APB Statement From Realtime Worlds

Neil Castle, the community officer at Realtime Worlds, has got in touch to deliver an official statement about the APB review embargo issue which we looked at earlier today. You can read the statement below.

The ‘Key to the City’ event is a demo event, not an open beta in the usual sense of the term. Players only have 5 hours of Action District playtime and are well aware that characters, customizations, vehicles, clothing and symbols created during the event are going to be wiped in time for launch.

As a result anyone attempting to review the game during this period would experience a somewhat unrealistic representation of what APB is offering the user and as such it was deemed inappropriate to allow reviewers to do so.

The decision was purely based on wanting reviewers to experience and see the full live server with players having both progressed and expressed themselves. Our service will also be down for the period between the end of ‘Key to the City’ on June 19th and the start of our ‘Early Access’ event in North America on June 26th. This too would have prevented reviewers from playing the game.

The initial July 6th embargo date was based on the UK street date of July 2nd and on press not having access to the game until said date. We are however moving the embargo date forward to July 2nd and giving reviewers invitations to the ‘Early Access’ event in order to ensure that they are able to properly experience APB and its community in time for street date.

Realtime Worlds is confident that APB All Points Bulletin is a great game and we have taken on board all the feedback provided to us by our community during the closed beta testing period in preparation for our launch.

If we were not confident in the game we would not have sent out hundreds of thousands of access keys for our ongoing ‘Key to the City’ event, we would also not be encouraging players to post their own videos and screenshots online.

The best way to make the decision for yourself is to jump in to the Key to the City. So head over to www.apb.com, grab a key and draw your own opinion.


  1. Daniel Rivas says:

    Well, okay.

  2. DizzyDoo says:

    So the embargo is now… back to the normal release date?

    • KindredPhantom says:


    • Ooofy McOoof says:


      The US version is released on the 29th June

      The embargo still stands until after the game is avaiable

    • Jimbo says:

      Yes, because reviewers will have access to it a week or so before with the Early Access guys n’ gals (pre-orders, presumably?).

      They’re essentially requesting that it be reviewed based on the Early Access, not the limited and temporary Demo Event. This seems fair enough to me, though I’d still take any MMO review released that early with a pinch of salt.

    • KindredPhantom says:

      Well yes, the embargo won’t be lifted for the NA release but will be for the EU release, but it is better than the previous embargo date. At least they gave an explanation for the embargo.

    • Jimbo says:

      Note: I hadn’t seen the earlier article when I posted my above reply (I thought the story seemed a bit random – a lead-in at the top of the article would be useful).

      I don’t think it would be possible for them to have an embargo a second after it is available to the public. If Early Access is available to the general public via pre-order or whatever, then they couldn’t stop you reviewing it a second after that starts either. They could request that you don’t do it – and it would be sensible not to anyway – but they can’t demand it. Fuck that.

      If they try and enforce it by NDA or EULA then simply do not review the game at all.

  3. Ripbeefbone says:

    I can’t imagine this game turning out any better unless they’ve got a secret, entirely different game that’s going to be available on launch. You do a mission and either go after or wait for some criminals/cops to show up, then see who wins in a gun fight, repeat endlessly so you can upgrade your car/weapon for one that looks exactly the same but has an upgrade slot on it.

    • Metalfish says:

      Aye, I agree -the potential for decals and tattoos etc is all very well, but the actual canvas(es) situation is pretty lacking.

      If that’s not a needlessly oblique comment, of course.

    • KindredPhantom says:

      You will have to give it the usual 6-months growing period that occurs with most new MMO’s nowadays then have a look and see if it is what you like.

    • Arthur Barnhouse says:

      I think that the thing that is missing is real honest-to-God rivalry. When I play on the TF2 server with the same group on a regular basis, I get to know how they play and, just as important, I really, really hate it when that one guy who always plays spy backstabs me for the fourth time, so I play pyro for a bunch of rounds. There isn’t a mechanism in APB, at least not in the beta, to really feel like you’re fighting the same people time after time, but some other faceless person who you’ll never see again who will call you a faggot because he threw a grenade at you. I wish it kept a list of rivals, people I could put a hit out on for some revenge killing, or that they could put an APB out on me.

      Although it’s also damaged by the sameiness of each character. Presumably they don’t have classes in the game to make it more accessible to new players and individuals who want to lone wolf it, but it really limits replayability. As long as I’m complaining, I get why in the Versus districts people don’t get to shoot other people who aren’t playing the same versus mission, but it leads to a constant problem where people will grief anyone who IS on a mission. Last night, some asshole kept crashing his car into mine when I was doing a chase, all the while calling me a stupid bitch (direct quote). It’s still quite fun in small doses. But playing every night, or paying a fee for the ability too? I don’t think so.

    • fucrate says:


      What? You totally DO get a sense of meeting the same characters again and again. I put about 3 hours into a game last night and ran with a group of three doing missions. We consistently came up against 3 players a number of times through multiple missions and I had a lot of fun trying to outsmart them based on my previous experience of fighting them. There was also a super high-level jackass riding around taking every single bounty, he had obviously been playing and ranking up for a long time, and every time I met him it was a real challenge, but it felt great to bring him down the few times I successfully did.

      Personally, I think this game is crazy fun, but I’m disappointed that more RPS readers aren’t going to be playing with me…

    • Arthur Barnhouse says:


      It might be because I’ve only played for six or seven hours, basically two nights, but that just wasn’t my experience. If you run with the same group all night, you might hit the same crew twice, but not with any consistency. Maybe you were on a particularly large crew that would get matched often against an equally large group on the other side? I don’t know. I played with a group of three other enforcers last night, and the gangs we were matched up against were not names that I recognized.

      It might be a bi-product of randomness, but that still doesn’t make not a problem, just a problem for some and not others. It would be nice if the game kept track of people who killed each other often, so that you could do something with that information, maybe even match particularly big rivals up more often.

  4. Radiant says:



    • Radiant says:

      The really isn’t for me though.
      It’s more social as a 2fort4 sniper then it was in that social district.

    • Gentacle says:

      They only came out with this after it was posted about. RPS did mention that RTW didn’t answer them for a week.

    • Vague-rant says:

      Check behind the sofa. Thats where I normally misplace things.

    • Radiant says:

      I know.
      Unfortunately my typeface for ironic sarcasm seems to have not worked.
      No matter.

    • Mad Doc MacRae says:

      I’ve had some beautiful wordless conversations as a 2Fort sniper.

    • Gentacle says:

      Mine was a misreply to the one above >:)

    • Gentacle says:

      Or two rather, I’m not functioning well today.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      And I have had great conversations with them.

      Like getting onto the enemy battlements and ending the conversation with “POW! HAHA! You are dead. Not big surprise.”

    • RedFred says:

      Radiant is enjoyment personified.

  5. ChaK_ says:

    yet they’ll blame PC market or piracy for releasing crappy game.

    Go finish it on 360 as you said and get your millions

    then spit on us :(

    • Crush says:

      Are you joking ? I cant tell. APB is an MMO not a single player game, good luck pirating it. Also the game was originally planned for the 360 too but MS wont allow MMO’s on the console so thats not going to happen either.

  6. IdleHands says:

    Still confused on why they didn’t just say this instead of just blindly issueing the embargo with no explanation.

    “The ‘Key to the City’ event is a demo event, not an open beta in the usual sense of the term”
    This also confused me. I’d understand if they had said that it wouldn’t give them a full picture because it was still in beta, but instead they say it’s not really beta but a demo of the game, which people will play and judge the full game on. Am I using the wrong use of the word ‘demo’ here?

  7. Gabanski83 says:

    Hang on, so the demo event isn’t actually a demo of the final product? They say it won’t be representative of the final product; what’s the point of it then really, from a consumer/players point of view? Or is it really just to stress test servers for the finished game, in which case, there’s no point as it won’t be representative of the release code.

    • Jad says:

      Well, demos are never representative of the final product — usually in that they are much shorter than the full game. Any reviewer who reviewed a game based on its demo would be a bad reviewer.

      This is a bit different, as ostensibly the entire game is available to review. But as RTW notes above, that’s not really true, as gameplay is restricted to 5 hours per player (and if a reviewer reviewed the full game based only 5 hours of play, they’d also be a bad reviewer), and everyone is aware that their characters and handiwork will be wiped out in a couple of days.

      I know I have been playing differently than I would have if it were the full game — I’ve been haphazard with how I customize my character (my boobs look frankly ridiculous because I was just playing with the sliders and left that slider all the way at the top — in the full game I will be a bit more mature about things), I haven’t worried about how effective my character upgrade choices are, and have spent money freely, with no plan to save up for certain items that I know I won’t be able to get. Reviewing a game with players playing with that kind of mentality will skew the results.

  8. AllenJB says:

    So 5 (+5, because we got extra) = 10 hours of action district play time isn’t enough for a review, but 10 hours of early access action district time is?

    • KindredPhantom says:

      I guess the press may get longer to play, possibly from the NA early access up until release.

    • Jockie says:

      Think they’re planning to release a patch post KTTC that will be in for the pre-order event that changes some of the fundamental things like progression. It’s like on most game demos with the “Not representative of the final product” messages.

    • Jockie says:

      Totally replied in the wrong place there, whoops!

  9. William Main says:

    It worries me Realtime Worlds are that confident about this game, because from what I’ve played it needs a massive overhaul. Even if the beta we’re currently playing is only a sample representation of the actual game, the experience of APB feels lacklustre. What effectively is keeping it afloat is an exceptionally good customization editor, but the game itself feels very rough around the edges.

    Perhaps though we really are worrying about something that will turn out to be great when the final game comes out. All remains to be seen I suppose, but I’m not overly hopeful.

  10. Peter Radiator Full Pig says:

    Fling enough shit, some is bound to stick.
    The alternative explanation to the 50,000 beta keys.

  11. Hallgrim says:

    I’ve been in several closed betas for different MMOs (although not APB), and every time I see these flagrant attempts to clamp down on media coverage of the game it is because the execs are TERRIFIED of informed consumers. They would much rather you just look at the box art, read the feature list on the back (both the true features and the imaginary ones… looking at you AoC), and buy it.

  12. Meat Circus says:

    So, they’ve shortened the embargo to six days after the game is released? I think that reducing stupidity by 50% still lives 50% of the original stupid.

    I think at this point, RPS should tell them to go fuck themselves.


      You should write a letter to RTW. Or make a billboard on how much you loathe this game. PEOPLE WILL CARE DAMNIT, PEOPLE WILL LISTEN

  13. Bob Dobbs says:

    Y’know, they can’t actually stop you from writing about whatever you want whenever you want to. The only reason these embargoes have any teeth at all is because they can cut you off from early review copies, exclusives, and other infoz that drive traffic. Which, admit it, you want. Need, in fact. That anybody even cares that they told people not to review until the sixth, except maybe to laugh, sort of shows what’s going on here. They can’t control what reviewers write, and reviewers don’t always write glowing reviews, and previews, and what have you, but game companies, or at least publishers, pretty much expect to be able to have ridiculous amounts of control. And it seems to me that reviewers buy into that mentality to a significant degree. At least in part, this is probably because their business model pretty much demands it.

    Movie reviewers, when there were newspapers who paid movie reviewers, were paid by newspapers with broad sources of advertising revenue, not by movie marketers. The industry did not presume to demand that newspapers retract reviews because somebody thought the reviewer might not have seen the whole thing. Nobody told reviewers they couldn’t review a movie before a certain date. If the marketers didn’t want reviews to come out before release, they didn’t screen the movie. It’s like people knew there was something to movies beyond just making money.

    Seems like a pretty big difference to me. Am I wrong here? Let’s have some posts about why companies even bother to tell reviewers what they can write about and when they can write it that digs a little deeper than “because that’s the way it’s done.”

    • Jimbo says:

      Why do publishers do it? Because they want to control what the media says as much as possible, for obvious reasons – and they pull all kinds of shit to make that happen.

      Why does the games media play ball? Because they are entirely reliant on the goodwill of publishers for their continued survival. If your competitors all have a review up for a major release on launch day, but you don’t because you weren’t sent a review copy… that’s a big deal. Maybe not quite so much for RPS (who have a relatively captive audience), but it is for most sites and magazines, because those users will just go to a competitor instead.

      Why do the consumers accept it? Because we’re too tight to pay for content directly and too impatient to wait for late reviews.

      Reading through your post again, you basically answered most of this yourself.

      I’ll add that it’s more of an issue with games than with movies for two reasons: Firstly because -whatever happens- you can still go and watch a 2 hour movie on release date and still have a review up in a worthwhile timeframe; this isn’t so easy with a 10, 20, 30 hour game. Secondly because the people that read game reviews tend to buy games on Day One – a Day Two movie review is a lot more relevant than a Day Two (or more realistically ‘Week Two’) game review.

      In short, because the movie industry carries a much smaller stick than the games industry, and because the games media’s carrot has a much shorter shelf life.

    • Jad says:

      Secondly because the people that read game reviews tend to buy games on Day One – a Day Two movie review is a lot more relevant than a Day Two (or more realistically ‘Week Two’) game review.

      Which is one of the really kind of weird things about this. It would seem that Day One should be incredibly more important for movies than it is for games. Movies are finished within 2-3 hours of release, and then the experience is completely finished. Movies are still much more of “event” experiences, where going to a movie with your friends is a major reason to actually see a movie, regardless of its quality.

      A game like APB is intended to be played for dozens, if not hundreds of hours for years following its release. Why the hell do the first day of sales matter that so damn much? A two-week-old review of APB would be a better, more-relevant review of the game than a Day One would.

      Gamers are so weird.

    • Wisq says:


      No, it actually makes perfect sense as it stands.

      Movies in theatres are a service with a limited capacity. Availability increases with time — the more people who have seen the movie, the easier it will be to get a seat at the next showing.

      Games in stores are a product with a limited quantity. Availability decreases with time — the more copies sold, the lower the odds that the shop will have a copy for you to buy.

      Pre-ordering a game reserves you a copy, meaning the movie model (less crowded stores if you go later) ought to apply to some degree. But pre-orders also typically requires that you pick it up within a rather short period of time.

      Digitally distributed games are unlimited. In some cases, the movie model might apply, since a popular game will tend to cause servers to overload and you’re better off waiting a day or two. But services like Steam get around this by pre-loading games that you’ve pre-ordered — and users who have already paid for a game they haven’t even seen are likely to want to see it pretty quick.

      So yeah, it’s actually rather sensible that we would wait a bit for easier access to a movie, but want to pick up a game ASAP.

  14. Meat Circus says:

    Nothing says “we have no confidence in our game” like a stament like “Realtime Worlds is confident that APB All Points Bulletin is a great game.”

    • Kadayi says:

      As I called it, and the rationale. Pity(“people who aren’t quite as convinced the the game is good” -Ed)

      EDIT: Right, everyone. Calm down. There really is no need to get personal on this one. I’m going to start just deleting posts now.

  15. John Peat says:

    I think games reviewers, as a whole, should be insulted by RTW’s assertion that they cannot write a fair review of a game without thousands of other people playing it at the same time.

    That statement only cements the general belief that they don’t want reviews messing-up their launch/initial sales – that they feel the generally negative comments thusfar will translate into bad reviews and damaged sales.

    An honest review on any MMO/multiplayer title should also defer to the fact that you need a community to make those games work AND that they’ll improve both from player and developer input/tweaking.

    So to summarise they are insulting reviews AND customers alike – great start!

    • Tei says:

      “That statement only cements the general belief that they don’t want reviews messing-up their launch/initial sales – that they feel the generally negative comments thusfar will translate into bad reviews and damaged sales.”

      The first days a online game is released, is full of problems, more if theres a single point of error, like a central server. But these things tend to fix thenselves, or with patchs, the next days, weeks and months.

    • Tei says:

      Aaargh… I sould have read better your post.
      Sorry, I was dancing “Lady Gaga – Poker Face”, my attention was not here.

    • John Peat says:

      Goo Goo Gaa Gaa LOOK AT MY HAT!!!

      A review wouldn’t downmark a game for launch server wobbles or other minor distractions either – at least a decent review wouldn’t…

      The whole topic of MMO review is complex but to assert that you CANNOT review it remains insulting.

    • mujadaddy says:

      Goo Goo Gaa Gaa LOOK AT MY HAT!!!

      Your early review has broken our embargo.

      Seriously, though, they need some better “hats.”

    • Kadayi says:

      @John Peat

      They can’t review it at the moment because right now the KttC event is not representative of the genuine game experience, because all of those involved have limited action district time (RTW are giving people a taster, not a free lunch). It would be like trying to review a film based off of the trailer alone.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      Look at my hat?

      I seem to recall a certain war themed hat simulator that did it much better…

    • Mr Labbes says:

      @Kadayi: Arguably, I’d say the limited time is more like watching a movie once, and not multiple times. You give it enough time, it becomes pretty clear whether you like something or not. Even Alpha Protocol took me less than five hours to like it.
      And I like APB, but if people do not like it after five hours (and it does have pretty huge flaws that were already adressed), chances are they won’t like it after ten hours, either.

    • Kadayi says:

      @Mr Labbes

      Much of what makes APB interesting is, in its similarity to team based tactical games like CS or Vs L4D, but where as the maps in those games are small and contained, here the play takes place in vast sprawling environments subject to a degree of interruption and anarchy. Certainly it can be argued that the core missions are the samey (but that’s a complaint that can be levelled at most games tbh), but how they play out is never the same. Sure APB is not going to be everyones cup of tea, but if you are the kind of person who enjoys teamwork you’d probably get into it.

  16. Meat Circus says:

    I’ve just realised, this idiot from RTW has basically called all game reviewers idiots. A courageous move from a man who’s trying to suppress criticism of his shitty MMO.

    • M says:

      Where did they suggest that?

    • Garg says:

      Also the fact that if you go out into the wider interweb you’ll rapidly conclude that nearly all game reviewers /are/ idiots may be some justification.

    • DJ Phantoon says:

      But not here.

  17. Ooofy McOoof says:


    link to savygamer.co.uk

    It’s open season now chaps

  18. Earl_of_Josh says:

    This is quite odd. I wonder if the embargo date is different for NA than it is for EU? It seems like it would only be appropriate if it was, given two different release dates.

  19. Juice says:

    This is what they call “damage control”.

  20. Gentacle says:

    APB, A Pretty Bad game.

  21. FunkyBadger says:

    They’re saying: “the game is at its best when there are many players involved” – possibly true… but how can they know? Presumably the only time its been played in that manner is during the betas. And isn’t most of the negative feedback coming from those involved in the betas?

    Seems like a fallacy. Seems they’re basically saying “trust us, it’ll be awesome”.

    • Gentacle says:

      The game actively seeks out and squashes those moments when they do occur. It barely lets people call in for backup on 1v1, and if one’s in a group and the backup escalates to a point where it’s 16v16, chances are the mission only had 3 lives to begin with on each side so it’s suddenly over. Or the other missions aren’t focused enough so there’s a chance to miss out on competition entirely whether it’s from being called in from across the map or having to stop a criminal on the last leg of their fetch quest.

    • Gentacle says:

      Plus, the game caps zones at 80 people so that’s going to be the “max” with “many players involved” with which they begin.

  22. sendmark says:

    meh. my anticipation was quashed by the beta anyway, will wait for the RPS review.

  23. Diziet says:

    I quite like it, it has issues sure (the cars are indeed awful) but nothing that can’t be fixed up post release like every other game under the sun these days. I won’t say it’s a must buy for me just yet but it’s a far superior game to the one I played 4-5 months ago. That to me bodes well if they keep the progress and updates post release.

  24. jalf says:

    “Please don’t review our game until, years from now, the last server goes down. That is the only way in which we can ensure that you experience all aspects of the game”

  25. VexD says:

    I really doubt they can just “fix” the driving post launch considering its a server side system and would require a vast re-write to push to the client side and keep it fair/ non game breaking. They are using UE3 which as far as I am aware only supports serverside driving, can’t think of another game using unreal 3 that has solved this.

    • Tei says:


      Most of the driving is clientside. You can see that for yourself. Start the game, and put your car doing circles, then turn off the router energy. TADA!!.. your car will continue doing circles, even with the game connected to nothing.

    • LuminosXI says:

      Just because the game isn’t connected to the server doesn’t mean the driving is handled on the client side, presumably the engine handles all driving and the values for the cars handling, damage, and upgrades are controlled through the server. While not requiring a major re-write in code, I do foresee RTW having to address these issues if enough of their customer base cries out for it.

  26. oceanclub says:

    They could have avoided this fiasco by, rather than trying to come across like a bunch of pre-internet era control freaks, simply publishing a press release explaining the reasons why they think that reviewers and punters should spend a bit of time with the game before making a judgement.

    But hey, I’m not a “professional” PR person.


  27. DW40 says:

    The problem I’m having with the game (I expected the bad driving,and find the better cars make a huge difference) is the combat. The game runs very smooth for me until I’m in a short range gunfight, then everything gets very laggy. Which is sort of…exactly the opposite of what I’d prefer.

  28. TheSombreroKid says:

    tbh this is just the press kicking up a fuss over nothing, the concept of a review of pre release code and a preview based on hours of actual gameplay of near release code are identical and you are perfectly entitled to print previews stating that fact, as games evolve into services these lines are going to be increasingly irrelevant.

  29. Freud says:

    I can’t say I have an encyclopedic knowledge of game releases and review conditions, but in pretty much every case I have heard about where reviews were delayed until some time after the games release (most often due to no review copies being made available) the game has been crap.

    There is of course a slight difference between single player games and MMOs with communities forming etc, but I would if I had pre-ordered APB I would cancel my order now. Partly based on testimonials from beta players and partly because of this silly embargo. That doesn’t mean I would never go near the game of course.

  30. geldonyetich says:

    Personally, I’d say the greater brand damage has already been done. A lot less gamers care about reviews so much as they do word of mouth.

    I’m pretty sure right now, a significant amount of gamers who played the game over the Key To The City event are thinking to themselves, “why should I pay subscription price on top of box price for what’s essentially GTA4 gone slightly more massively multiplayer” or “don’t get me wrong, the APB mechanic of players being dynamically assigned to oppose themselves is cool, but the control is to loose and ‘spray-and-pray’ esque that I’m really not too confident about making this purchase” and so on.

    Their passing this message on to their friends is likely the real concern the developers should have, and if I were them I would be ready to roll with those punches than try to put up a front that there’s nothing the matter that a little time won’t fix.

    • Marco W. says:

      And why runs the U3E so crapy on good systems? Why can you set the video options from minimal to high and their is no effect? etc. Polish the code and then release.

  31. etho says:

    I’ve seen a few sites (don’t recall off the top of my head which ones) do 2 or 3 part reviews for MMOs, one right near release and additional follow up reviews (months later in most cases) after the reviewer has spent more time in the game. This always seemed like a sensible way to go about it.

  32. GarbageDonkey says:

    APB is a maximum wonderful game.

    Certainly not to be played alone though. If you’re not with a group on TS, constantly getting into the spirit of things, I would imagine it to be a very boring play indeed.

    It’s rare that a game world feels so in depth despite the fact that it’s clearly not. Time and time again I would find myself and a partner running down random corridors through back alleys and buildings, kicking down doors and jumping fences to get away from a pack of hungry enforcers. Having a group of running buddies is what’s going to make this game. Your crew against that pack of dudes dressed up like Stephen Colbert, who have themes set to his shows theme song, and plays every time one of them kills you.

    Consistently entertaining not because of the missions, but because of the random situations of having to face a pack of real bad ass opponents, or looking on the scoreboard to see that the group of lackeys you smoked two missions back have been called on to try and stop you again.

    There is also the aspect of camaraderie that I experienced as I started to know who was an enforcer and who was a gang member. Many of times I would see a random gun fight between the two, and would intentionally mess with the enforcer whilst driving off so that the baddies came out on top.

    People can complain because the game doesn’t have their ideal set of controls or shooting parameters, but if you’re not able to learn a new system then why bother playing new games? Once you put a little work into it, and less guff, you may find that it’s more of a blast and less of a hassle. Hell if you’re that bad at shooting just slide your car into a group of people… That’s always good for a laugh.

  33. angrycoder says:

    Standard line of every MMO: the beta is lousy now, but wait one week when we launch, it will be awesome!

  34. LuminosXI says:

    I think I’ll just wait for this to go the way of LOTRO and DDO, free to play

  35. Loner says:

    GarbageDonkey: I totally agree with you. This game is a blast and a refreshing take on MMOG, definitely a MMOG to play with friends. You want to play solo, stick to current MMOs. The randomness and dynamics missions are what make this game stand. The situation you’re put into are always different even if the missions are almost the same. I don’t understand the poor controls arguments, it control a lot better than all GTA I’ve played, don’t judge the game by the first car you get.

  36. Min3mat says:

    Typical corporate bs. I worry for this game now

  37. Kadayi says:

    The problem our ‘heroes’ face now is that having argued the toss they’ve gotten themselves into the North American early access release. Enjoy those 400+ pings guys.

  38. Q-efx says:

    Sorry, but I dunno why to pay monthly for this game? Low amount of weapons, low amount of things you could do, even the map feels like a small map, I mean you pay MONTHLY for it, so except something to do, and go and change, wtf I want with 1000 Trillions of costumes?