More games should play with their core features
Fortnite is getting rid of building, which feels as much of a core change as Fortnite getting rid of guns. Building is less exciting than the guns, of course, and it's perhaps not what attracts casual players, but it is the thing that makes Fortnite Fortnite. Take away the building elements and it's just another battle royale. You might as well just play Apex Legends, since Fortnite's only other gimmick is that you can play as two different versions of Zendaya, right? I don't think that's true or fair, but it's damn exciting that one of the biggest games on the planet is changing its most basic foundations.
Of course, there are negatives to be found, if you want to look for them. And since it's Fortnite, people do. Getting rid of building might be seen as shaving off some of the more interesting mechanics in order to make the game more approachable – and this is a game already targeting not just mass market appeal, but complete genre saturation. It could be seen as Fortnite getting rid of anything that makes it interesting, unique, or even vaguely experimental. But then isn't this an experiment? Isn't removing one of the things the game is most known for by definition experimental?
It may result in either the creation of a permanent non-building mode, or in building being taken out altogether. Neither of those seem like major wins for triple-A games daring to think differently, but I don't think that needs to be the benchmark. If Fortnite is prepared to mix it up a bit here, then the game may do something similar in the future, maybe with an even bigger change. For all the criticism Fortnite gets for its reliance on crossovers, it has done its fair share of experimentation already. Travis Scott and Ariana Grande's concerts introduced a new melding of music and gaming, even if the kinks still need to be worked out moving forward.
Maybe other games will follow suit and try some new ideas of their own. Live-service games are increasingly more common these days, so it makes sense that developers begin to try out fresh ideas on existing games rather than having to make them from scratch. Fortnite is earning some naysayers by chopping off building, but it's the closest thing to a bold moves games of its size ever make and have made in a good while.
But enough about the analysis around its removal, let's look at the removal itself. Building doesn't get talked about much in Fortnite these days, but then walking around doesn't get talked about much either – yet if they removed the ability to walk around, we'd suddenly realise how important it was. Could a new meta emerge with building off the table completely? Will maps be tweaked so that areas once designed for building now have another purpose? How does the game change when you take away something crucial to the overall texture of gameplay, even if many individual players underused it?
This is how the removal of building becomes an experiment for Fortnite. It might seem as if it's getting rid of an interesting mechanic to embrace the mindless shooter sludge, but it is fundamentally upending its own game to see what happens. It's a science experiment, a little like when you were at school and you put your pen in the Bunsen burner to see what would happen. You're experimenting, even though what you've done has been done before, you won't learn anything important, and you might just make a mess. What I’m saying is that more games should put their pens in the Bunsen burner.
Stacey Henley is the Editor-in-Chief at TheGamer, and can often be found journeying to the edge of the Earth, but only in video games. Find her on Twitter @FiveTacey
