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.
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.
Then the battle royale market exploded.
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.
The Culling 2 did not provide one.
The Short Version
The Culling 2 failed because it chased the broader battle royale market while weakening the franchise’s original identity.
The major risks were:
- moving toward a crowded trend
- launching into comparison with much larger competitors
- alienating players who liked the first game’s niche
- shipping without enough visible differentiation
- losing trust quickly after launch
The lesson is direct: market demand is not enough. An indie game also needs a defendable identity.
What Happened
Xaviant released The Culling 2 in 2018 into a battle royale market dominated by much larger games. The launch went badly. Reporting at the time described extremely low player counts and a fast reversal from the studio. The game was removed from sale, buyers were offered refunds, and the studio shifted attention back toward the original The Culling.
That speed is important.
Some failed launches fade slowly. The Culling 2 failed almost immediately because the market gave it no time to explain itself. Players looked at the game, compared it to stronger alternatives, and left.
For an online multiplayer game, that is fatal. Low player count is not just a metric. It damages matchmaking, streaming visibility, community confidence, and the basic belief that the game has a future.
Where The Failure Really Started
The failure started with positioning.
When a genre becomes popular, it attracts two kinds of opportunity:
- real demand from players
- dangerous imitation pressure for developers
The hard question is whether a team is solving a specific player problem or simply moving toward a hot category.
The original Culling had a recognizable shape. It was smaller and rougher than its later competitors, but it had texture. Players could describe why it felt different. The sequel appeared to move closer to a more conventional battle royale template at a time when conventional battle royale was already being served by stronger games.
That created a strategic trap.
If players wanted the biggest mainstream battle royale, they had better options. If players wanted the distinctive original Culling, the sequel did not clearly satisfy that desire. The game ended up squeezed between a huge market and its own abandoned niche.
The Developer Lesson
Do not chase the category. Defend the reason players should choose your version.
Indie studios rarely win by being a smaller copy of a dominant game. They win when they create a sharper promise:
- a different time scale
- a different social dynamic
- a different control feel
- a different fantasy
- a different content rhythm
- a different emotional payoff
Trend awareness is useful. Trend obedience is dangerous.
If a team already has a niche audience, the sequel should protect the reason that audience cared. It can evolve, but it should not discard its strongest identity in exchange for a broader market that may never arrive.
What Indie Teams Can Do Differently
Before pivoting toward a hot genre, write a positioning test:
- Why this game?
- Why this team?
- Why now?
- Why would a player leave the market leader?
- Why would an existing fan trust this direction?
If the answers sound like “because the genre is popular,” the strategy is weak.
A multiplayer game needs an even sharper answer because launch liquidity matters. If the player base is not large enough, the game cannot demonstrate its own strengths. Matchmaking fails, queues stretch, streams look empty, and new players assume the game is already dead.
That means a multiplayer indie should launch with a narrow, reliable hook that concentrates players instead of scattering them across too many modes, regions, or unclear promises.
Practical Checklist
Before building around a market trend, ask:
- What does this game do that the genre leader cannot or will not do?
- Which existing fans might feel abandoned?
- Is the hook clear in one sentence?
- Does the team have the resources to meet genre expectations?
- Can the launch support healthy player counts?
- Is the sequel preserving the franchise’s strongest identity?
- Are we following player demand or investor-level market logic?
If the game cannot answer why it should exist, the market will answer for it.
Final Takeaway
The Culling 2 shows that a popular genre can still be the wrong target.
Indie developers do not need to ignore trends, but they should not let trends define the product. The more crowded the market becomes, the more valuable specificity is.
A small game needs a reason to be chosen.
Without that reason, trend chasing only makes the comparison harsher.
Further Reading
Keep Reading
Follow the engineering thread
Get the next practical Birdor note, or browse the archive for related systems, tooling, and architecture work.