<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Positioning on Birdor Blog</title>
		<link>https://blog.birdor.com/tags/positioning/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Positioning on Birdor Blog</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 12:40:00 +0800</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://blog.birdor.com/tags/positioning/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>The Culling 2 Failure Case Study: When Trend Chasing Destroys Product Identity</title>
				<link>https://blog.birdor.com/the-culling-2-trend-chasing-failure-case-study/</link>
				<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 12:40:00 +0800</pubDate>
				<guid>https://blog.birdor.com/the-culling-2-trend-chasing-failure-case-study/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;The Culling 2 is a sharp lesson in how chasing a market trend can erase the thing that made a game interesting in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The original Culling had a specific identity: a smaller, more intimate battle royale focused on crafting, melee combat, traps, and game-show brutality. It was not the biggest game in the genre, but it had a distinct pitch.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Then the battle royale market exploded.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;By the time The Culling 2 launched, players were comparing every new battle royale game against giants with huge player bases, production budgets, streaming visibility, and polished shooting systems. A small studio entering that space needed an extremely clear reason to exist.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
