Is Lawbreaker's (relatively) low population a dealbreaker for you?

[sanquin]

The deal breaker for me is that it came too late to the party. I'm not much of a shooter player at all. I've played maybe 3 in the last few years. One was doom 2016, another was fallout 4 (because it's really more a shooter than an rpg), and lastly Overwatch. And Overwatch already filled the online shooter slot for me. I don't -want- to add more online shooters to that considering how little I play them.

 

[Deadguy2322]

The dealbreaker for me, besides the multiplayer-only thing, is that Bleszinsky is a douchebag who hasn?t ever made a good game. The sooner he is out of the industry, the better! Don?t let the door hit you, Clifford!

 

[laggyteabag]

Yes.

Why would I want to drop any substatial amount of money on a game that didn't even attract 2k peak players on launch day, and is sitting around 700 peak daily - less than 2 weeks after the game came out? Who can say that the game will even be playable within a few months, at this rate?

Its a shame, though, because LawBreakers looks like a lot of fun, and is my kind of game, but there is no point investing in a failed project. It must be hard for the developers to spend however much time, money, and passion developing the game, only for it to heckled before it comes out for looking too much like Overwatch, and then release with the enthusiasm of a wet fart.

Free 2 Play within 6 months.