If things couldn't have gone worse, it also 'officially' launching alongside Apex Legends, a game which no one anticipated. Not only did this split the playerbase, but it was also confusing for new players (which to purchase?), resulting in both games needing vastly different balance, and resources that were likely already stretched, were pulled further. Unfortunately for Stunlock, they made a catastrophic error by making it standalone. Not because Battlerite Royale was bad, in fact, it was an excellent spin on the genre. If you consider the man hours and resources that were directed at a game mode that was, in part, an attempt to not only broaden its appeal, but also capitalize on a current trend, it was always a massive risk. The elephant in the room, and one that - as far as I’m concerned - killed Battlerite. Why were Stunlock so slow to implement all the above when it would have unquestionably reaped rewards when it came to player retention? Battle Royale It forces you to find players outside of the client, which is neither helpful nor practical. To login to the game, and face silence - when you likely have many questions - makes you feel isolated. While none of these features may set the world alight, they’re quality of life improvements that would unquestionably help the community grow. Universal chat, and private group channels (when navigating menus).Unfortunately, a combination of factors lead Battlerite on a path it couldn’t quite recover from.įrom the moment Battlerite launched, players have asked for nothing more than a list of key features that would not only support the community, but also new players, competition and retention. Heck, I’d go as far as to say the studio - and Battlerite - does most things right. No one can question Stunlock’s Champion design, kits, art direction or their ability to deliver a polished product. I’ve written about the game many times, and promoted it to all who’ll listen. This What Went Wrong won’t highlight all the good that Battlerite offers. There are valuable lessons for the studio to learn, and I think it’s often helpful as an outsider to deep-dive and clear through the wreckage. Despite all the good that Stunlock Studios have done in the game and for the genre, it clearly missed its mark somewhere along the way. Having invested thousands of hours into Battlerite, it genuinely pains me to see its decline and - most likely - inevitable closure. Those ten players were acola, Asimo, Gackt, Hero, Kameme, KEN, ProtoBanham, Shuton, Tea, and Yoshidora.As has become customary when a game I play hits the skids, I’m keen to break down what I think went wrong. However, there were ten featured players unordered on the Japan list that were given a distinction compared to the other players. Japan's rankings were not ordered, while the other two rankings were. The list was split into three regions (North America, Europe, and Japan) instead of a global top 50. The third version of the PGRU took into account tournament results from Smash Ultimate Summit 4 to Battle of BC 4. The second version of the list took into account tournament results from Low Tier City 7 to Sumabato SP10. Ally's ranking picture and X-Factor were omitted due to his departure and ban.

The first version of the list took into account tournament results from GENESIS 6 to Albion 4. A player with a negative X-Factor would be someone showing impressive results and wins with a lack of acknowledgement from the panellists. A player with a very positive X-Factor would theoretically be a notable player that is very strong in the eyes of the top players but would not have enough results to back them up.

The X-Factor is the difference between a player's Panda Global Rank and their spot on the list that the panellists rated them. The PGRU includes a separate and subjective metric voted upon by the panellists referred to as 'X-Factor'. Ultimate players as determined by Panda Global's stats team, PG Stats, and a panel of community figureheads. PGRU is a ranking of the top 50 Super Smash Bros.

All pictures of battlerite ranks