern battle royale space. Valorant succeeded through exceptional gunplay, perfect timing (esports players bored with CS: GO), and Riot's willingness to pump millions into esports. Highguard's raid shooter mechanics are different and interesting, but different alone isn't enough. It also needs to be demonstrably better at something than existing options, have perfect execution on live-service updates, and capture streamer/esports interest. This is achievable but difficult. A more realistic scenario is that Highguard becomes a solid secondary game like Apex Legends—not the dominant player, but a healthy, stable community that sustains for years.

Should I invest cosmetics money in Highguard if I'm worried it might get shut down?

That's a risk calculation you have to make. Games do get shut down (Concord, Anthem's live-service, Spellbreak), and cosmetics you've purchased will be gone. However, most launched games that reach a certain player threshold survive long-term. If Highguard gets 200K+ monthly active players by month 3, it'll probably survive for 3+ years. If it drops to 50K by month 3, shutdown within 18 months is realistic. The safest approach is to wait 3 months, see if player counts and content updates are healthy, then decide if it's worth cosmetics investment. For someone who loves the game and wants to support it, spending money is reasonable. For someone sitting on the fence about the game, hold off until you know it's going to stick around.

How often will new content come out, and what kind?

Wildlight hasn't released a detailed content calendar yet, but they've mentioned commitment to regular updates. Industry standard for successful shooters is: new character every 4-6 weeks, new maps every 2-3 months, seasonal content and limited-time events continuously. Balance patches happen weekly or biweekly. Whether Wildlight can maintain this pace depends on team size and resource allocation. Fortnite and Call of Duty have massive teams and can update constantly. Smaller studios struggle. If Highguard's update cadence slows to monthly or longer, player retention will suffer. The contentment of the community in months 2-6 will largely be determined by whether new content keeps arriving on schedule.

Conclusion: The Game We Hope Succeeds But Shouldn't Expect To

There's something beautiful about watching a talented team make an ambitious bet. Wildlight Entertainment did that. They took people who'd shipped Apex Legends and Titanfall, gave them resources, and said "make the shooter you want to make."

The result is Highguard. A game that's solidly made, mechanically interesting, and different enough to stand out. It's not reinventing the wheel—the shooter wheel was invented 20 years ago and perfected by Valve with Half-Life. But it's spinning that wheel in a new direction, mixing in MOBA elements and fantasy aesthetics and pretending you can ride a bear into battle.

Does Highguard succeed? Honestly, I don't know. The odds are genuinely against it. Dozens of ambitious shooters have launched with great teams and failed. But so have dozens of ambitious shooters succeeded. Valorant is proof that doing something different with excellent execution still works. Apex Legends is proof that borrowing mechanics from multiple genres and nailing the core gunplay creates something special.

What's certain is that Highguard will be played by millions of people. In month one, launch momentum will push it to the top of Steam. Twitch will feature it. YouTube will have thousands of videos. You'll see clips of people riding bears, using ultimate abilities, and clutching base defenses. It'll be a moment.

Whether that moment extends into month 12 depends on decisions Wildlight makes about matchmaking quality, content update cadence, community management, and whether they can sustain the spark of launch enthusiasm into the grinding reality of year-two operations.

For players, the choice is straightforward: try it while it's fresh. The game is free. You'll play 3-5 hours in the first week and decide whether the raid shooter mechanics click for you. If they do, you've found something special. If they don't, Valorant and Fortnite will still be there.

For Wildlight, the real work starts in month 2 when launch momentum fades and the question becomes: did players actually want this game, or were they just trying something new?

That's the most interesting question in game development right now. And the next few months will tell us the answer.

Key Takeaways

• Highguard is a 3v3 raid shooter combining first-person shooter mechanics with MOBA economy systems, creating a unique hybrid gameplay experience that's strategically deeper than Fortnite but potentially more complex for new players
• Wildlight Entertainment's team has shipped Apex Legends and Titanfall, giving them legitimate pedigree in multiplayer game development, though experience alone doesn't guarantee success in an oversaturated market
• New online shooters face brutal market saturation where dozens have failed despite quality mechanics (Concord, Spectre Divide, XDefiant), making Highguard's success dependent on perfect execution across matchmaking, content updates, and community management
• The first 6 months are critical for Highguard's survival—it needs to achieve critical mass (500K+ monthly active players) and maintain streamer interest to avoid the shutdown path that befell competitors
• Highguard's raid shooter mechanics are genuinely different from competitors, but differentiation alone isn't enough—it must also execute better at core gameplay, maintain a healthy content roadmap, and build esports infrastructure to retain players long-term

Related Articles

• The New York Times Crossplay: Building the First Two-Player Game [2025]
• Arc Raiders Out-of-Bounds Exploits: Why Players Still Can't Trust Stella Montis [2025]
• Why Highguard Failed on Steam: A Marketing Disaster Case Study [2025]
• Blizzard's Four Showcase Events 2025: What to Expect from WoW, Overwatch, Diablo & Hearthstone
• Ubisoft's Crisis: Layoffs, Studio Closures, and the Gaming Industry Reckoning [2025]
• Beast of Reincarnation: Why Game Freak Prioritizes Gameplay Over Graphics [2025]