'PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds' Dev Isn't Happy About 'Fornite: Battle Royale'

News
By Nathaniel Mott
published

Gaming trends often follow a predictable cycle: a new game comes out, finds a following, and is picked apart by other developers hoping to replicate its success. PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds quickly went through the first two steps—it's the most popular game in Steam history—so it's no surprise that Epic Games decided to kick start the third step with Fortnite: Battle Royale. The games are remarkably similar in design.

PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds publisher Bluehole noticed those similarities, and it's not happy about them. The company released a statement today in which it slammed Epic Games' decision to enter the "battle royale" market with the aptly named Fortnite: Battle Royale. It said:

“We’ve had an ongoing relationship with Epic Games throughout PUBG’s development as they are the creators of UE4, the engine we licensed for the game,” said Chang Han Kim, Vice President and Executive Producer for Bluehole, Inc. “After listening to the growing feedback from our community and reviewing the gameplay for ourselves, we are concerned that Fortnite may be replicating the experience for which PUBG is known.”

Bluehole isn't wrong to be worried about other games chipping away at PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds' success. This is going to sound weird, but bear with us. The game is popular because it's so popular. A large audience means players don't have to sit through long queue times, that people will watch others play the game on Twitch, and that even more gamers will buy the title just to see what all the fuss is about.

Other games could eat away at those numbers, which could have a domino effect. Fewer players means longer queue times, which means fewer players, and so on and so forth. PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds swiftly became a juggernaut in the game industry despite only being available as an incomplete Early Access title. Maintaining that momentum—or at least making sure it doesn't reverse—is crucial to the title and Bluehole itself.

Still, it's hard not to think Bluehole shouldn't worry too much. The first and foremost reason is that this happens to all popular games. Remember when first-person shooters were called Doom clones? Surely you've also seen the so-called "Souls-likes" that have popped up since Dark Souls took the world by storm. Both of those franchises are fine—the latest Doom was quite popular, and so were later installments in the Souls series.

So, yes, Fortnite: Battle Royale puts a unique spin on PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds' core "battle royale" gameplay. But is anyone surprised that other developers would enter this market? And should Bluehole really be that worried about someone coming after the title's throne?

Swipe to scroll horizontally
NamePlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
TypeShooter
DeveloperBluehole
PublisherBluehole
PlatformsPC, Xbox One
Where To BuySteam
Release DateMarch 23, 2017 (Early Access)
Nathaniel Mott
Nathaniel Mott
Freelance News & Features Writer

Nathaniel Mott is a freelance news and features writer for Tom's Hardware US, covering breaking news, security, and the silliest aspects of the tech industry.

17 Comments Comment from the forums
  • ibjeepr
    HELLO and welcome to Shark Tank!

    Shark 1: How many patents do you have.
    Dev: None.
    Shark 1: So any larger business can simply duplicate your success?
    Dev: No, we're special (listing irrelevant ways they think they're safe)
    Shark 1: I'm out; but welcome to the game industry.
    Reply
  • travis.eno
    In all honesty its just a better version of PUBG. In literally every way. It lacks features (For the moment) but the core of the game is much more solid and E-sports ready.
    Reply
  • clonazepam
    It's one thing for a dev to copy another dev, but to copy your own customer's success? I couldn't personally go that route, but they can and will obviously do whatever they want.

    In the end, they can simply say their Fortnite customers demanded a Battle Royale mode and so they provided, simple as that I guess.

    Edit: Imagine the scenario where you're designing a game with the UE and you're contacting Epic, sharing your ideas, because you need their technical expertise to get the engine to do what you need it to, or you simply encounter bugs in the engine that inevitably lead to some sharing of ideas or concepts during the reporting process, and down the road, there's your game mode in one of their titles. I'm not suggesting that's the case here, but that has to be in the back of the minds of anyone considering using it from here on out. It'd be like a swift kick to the chest that sends you through plate glass.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. They should be thrilled others are trying to ape their success. Besides, PUBG already has 10,000,000 copies sold, it's not like there's going to be a mass refunding because someone else is doing the same thing.

    If they want to secure future potential customers, assuming there's even anyone left to buy the game, they just need to make their game better than the alternatives. Are they afraid they can't do that or something? And if they are afraid of that, why would they broadcast that insecurity? It's not going to make anyone want their game more.
    Reply
  • travis.eno
    20200910 said:
    It's one thing for a dev to copy another dev, but to copy your own customer's success? I couldn't personally go that route, but they can and will obviously do whatever they want.

    In the end, they can simply say their Fortnite customers demanded a Battle Royale mode and so they provided, simple as that I guess.

    Edit: Imagine the scenario where you're designing a game with the UE and you're contacting Epic, sharing your ideas, because you need their technical expertise to get the engine to do what you need it to, or you simply encounter bugs in the engine that inevitably lead to some sharing of ideas or concepts during the reporting process, and down the road, there's your game mode in one of their titles. I'm not suggesting that's the case here, but that has to be in the back of the minds of anyone considering using it from here on out. It'd be like a swift kick to the chest that sends you through plate glass.

    I think if PUBG had created the "Battle Royal" Genre they would have grounds to be upset. But they didn't. Look at all the successful DOTA clones. LoL Is still the most popular game in the world, and it was nothing more than a more polished version of the WC3 mod. And continues to be one of the most polished versions of the genre. I think competition is good for any genre of video game. More options for the players. More motivation to innovate and improve the product. In the end, the consumer is winning here.
    Reply
  • neilquan
    TRAVIS.ENO, you're exactly right. PUBG did not invent the Battle Royale game mode. Imagine if only the first game who introduced capture the flag or rescue/escort could stop others from ever using that mode. Many of the best games would have never existed. It's silly.
    UE is ubiquitous at this point. (How do you like my word of the day?). It's hard to find a shooter that doesn't use it. Even had they created their own physics engine (no small task), someone else would have eventually introduce BR mode. So I think PUBG's argument is really worthless.
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    Bluehole should get used to this. We saw all manner of DOTA clones trying to ride off of their success. Open world went absolutely nuts after GTA3 made a ton of cash off of it. Everyone wanted to make an RTS game after Warcraft came out. Now we've moved on to hero shooters thanks to Overwatch. Next, it's battle royale games -- there will be a ton of them in the next year or two.

    This is how the gaming industry works. This sort of competition and innovation is awesome. It's the reason we have games like Cities Skylines, Just Cause, Halo, and even PUBG itself. "Anything you can do I can do better," is healthy for this industry. I don't want to see the gaming industry turn into some nightmarish offshoot of the mobile software industry where everyone is constantly suing everyone else.
    Reply
  • lucas_7_94
    I think PUBG is a currently good game. But, like every game out there, it will slowly die. They need to perform -in a future- fast start games with 30~50~70~100 people on the server.
    Reply
  • jasonelmore
    Keep in mind PUBG copied H1Z1. H1Z1 copied Dayz, the chain continues.. PUBG owes everything they have to H1Z1, they shouldn't be talking any trash.
    Reply
  • Ben Pottinger
    PuBG is a fun game and worth the 25$ I spent on it but like all MP games without player controlled servers it has a shelf life. If you want to maintain total control and eventually sell micro transactions, etc then do what their doing. If you want people to be playing your game 20 years from now, publish a server client. (And the games high player count isn't an issue, plenty of us have the bandwidth and hardware to run a 100+ player capable server).
    Reply