The Absolute Disaster of Highguard

Highguard was supposed to be a bold new entry in the crowded shooter genre – a free-to-play “raid” hero shooter from a new studio founded by ex-Titanfall and Apex Legends developers. It even landed the coveted final reveal slot at The Game Awards 2025. Unfortunately, virtually nothing went right after that flashy debut. Highguard’s launch in January 2026 was met with scathing reviews, technical meltdowns, and an immediate player exodus. What promised to be a fresh mix of fantasy and sci-fi action quickly became the cautionary tale of the year. This article critically examines the myriad failures of Highguard – from gameplay and design misfires to bugs, performance issues, marketing blunders, and the ensuing community backlash – and compares its fate to other notorious game launch debacles like Cyberpunk 2077, Anthem, and Fallout 76. In the end, we’ll distill some hard lessons the gaming industry should learn from the Highguard fiasco.

Overhyped Reveal and Marketing Missteps

Highguard’s troubles began before anyone even played it. The game’s world premiere came as the surprise finale of The Game Awards 2025, a spot typically reserved for industry juggernauts. The reveal landed with a thud. Many viewers felt let down that this was not the Titanfall 3 they had been speculating about, but rather an unknown IP that failed to wow the internet. The trailer’s reception was immediately negative – its YouTube uploads amassed heavily downvoted like/dislike ratios. In gaming forums, Highguard was mercilessly “memed into the ground” as players joked that closing the show with it was “unwarranted” and indicative of an overhyped dud. The unfortunate timing meant Highguard was widely viewed as a bait-and-switch – as one gamer quipped, “that’s what they get for baiting us with Titanfall”.

To make matters worse, the marketing push after that reveal was virtually nonexistent. Highguard went radio silent for weeks following the Game Awards, with no beta tests or substantial gameplay showcases. This vacuum of information bred speculation and skepticism among the community. By the time launch day arrived (a mere six weeks after its unveil), confusion reigned – many gamers didn’t even realize Highguard was releasing, and those who did were wary. As one observer noted, attempting a sudden launch so soon after announcement (a strategy that worked for Apex Legends) is incredibly risky “if you are not ABSOLUTELY SURE your game works pretty damn well”. Wildlight Entertainment’s decision to forgo public testing meant that any hidden flaws would be exposed live to a paying audience.

Finally, the positioning of Highguard as a marquee title simply set expectations too high. By closing out a major awards show and touting the resumes of its developers, the studio invited direct comparisons to top-tier shooters. But Highguard in reality was a smaller-scale experiment. When gamers booted it up, many immediately felt it didn’t live up to the hype– it “wasn’t a massive new IP or highly anticipated sequel” worthy of that spotlight. In retrospect, the marketing and reveal strategy for Highguard was a major miscalculation: it created big-budget anticipation that the final product could not fulfill.

Flawed Gameplay and Design

Highguard’s core gameplay issues proved just as damaging as the marketing blunders. On paper, the concept sounded intriguing – a 3v3 PvP “raid shooter” blending elements of hero shooter abilities, MOBA-style phases, base defense like Rainbow Six Siege, and even mounts to ride across a large map. In practice, however, Highguard turned out to be a muddled grab-bag of ideas that never coalesced into a fun whole. Critics described it as a game that “couldn’t commit to one idea” and instead “tossed everything in”, resulting in a bland experience. The fantasy-meets-sci-fi setting, for example, ended up feeling generic – “nothing sticks out. There’s no charm, no quirks”, lamented Kotaku’s review, calling Highguard “such a boring game to look at”. The world and characters are painfully forgettable; after dozens of matches, the reviewer struggled to name a single hero beyond one obnoxious dude, as every character felt like a generic tough guy or sneaky woman with zero personality. This lack of distinctive identity or lore for the heroes (they literally shipped with no bios or backstories) left players feeling no attachment to the game’s universe.

The raid shooter format itself sounds innovative, but Highguard’s execution was deeply flawed. Each match consists of disjointed phases: a slow preparation segment of fortifying your base and looting neutral areas, then a frantic contest over a giant sword relic, and finally a base assault (“raid”) to decide the round. Rather than flowing together, these pieces actively undermine each other. Highguard’s time-to-kill is extremely low, with fast Call of Duty–style gunplay that makes early skirmishes end in seconds. This discouraged engaging the enemy at all in the initial phases – dying quickly is no fun, so why bother hunting opponents before the raid? Instead, optimal play meant ignoring combat to farm crystals and cash for gear upgrades, since the PvE looting yielded far more resources than PvP kills. As one frustrated player explained, “you basically are guaranteed to get decent guns and armor from the first round’s chests… there’s no incentive to go try and kill people at this point”. In other words, the game’s own design encourages avoiding the very firefights that should be exciting. When the raid finally comes, it is indeed the tensest part – but even there Highguard stumbles. Only having 3 players per team makes the climactic base assaults feel strangely small-scale and empty, given the expansive multi-floor bases you’re defending. (The developers themselves quickly realized this and began testing a 5v5 mode to make raids more lively.)

Meanwhile, features that sounded cool on the back of the box end up cannibalized by other mechanics. The game gives each team mounts (like horses, bears, even a panther) to rapidly traverse the map, which is genuinely novel in an FPS and initially one of Highguard’s “coolest features”. But once the relic sword spawns and the raid begins, those mounts suddenly don’t matter – you’re stuck storming or defending a base on foot, making the earlier mount antics feel pointless. Highguard’s myriad systems constantly get in each other’s way. As Kotaku succinctly put it, “each piece of Highguard often gets in the way of the other pieces and can derail the whole experience”. The end result is an uneven mess: sometimes there are flashes of fun (the gunplay is snappy and satisfying in short bursts, owing to the dev team’s pedigree), but too often the match pacing feels awkward and unrewarding.

Player feedback echoed these criticisms in blunt terms. One early player quipped that “you can tell after one game that it’s bad”, citing the oversized map for just 6 players and long stretches where “nothing is happening”. Another simply said “the game itself is weak, the gameplay is weak”, dismissing it as “garbage live service” fodder. Perhaps most damning, the general sentiment was that Highguard felt unfinished and in need of another year of development. Indeed, Highguard’s design comes off like an ambitious prototype that was never refined – a “Swiss Army knife” attempt to mash genres that ended up dull on all fronts.

Technical Problems and Bugs Galore

If Highguard’s design issues gave players plenty to gripe about, its technical failings absolutely sealed its fate. The game launched in a shockingly rough state on the technical side – enough so that many of the earliest Steam reviews focused almost entirely on performance problems. On PC, Highguard was poorly optimized to the point of unplayability for many. Even players with top-of-the-line rigs (RTX 40- and 50-series GPUs) reported that the game ran abysmally. Stuttering frame rates, severe hitching, and frequent crashes were commonplace in the first build – so much so that fans across social media labeled Highguard a “stutter-ridden mess” full of crashes and input lag. One Facebook gaming page noted that within hours of launch, Highguard’s Steam page had filled up with complaints about these issues, especially citing constant stutters, crashes, and lag plaguing the experience.

Reviewers encountered similar problems. Kotaku’s Zack Zwiezen admitted the game “isn’t running well on my RTX 5070 PC, even at medium settings with DLSS”, and he was far from alone. On consoles, players were irate to discover that Highguard inexplicably shipped without a field-of-view (FOV) slider on PS5/Xbox – a baffling omission for a first-person shooter in 2026. This meant console users were stuck with a narrow view, causing discomfort for many and drawing comparisons to the FOV controversy that had angered Borderlands 4 players a year prior. Highguard also initially lacked common quality-of-life toggles (like the ability to hold or toggle aim-down-sights and crouch on PC), which made the controls feel unwieldy until post-launch patches added these options.

Perhaps the most egregious bug discovered was a bizarre graphics glitch: the game’s rendering resolution was secretly tied to the post-processing setting. In effect, lowering post-processing (which many did to improve frame rate) would alsodrop the output resolution, making the game extremely blurry even though the menu still claimed you were at 100% resolution. A PC Gamer investigation confirmed this “potatovision” bug – with post-processing on Low, Highguard was only rendering at ~80% of the intended res (1728p instead of 2160p on a 4K display), boosting fps but greatly reducing clarity. No wonder so many players complained the graphics looked fuzzy; as PC Gamer noted, “‘blurry graphics’ seems to be a repeated complaint, and if players are lowering settings to make up for poor performance, the post-processing bug is likely to blame”. In short, Highguard all but forced players to choose between sharp visuals or acceptable frame rate, an unenviable catch-22.

Network and stability issues rounded out the laundry list of tech woes. Highguard’s servers buckled under the day-one rush of nearly 98,000 concurrent Steam players. Many found themselves stuck in long queue times or getting randomly disconnected from matches. Additionally, a nasty PS5-specific crash was bricking the game whenever players tried to leave a match, and some users encountered a bug where tutorial dialogue audio was missing entirely. Wildlight Entertainment scrambled to issue a flurry of patches in the days after launch. The first patch (v1.0.4, rolled out within 72 hours) finally added console FOV sliders (up to 110°) and introduced a suite of graphics toggles on PC to disable effects like chromatic aberration, bloom, and tweak view distances for better fps. That patch also fixed the PS5 crash-on-exit and a startup crash on slower drives, which the devs claimed reduced crash frequency by 90%. Clearly, the initial build had been extraordinarily unstable if a 90% crash reduction was achievable via one hotfix.

Despite these rapid fixes, the damage was done. Highguard’s technical state at launch left an awful first impression. Many Steam users simply noped out after minutes – some negative reviews were literally logged with 0.1 hours of playtime, meaning they barely got through the tutorial before encountering game-breaking issues. Even those who stuck around noted the game “needs a massive performance update” to be truly enjoyable. All told, Highguard joined the ranks of games that launched effectively unfinished, requiring significant post-release repair work. But as we’ll see, players have little patience for a product that feels like an early beta released as a full game. In the court of public opinion, Highguard’s technical incompetence was as damning as its design flaws.

A Rocky Launch and Player Backlash

Highguard’s launch on January 26, 2026, was nothing short of chaotic. Initial curiosity drew a big crowd – tens of thousands jumped in on day one – but this surge imploded almost immediately. According to SteamDB tracking, the game peaked at ~97,000 concurrent PC players at launch, only to lose roughly 90% of them within 24 hours. By the next morning, concurrency had plummeted to just ~11,000 on Steam. Such a rapid fall-off is virtually unheard of; even accounting for timezones and a day-one novelty spike, an 86k player dip overnight signals a mass exodus of disappointed users. One gaming outlet headlined it as “Highguard Loses Nearly 90% of Players After Launch, Internet Has a New Lolcow”, reflecting how the game became an immediate laughingstock in online communities.

Indeed, the community backlash was swift, loud, and often vicious. On Steam, Highguard debuted with an “Overwhelmingly Negative” reception – at one point only 26% of user reviews were positive. The Steam reviews section turned into a war zone of meme-filled slams, with some users piling on just for the sport of it. Many negative reviews were clearly posted in bad faith (joke comments or anger from people who barely played at all), essentially a review-bomb situation. As one Redditor observed, “Most of the bad reviews that actually had game time were about performance. People hate on it simply for being a hero shooter… and you can tell [from] all the 0.1 hour playtime negative reviews”. Highguard unfortunately became “the internet’s punching bag”, an easy target for collective outrage and ridicule.

Social media was equally unforgiving. Twitter and Reddit filled with snarky hot takes and montages of bugs. Some prominent figures in the gaming community even commented on the phenomenon: “When did it become trendy to hate on a new game?” mused designer Cliff Bleszinski, noting the bandwagon of negativity surrounding Highguard. Larian Studios’ CEO Swen Vincke (of Baldur’s Gate 3 fame) chimed in with a plea for civility, reminding folks that “over a hundred people worked for years [on Highguard]” and that seeing it dismissed in knee-jerk fashion was disheartening. There was a kernel of truth there – some of the pile-on was undoubtedly exaggerated internet outrage. But it’s also true that Highguard earned much of the backlash through its own failings. Players who came in hoping for a polished experience were met with something that felt half-baked and broken. As one industry commentator put it, there was a sense of “celebration of a game doing badly” in the headlines about Highguard’s player count nosedive, but that schadenfreude wouldn’t have materialized if the game had actually impressed people from the start.

Wildlight Entertainment did try to stem the bleeding. In the week after launch, the team was unusually responsive – rapidly patching the game and even launching a limited-time 5v5 mode to address complaints about the 3v3 format feeling too sparse. By listening to feedback and not lashing out at the community, the devs earned back a bit of goodwill. A few players noted “W devs for not blaming the community and actually listening”, as Highguard’s first big update directly tackled top player grievances (better performance and the 5v5 option). These changes did have a small positive effect – within a few days, Highguard’s Steam rating inched up from “Mostly Negative” to “Mixed” (around 40% positive reviews). One newly converted reviewer remarked that the game finally felt more lively: “5v5 is absolutely a better pace and actually brings purpose to the farming and looting side of the game”, while another still cautioned that “the bones of a fun game are there, just waiting for a massive performance update”.

However, turning around public perception of a failed launch is an uphill battle of Sisyphean proportions. A week after release, Highguard was already branded by many as “DOA” (dead-on-arrival). Concurrent player counts continued to slide, and media outlets were openly calling it “another Concord” – referencing an earlier live-service flop that infamously shut down within a month of launch. Even if Highguard manages to stabilize with a small dedicated player base, the broader gaming audience has likely moved on. The initial stigma of disaster will forever color its reputation. As one analyst of game launches noted, online ecosystems now reward the swift and harsh judgment – if you’re not immediately successful, you get cast as a failure meme, and climbing out of that hole is extraordinarily difficult. Highguard learned this the hard way.

Comparisons to Other Notorious Launches

Highguard’s botched debut has invited many comparisons to past high-profile game failures. Indeed, it sits in an ignominious club alongside titles like Cyberpunk 2077, Anthem, and Fallout 76 – games that arrived amid massive hype only to face severe backlash and become cautionary tales. While each case has its own nuances, the parallels are striking and illuminating.

Cyberpunk 2077 (2020): Arguably the most infamous modern example, Cyberpunk 2077 launched in such a technically broken state (especially on last-gen consoles) that it provoked industry-wide fallout. The game’s bugs and performance issues were so egregious that Sony pulled Cyberpunk 2077 from the PlayStation Store entirely – an unprecedented step for a major release. CD Projekt Red had to issue public apologies and promise emergency patches after players and media ridiculed the game’s glitched state. Highguard’s situation echoes Cyberpunk’s in the sense that both games were highly anticipated (Highguard on a smaller scale, but its pedigree had fans excited) and both saw their launches derailed by technical failures. However, a key difference is scope: Cyberpunk at least had a richly crafted narrative RPG underneath the bugs, which made some players willing to wait for fixes. Highguard, by contrast, did not offer deep story or content to fall back on – its appeal was purely in polished gameplay, which wasn’t delivered. That said, the lesson from Cyberpunk holds true for Highguard: no amount of pre-release hype can save a game that fundamentally doesn’t work at launch. Gamers have become increasingly unforgiving of being sold an unfinished product, and they will rebel even against giants of the industry. In Cyberpunk’s case, the backlash led to refunds and lawsuits, costing its developer both money and trust. Highguard’s flame-out is on a smaller financial scale but similarly saw players abandon it in droves once they hit the rough edges.

Anthem (2019–2021): BioWare’s Anthem is an almost tragic mirror to Highguard. Like Highguard, Anthem was a multiplayer action game that attempted to mix genres (shooter with looter and MMORPG elements) and came from a storied developer branching into live service for the first time. Anthem too suffered from overambitious design that never quite gelled, coupled with a paucity of content and myriad technical issues. At launch, it was criticized for rote mission design, limited enemy variety, and shallow progression, as well as long loading times and a host of bugs that made the experience feel “needlessly frustrating”. One post-mortem noted that Anthem had “mounds of untapped potential” but would require “serious work to fix the game’s core problems” – work that, ultimately, never came to fruition as BioWare canceled its planned overhaul and abandoned the game after two years. Highguard similarly tried to pack in a grab-bag of features (in its case, mounts, Siege-like base defense, MOBA phases, hero abilities, etc.) without nailing the basics, resulting in a disjointed product. Both games demonstrate that throwing everything at the wall can backfire spectacularly – players would prefer a focused, polished core loop over a mishmash of half-baked mechanics.

From a live-service perspective, Anthem is a cautionary tale of how a botched launch can permanently cripple a game’s trajectory. Despite some fun elements (many enjoyed Anthem’s core flying and combat mechanics), the negative reception at release shattered its momentum. Player counts nose-dived and never recovered, much like Highguard’s 90% day-one drop. Anthem’s failure was so pronounced that by 2021 it was considered “dead” and Electronic Arts officially pulled the plug on further development. As one gaming outlet summarized, Anthem ended up “joining numerous other live service games that squandered their potential… a reminder of how poor management, weak planning, and troubled development can doom a game in a matter of weeks.” For Highguard, that last line could practically serve as an epitaph. Poor planning (e.g. launching without testing or sufficient content) and troubled development (rushing to market with technical flaws) set it on the same downward spiral that Anthem experienced. The big takeaway from both is that live-service games only get one chance to hook players – if the first impression is a “flop,” most will never return. A live game cannot survive on promises of “it’ll get better later” when the launch offering is subpar.

Fallout 76 (2018): Bethesda’s online Fallout spin-off provides another useful comparison, especially regarding community backlash and PR blunders. Fallout 76 released riddled with bugs and lacking many features fans expected (like NPCs or a meaningful story), resulting in it being “slammed by both players and critics for being a broken, dull, and lifeless” take on a beloved franchise. Angry players not only review-bombed it but even demanded refunds en masse, as the game’s condition at launch was frankly unacceptable. Adding fuel to the fire, Bethesda committed a legendary marketing sin with the infamous canvas bag controversy – advertising a quality canvas bag in the Collector’s Edition but shipping a cheap nylon one, which, combined with the game’s sorry state, enraged customers and led to talk of lawsuits. Highguard, luckily, didn’t have a physical merchandise scandal, but it did suffer from a similar trust deficit with players. By promising a high-caliber FPS experience (the Titanfall/Apex pedigree) and then delivering a buggy product, it invoked the same feeling of bait-and-switch that Fallout 76 players felt with their downgraded bags and buggy game. In both cases, the community’s backlash was not just mild disappointment – it was fury at feeling misled and sold a lemon.

However, there is a silver lining in the Fallout 76 story: although its launch was a disaster, Bethesda slowly but steadily improved the game over subsequent years. They fixed bugs, added tons of new content (including NPC questlines), and generally turned Fallout 76 into a respectable online RPG that many fans now enjoy. It took a long time, but the game’s reputation recovered to a degree – today it’s not the punchline it was in 2018. This shows that redemption is possible if a company remains committed. By contrast, Anthem showed the opposite outcome – an abandoned game that never fixed its issues. Where will Highguard fall on this spectrum? It’s too early to tell, but the odds aren’t great. Highguard’s player base is far smaller than Fallout 76’s was, and being a new IP, it doesn’t have a huge fan community rooting for its revival. Still, if the developers continue to hustle out patches and content, there’s a chance Highguard could stabilize and shed the “worst launch ever” label in time. The road to redemption is narrow and uphill, but not completely closed.

In summary, Highguard’s plight is very much in line with these past cautionary tales: big promises, botched execution, instant backlash. Cyberpunk 2077, Anthem, Fallout 76 – each underscores a different facet (technical quality, design/content depth, and community trust, respectively) that contributed to Highguard’s negative reception. The common thread is clear: launching a game in a poor state – whether it’s buggy, boring, or both – can deal nearly irreparable damage to its reputation. And in the age of social media, that downfall is greatly magnified and accelerated.

Lessons the Industry Must Learn

“The Absolute Disaster of Highguard” will likely be studied by developers and publishers as yet another example of what not to do. So what lessons should the gaming industry take away from this debacle?

1. Don’t Overhype Beyond What You Can Deliver: Highguard’s marketing mistake was painting a target on itself that it couldn’t hit. By ending a major show with its reveal and name-dropping pedigree, it set expectations sky-high. When the product turned out average (or worse), the backlash was correspondingly intense. The industry should remember that it’s often better to under-promise and over-deliver. If your game is a quirky mid-budget experiment, market it as such – don’t pretend it’s the second coming of Titanfall. Mismanaged hype not only disappoints players, it actively breeds cynicism and internet mockery, as Highguard saw firsthand.

2. Ensure Core Gameplay is Cohesive and Tested: Fancy ideas mean little if the fundamental gameplay loop isn’t fun. Highguard tried to be five games in one and ended up excelling at none. Developers should carefully curate which mechanics truly add value and test that the overall design feels rewarding in practice. Conducting robust beta tests or early access periods can catch issues with pacing, balance, and player motivation. Highguard skipped this step, and thus it launched with glaring design flaws (empty maps, pointless phases) that could have been caught by wider playtesting feedback. The lesson: iterate early and often with real players. If something in your design isn’t clicking, don’t assume people will magically love it on launch day.

3. Never Compromise on Technical Polish for Launch: This cannot be stressed enough – a smooth, stable launch is critical to a game’s success and goodwill. Highguard’s devs may have thought some performance issues could be fixed “in a day-one patch or shortly after,” but as we saw, even a 2–3 day window of poor performance turned away the vast majority of players, likely for good. The expectation in 2026 is that released games should be finished games. Titles like Cyberpunk 2077 showed that even mega-fans will only tolerate so much before revolting. So studios must allocate adequate time and resources to optimization, QA, and platform-specific features (like console FOV options) beforelaunch. If that means delaying a game, then delay it – a late game is only late once, but a bad game’s reputation is forever. Highguard’s instant technical backlash (with reviewers calling it “unplayable” on high-end PCs) is a painful reminder of this truth.

4. React Fast – But Also Communicate Openly: One thing Highguard’s team did right was quickly releasing patches and showing the community that they were listening. In today’s environment, radio silence amid a crisis will only pour gasoline on the fire. Even if you can’t fix everything overnight, transparency and updates go a long way to regaining player trust. Highguard’s addition of a 5v5 mode and performance fixes within days was smart triage. In contrast, games like Anthem that went long stretches without meaningful updates saw their remaining players lose hope. The lesson: when launch goes wrong, own up to issues, outline a plan to address them, and deliver on those fixes as rapidly as possible. However, also be realistic – not every game can be saved, and you shouldn’t mislead players with false hope. Had Highguard’s developers been defensive or silent, the narrative would have been even worse. Their candid approach (admitting optimization wasn’t ready and promising improvements) at least kept a door open for second chances.

5. The Live-Service Gamble Requires Substance: Highguard, like many recent titles, attempted the “free-to-play live-service” model in hopes of attracting a huge player base and ongoing monetization. But as we’ve seen with Anthem, Marvel’s Avengers, Babylon’s Fall and others, players have become extremely skeptical of this model unless the game offers rich, compelling content out of the gate. The “it’ll get better with future updates” pitch no longer flies. If you want fans to invest time (and potentially money) into a service game, you must launch with enough content and depth to satisfy them initially. Highguard’s paper-thin content (one mode, few maps, minimal progression) did not meet that bar, and its player count collapse reflected that. The industry should take note that the live-service space is ruthlessly competitive – gamers will simply stick to established titles (Fortnite, Apex, etc.) unless a newcomer genuinely wows them. Being half-baked at launch is essentially a death sentence for a live game. As one article observed, Highguard’s flop is partly symptomatic of player fatigue with every new title trying to be a forever-service without earning it.

6. Learn from Failure – Don’t Repeat It: Lastly, the broader lesson is to treat cases like Highguard as learning opportunities. Each disaster highlights certain pitfalls to avoid. After Fallout 76, for example, it became clear that you cannot neglect quality control or disrespect your core fanbase’s expectations without dire consequences. Cyberpunk’s launch taught publishers that even the biggest IP can falter if released in a clearly unfinished state – and that platform holders might take drastic action in response. Anthem’s failure underlined the importance of a coherent vision and post-launch support plan (and the perils of trying to retrofit one after launch). Highguard encapsulates a bit of all of these. The onus is now on industry leaders to actually apply these hard lessons. We’ve seen enough “disaster launches” in the past decade that they should no longer catch anyone by surprise. Yet they continue to happen, often for similar reasons: rushed timelines, overpromising, under-delivering. It’s vital to break that cycle.

In the end, Highguard’s story is a sobering reminder of how a promising game can swiftly implode when nearly every facet – gameplay, technical, marketing, and community management – is mishandled. The hope is that other developers are paying attention. Gamers have an incredible breadth of choice today and extremely tuned BS-detectors. They will reward excellence and ruthlessly reject mediocrity or deceit. Highguard flew too close to the sun and fell to earth; its legacy may well be as a case study that helps future games avoid a similar fate. For the health of the industry and the happiness of players, let’s hope these lessons are taken to heart, so we see fewer “absolute disasters” and more success stories in the years ahead.

Sources:

• Zack Zwiezen, Kotaku – First Hours Of Highguard Plagued By Technical Issues And PC Performance Problems
• Zack Zwiezen, Kotaku – Highguard: The Kotaku Review
• Ethan Gach, Kotaku – Highguard’s First Patch Brings Much-Requested Fixes…
• Andy Edser, PC Gamer – Highguard’s output resolution tied to post processing…
• Richard Breslin, GamingBible – Highguard Loses Nearly 90% of Players After Launch
• Lewis Parker, GamingBible – Highguard Jumps up to “Mixed” Rating on Steam
• Reddit Users (r/Steam, r/Games threads on Highguard) – Various player reactions and comments
• Keza MacDonald, The Guardian – Cyberpunk 2077 pulled from PS Store after complaints
• Sean Carey, TrueAchievements – Fallout 76 Canvas Bag Controversy
• Ravi Sinha, GamingBolt – So Long, Anthem: EA’s Biggest Flop Says Goodbye