Highguard's awful user reviews paint a very different picture when looking at the ones left by people with at least three hours clocked into the divisive hero shooter.
The new game from former Respawn Entertainment developers got off to a bad start with a dry, brief trailer capping off The Game Awards 2025 that didn't do much to differentiate Highguard from free-to-play shooter #86. The high-profile reveal led to almost 100,000 concurrent players on Steam at launch, but it also led to 'Mostly Negative' user reviews mere hours after the gates opened, with many a complaint aimed at server instability and poor performance - and many more simply joining in on the memes.
Highguard's bad rating on the platform has persisted in the days since, too. At the time of writing, only 37% of the game's 28,000 or so Steam reviews give it the thumbs up. But filter those reviews by playtime and things start to look very different almost immediately.
Once you look at reviews left by people with over three hours in the fantasy shooter, Highguard's Steam rating goes from 'Mostly Negative' to 'Mostly Positive,' this time with 76% of people having generally good things to say. Of course, the results aren't too surprising. Players who enjoy a game are normally likelier to have more hours logged in, and players riddled with the game's performance woes aren't going to chug through laggy matches for three hours or more, so it's a process of elimination.
But the filtered reviews might also indicate that the people who have taken the time to engage with Highguard's systems - beyond just checking out if it's 'Concord 2' as many user reviews quip - actually come away with a softer stance on a game that's drawn so much vitriol. Not to diminish legit critique of the game. Personally, I think maps are a little too big and too empty for the shooter's 3v3 format, as you sometimes spend minutes at a time just looting, not shooting, but it's far more competent, at least, than the internet might have you believe.
