BattleBit Remastered

BattleBit Remastered

BattleBit Remastered以大型線上戰鬥為核心,而非單人冒險;可以先想想自己是否想經常遊玩多人模式。目前在Kinguin的價格為≈ HK$100.52。載具與可破壞建築帶來變化多端的交戰情境,小隊職責則影響彼此的協同作戰。 相較於Steam的HK$114.00,Steam的報價便宜≈ HK$13.48。

正在取得全網報價
82%Steam 玩家評分12.8萬 則評價
發售日期: Jun 15, 2023
FPS · Multiplayer · Shooter · Military · Destruction
BattleBit Remastered Steam Altergift·平台:Steam·~ HK$130.06-23%起~ HK$100.52(~ €11.43)比 Steam 省 HK$13.48去購買
·平台:Steam·香港 Steam 官方價~ HK$114.00去購買
BattleBit - Remastered Global·平台:Steam·起~ HK$156.36(~ €17.78)去購買
史低 ~ HK$58.78含 Steam 及第三方通路
正在取得全網報價
心願價
設定後,所選地區的可用報價達到或低於心願價時,會寄送電子郵件提醒。

價格歷史

近 36 個月 · 資料每日更新
全網低價紀錄~ HK$0.002023-11目前全網低價~ HK$117.64Steam
~ HK$110.58~ HK$115.29~ HK$119.99~ HK$124.7025-1026-0126-0426-0726-10~ HK$117.64

價格涵蓋 Steam 官方與 39 家授權商店,僅統計正規通路報價。曲線按週呈現近 36 個月的全網低價與 Steam 官方價。

歷史價格以美元記錄,圖中金額按 2026-10-09 歐洲央行匯率換算為 HKD,僅供參考;實際結算金額以商店頁面為準。

01關於BattleBit Remastered

BattleBit Remastered是一款低多邊形風格的大型多人第一人稱射擊遊戲。小隊可參與最多254人的戰鬥,突擊與支援等角色各有職責。可破壞的建築會改變戰場,載具種類從坦克延伸至海上載具。 Steam玩家評價:127,704則評價中有82%%為好評。 發行日期:2023年6月15日。

製作團隊

開發
SgtOkiDoki · Vilaskis · TheLiquidHorse
發行
SgtOkiDoki

Steam玩家評論

82%好評極度好評127,704 Steam評論

近36個月記錄最低價

≈ HK$0.002023-11-30 · Steam基本遊戲 · 與上方圖表記錄相同;美元價格歷史,並非地區Steam最低價。

語言支援

語言介面字幕音訊
簡體中文是——
繁體中文是——
英語是——
再顯示19種語言
語言介面字幕音訊
法語是——
義大利語是——
德語是——
西班牙語是——
阿拉伯語是——
捷克語是——
荷蘭語是——
芬蘭語是——
匈牙利語是——
日語是——
韓語是——
挪威語是——
波蘭語是——
巴西葡語是——
俄語是——
土耳其語是——
烏克蘭語是——
越南語是——
瑞典語是——

Steam PC版資料 · 2026-10-12

02購買前

多人遊玩

Steam PC版主打大型多人戰鬥,每個伺服器最多支援254名玩家,並包含載具與可破壞環境。

溝通方式

遊戲描述提及開放式語音交流;未提供控制器支援資訊。

03常見問題

戰鬥規模有多大?

描述指出每個伺服器的戰鬥最多可容納254名玩家。

遊戲中有載具嗎?

有。描述列出坦克、直升機、運輸載具與海上載具。

環境可以破壞嗎?

牆壁與建築可以摧毀,戰場也會因此改變。

7.5
綜合評分
外部評分82%Steam 玩家評分12.8萬 則評價
畫面
6.5
音效
8
玩法
9
劇情
6
內容
8

“A three-dev team trades fidelity for 254-player destructible warfare and proximity-voice presence, the value benchmark for large-scale team combat”

評測總結

On balance, BattleBit Remastered is a deep system wrapped in a deliberately plain shell, and the 7.5 verdict both honours its irreplaceable core and marks, honestly, the real-world hurdles around staying power and fit. It is not a game for everyone. For the right person, though, it is something with almost no substitute at this price.

A historical marker written by three people

Start with where it sits in history. It is close to the most successful independent large-scale multiplayer case of recent years: three people, no publisher marketing budget, proving with a low-poly look that fidelity was never the prerequisite for a big-battle experience, proving with a buy-once, no-microtransaction model that pure economics still works, and beating industrial-grade stacking with the cleverness of its design. 1.8 million copies in a fortnight, a peak of 87,323, a spell on top of the Steam charts above studio giants — those numbers add up to a benchmark that keeps getting cited.

Its meaning runs past a single game. In a climate that assumed large multiplayer projects could only be steered by big studios, it tore an opening in the plainest way imaginable and told every indie developer that budget and graphics need not decide a big multiplayer game — grasping the one core experience can.

That instructive value gives it a standing beyond the commercial win. Years from now, when people argue about what an independent studio can and cannot attempt, this is the game that gets pulled off the shelf as proof. It did not just sell well; it widened the sense of what was possible, and that is a rarer achievement than any sales figure.

Who should buy in, and who should walk past

Who is it for? If you miss the large-map cooperation of classic Battlefield, are tired of rivals carved up by microtransactions and passes, and have been shut out of the photoreal blockbusters by hardware, it is close to tailor-made — the gentle system requirements leave you almost no hardware baggage, and the buy-once model means one payment lands you everything. More than that, if you relish the light social spark of teaming up with strangers by voice and finding your own slot in a 200-player melee, the presence it hands you is something most rivals simply cannot.

Who this battlefield is for

Who should walk past? If you want photoreal fidelity, demand reliably full servers and mature anti-cheat, or live only for single-player and small-scale ranked play, it will most likely let you down. The look bounces graphics purists on sight, and the swings in its player count mean the entry experience carries real uncertainty.

These are not flaws being papered over; they are facts to weigh before you commit. The honest thing to say is that BattleBit asks something of you in return — a tolerance for rough edges, and a willingness to show up when the servers are warm. Give it those, and it gives back an experience with almost no rival. Withhold them, and you will likely find it frustrating.

Where it stands now, and the thing nobody has copied

From the vantage of 2026, you have to split the historical standing from the present state. As history it is a benchmark; in the present, its population has been through a cliff-edge fall, and whether a newcomer can find a full server fast and whether Operation Overhaul can reignite the community are questions anyone joining now has to face squarely.

Even so, its one core value has never been shaken: that "hear it, see it, reshape it" 254-player presence has yet to be copied by any peer at this price. Against an industrially funded but soul-questioned photoreal title like Battlefield 2042, it swapped fidelity for scale and purity, and traded the cleverness of three people for an intimacy no amount of money seems to buy.

Grasp the full arc — meteoric rise, mid-life silence, teased return — and you can answer "is it worth joining now" without letting the mood drag you. The population may rise and fall, but the thing that made it special was never the headcount on any given night; it was the design underneath, and that has not gone anywhere. For the people who actually want this kind of experience, the answer is very likely yes.

展開閱讀完整評測