Wardogs devs feel sorry for prioritizing streamers in the FPS queue
Fresh FPS Wardogs exploded onto the Steam scene, quickly garnering a Very Positive rating across over 32,000 reviews. But as with many wildly popular multiplayer games, the initial euphoria was tempered by the reality of a massive player base grappling with some seriously agonizing queue times.
In just three days following its early access release, the game’s player count surged, hitting a peak of over 428,666. This astronomical number quickly exposed a fundamental bottleneck: the server infrastructure struggled to accommodate the sheer volume of players, making the wait for a game to start an almost unbearable ordeal.
The developers, Bulkhead, faced intense scrutiny over how they managed this influx. The issue wasn’t just lag; it was the priority system itself. Reports surfaced that developers prioritized influencers in the queue, a decision that ignited a firestorm among the community.
The frustration boiled over, leading to some rather blunt public admissions. In a clip shared by a prominent gaming personality, a server announcement briefly flashed, revealing the developers’ exasperation: “We are dick heads.” This admission was quickly followed by further clarifications, with the team acknowledging that the prioritization of streamers was not something they requested, and apologizing for the disruption.
The situation reflected a common tension in the gaming world: balancing commercial interests with the needs of the player base. While the prioritization of influencers undoubtedly drove attention, the massive number of players struggling to find a spot in the queue highlighted a stark imbalance. Thousands of players waited while a small group was given preferential treatment, prompting a reflection on what constitutes fair access in a live service environment.
When pressed for comment, the CEO of Bulkhead, Joe Brammer, issued a personal apology, stating that the team had placed all influencers at the end of the queue, attempting to rectify the situation. While the math might suggest that the developers were focusing attention on a select few—just eleven influencers provided entertainment for over 300,000 people—the real pain point remained the experience of the general player base.
Indeed, community responses to the controversy offered a more nuanced view. Some players admitted they were happy to have someone to watch play while waiting, while others pointed out the irony that seemingly favored streamers were often AFK because their lobbies weren’t full. Ultimately, the controversy seemed to fade as the game maintained its Very Positive rating, suggesting that most players found their way through the chaos and enjoyed the experience.
Buy on Amazon
Credit
