BULKHEAD's ambitious new shooter "Wardogs" received a bigger reception than almost anyone expected, but that same wave of players quickly exposed cracks the studio was not fully prepared for.
Success and frustration have ended up arriving at the same time for the fledgling multiplayer title.
'Wardogs' Launch With Issues on Early Access
"Wardogs" launched into Early Access selling more than 1.25 million copies within its first 24 hours, alongside a concurrent player count that peaked above 340,000 on Steam.
BULKHEAD CEO Joe Brammer described the numbers as mental, telling IGN that the studio had to "crunch" for months on end to deliver the game. Even with that approach, including a marketing push that literally listed reasons not to buy the game, the sheer number of people trying to log in at once caught the team off guard.
This ones on us, we've heard the feedback and seen the frustration and we're jumping on it quick in this instance.
— Joe Brammer (@Brammflakes) September 12, 2026
We won't always do that, but communities are so important to games like @WARDOGS so we need to give them our attention when the game isn't working for them.… https://t.co/KTkcGxTXTe
According to Brammer, the demand pushed the game's servers well past what the team had planned for, forcing multiple restarts and long login queues during the opening days.
Some players found themselves unable to get into a match at all during certain stretches of launch day, a frustration that showed up clearly across early Steam reviews even from people who otherwise enjoyed the shooter itself.
Players Note Server Issues, Money System
Beyond the server strain, players have raised concerns about how "Wardogs" handles its in-game economy, reports ComicBook Gaming. The game rewards nearly every action with cash, whether players choose to fight on the front line, transport supplies, or build fortifications, and that money gets funneled into buying weapons, vehicles, and gear.
Complaints have centered on that balance feeling skewed, with logistics and base building roles reportedly earning far more than infantry players fighting directly in the contested zones.
Some players have also pointed out that stronger anti-air defenses and mortars feel too easy to access and too powerful compared to their cost, while effective infantry loadouts can end up pricier than vehicles like helicopters or tanks.
Is Team Switching on 'Wardogs' Flawed?
Another issue players have flagged involves the ability to switch teams in the middle of an ongoing match. Feedback gathered by BULKHEAD has pointed to this as something that should not be allowed at all, since it can let players hop toward whichever team currently has the advantage rather than sticking with their original squad through a tough fight.
That same imbalance has shown up in how players approach the game's three factions overall, with one faction in particular developing a reputation among the community as the one to avoid, even though all three technically play identically.
We’re entering the first phase of @WARDOGS perfectly acceptable decline where people start to find issues with the balancing, or just disagree with design decisions. So, let’s start the next phase of development…
— Joe Brammer (@Brammflakes) September 16, 2026
Now remember, we’re in charge here, we’re the ones with the…
"Wardogs" itself pits up to 100 players across three teams battling over a randomly placed control zone on large, destructible maps, blending infantry combat with vehicles, base construction, and a shared economy that ties directly into how well a team performs.
That scale and complexity is exactly what has made the team-switching exploit such a sticking point, since a single player jumping ship at the wrong moment can throw off the balance of an entire ongoing match across a map built for a hundred people.
Brammer has acknowledged the feedback directly, telling players that while the developers still intend to steer the game's direction themselves, community input is being taken seriously heading into future content updates.
