KILLER INN CBT2 Returns to Steam: 24-Player Murder-Mystery Test Oct 3–13, 2025

Square Enix has confirmed that the multiplayer murder-mystery action game KILLER INN will return for a second Closed Beta Test on Steam from Friday, October 3, 2025 at 3:00 p.m. PDT / 6:00 p.m. EDT through Monday, October 13, 2025 at 2:59 p.m. PDT / 5:59 p.m. EDT, inviting players to test updated systems, balance changes, and new features added after the July test.
The publisher says participants from the first closed beta will be able to join automatically, while new registrants will receive invitation notifications on Wednesday, October 1. Attendees at Tokyo Game Show (Makuhari Messe, September 25–28) will be able to play a preview build at the Square Enix booth and receive CBT 2 invitation codes on-site. The company is explicitly soliciting player feedback during CBT 2 to refine the experience before an eventual full release.

Background and overview​

KILLER INN is a 24-player, third-person, asymmetrical murder-mystery action game that blends social deduction with direct combat and investigative mechanics. Matches pit a smaller team of hidden killers (“Wolves”) against a numerical majority of “Lambs” who must gather clues and survive or escape. The project is a multi-company collaboration: Square Enix is publishing, Tactic Studios is credited as a developer partner, and the IP is co-created with TBS GAMES (the game-focused arm of Tokyo Broadcasting System Television). The game was first revealed during Summer Game Fest and ran an initial closed beta in late July focused on server and networking tests.
Key pillars of KILLER INN’s design include:

• Asymmetrical roles: Wolves versus Lambs in a single match of 24 players.
• Physical forensic clues: hair, fingerprints, clothing fragments and other evidence left at murder scenes that Lambs can collect and analyze.
• Action-led resolution: once a killer is identified, combat rather than voting determines the outcome—players can fight to eliminate suspects.
• Progression during matches: quests, lootable chests, weapons, armor and equipment upgrades change the tactical landscape within a single session.
• Immersive proximity voice chat with 3D audio to amplify social deduction and deception.

This second Closed Beta Test (CBT 2) promises balance changes, gameplay adjustments, and new features driven by the developer’s analysis of July’s player feedback. The stated goal is iterative polishing: the team wants to test not only stability but whether recent design shifts improve the risk-reward loops that shape trust and suspicion in large-group social-deduction matches.

---

What Square Enix announced for CBT 2​

The public announcement centers on dates, access, and the scope of changes coming into the test window. The essentials for players are straightforward:

• CBT 2 dates: Oct 3–13, 2025 (Steam playtest).
• Auto-access for July CBT participants; new applicants notified on Oct 1.
• Preview playable at Tokyo Game Show with on-site invitation codes for attendees.
• Continued solicitation of feedback during and after the test.

On the technical side, Square Enix published minimum and recommended Windows system requirements for the CBT, which are important for players planning to participate:

• Minimum: Windows 10 64-bit / Windows 11; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 or Intel Core i5-7500; 16 GB RAM; AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (8 GB) or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB); DirectX 12; 75 GB free storage; SSD required; 1920 × 1080 @ 30 FPS target.
• Recommended: Windows 10/11; AMD Ryzen 5 5500 or Intel Core i7-9700K / i5-10600; 16 GB RAM; AMD Radeon RX 5700 or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER or better; DirectX 12; 75 GB free storage; SSD required; 1920 × 1080 @ 60 FPS target.

These specs are conservative in two ways: the memory requirement is a fixed 16 GB for both minimum and recommended, and the storage demand is a substantial 75 GB during beta—an important consideration for players whose primary SSD space is constrained.

Why the second beta matters: what changed since July​

The first closed beta in late July concentrated on server stability, networking, and basic match flow. Developer notes and community reaction from that period emphasized a few consistent themes:

• Strong first impressions for the concept and audiovisual identity; many outlets praised the premise of a more action-forward social-deduction game.
• Concerns around balance and match pacing — large 24-player matches introduced edge cases where games tipped quickly or ended in chaotic free-for-all firefights rather than methodical deduction.
• Questions about how evidence systems (forensics left behind by Wolves) would interact with player agency, griefing, and false accusations.
• Early chatter about potential toxicity and voice-chat moderation risks, given the proximity chat design.

CBT 2’s stated focus on design reassessment and balance adjustments is therefore meaningful. The second test appears intended to validate:

• Whether the evidence-collection mechanics can become reliable signals without trivially exposing Wolves.
• How progression within a match (loot, armor, traps) affects the long middle game and endgame pacing.
• Server and matchmaking behavior under sustained loads, particularly with cross-region participation anticipated by players worldwide.

For players and analysts, the beta is the first real opportunity to judge whether KILLER INN can synthesize social deduction and action-competitive gameplay without undermining the social fabric that makes deduction games compelling.

---

Deep dive: core gameplay systems and design intent​

Asymmetry: Wolves and Lambs​

KILLER INN’s asymmetry is typical of social-deduction titles but unusual in its scale and mechanics. Twenty-four players creates a complex network of interactions; it raises several design trade-offs:

• A higher player count increases drama and ambiguity but complicates signal clarity. With more actors, an innocent player is more easily misunderstood, and Wolves have more cover.
• Scaling mechanics like evidence density, loot availability, and resource sinks must be tuned to prevent runaway advantages (for example, one killer hoarding high-power gear and steamrolling the match).

The game’s emphasis on physical forensic evidence (hair, fingerprints, clothing fragments) is a deliberate attempt to reduce purely rhetorical deception—players aren’t forced to rely solely on persuasion; there are collectable, in-world clues. This moves the design toward a hybrid of investigation and confrontation.

Combat and the endgame​

Unlike Among Us–style titles that resolve accusation through voting, KILLER INN resolves suspecting players through direct combat. This creates a different skill ceiling: mechanical prowess (aiming, using equipment, movement) matters in addition to social manipulation. The payoff is a visceral, climactic confrontation that can make correct deductions feel decisive.
However, this also risks making the game feel unfair for less mechanically adept players. If Wolves with strong aim and loadout advantages can consistently defend themselves, detection loses meaning. The developers’ balance changes will need to ensure:

• Weapons and armor are counterable.
• The environment offers tools for non-combat resolution (traps, stealth).
• Matchflow prevents early snowballing where a discovered Wolf can singlehandedly eliminate Lamb numbers.

Progression and match economy​

CBT materials describe quests, chests, and character abilities. Match-level progression (loot fetched mid-game) encourages exploration and short-term goals but can create disparities within the same match. The team must tune:

• Economy pacing so late-arriving players or those who died early aren't irreparably disadvantaged.
• Risk-reward for bounty-hunting versus self-preservation.
• How power items are distributed and whether they promote diverse strategies or centralize effective meta-play into a single “best” weapon or tactic.

Social systems: voice, emotes, and anti-abuse​

Proximity voice chat with 3D audio promises immersive interactions and a stronger sense of suspicion. That immersion can enhance drama but multiplies moderation challenges. Key risks:

• Harassment and voice toxicity in large anonymous matches.
• Inability of developers to proactively moderate real-time voice without intrusive measures.
• Potential for targeted abuse if reporting tools are insufficient.

Square Enix will need to deploy robust in-game reporting, mute/auto-mute defaults, opt-out options, and perhaps filters or timed cooldowns for voice features. Community moderation and server-side mitigation will likely be necessary to keep public matches healthy.

---

Technical and Windows-specific implications​

KILLER INN’s published system requirements already signal a few realities for Windows users.

• SSD requirement: The studio lists an SSD as mandatory for both minimum and recommended specs. This is a clear sign that load times and streaming are significant—likely due to large, detailed castle maps and many simultaneous players. Expect high disk I/O during match joins and respawns.
• 75 GB storage footprint: Even as a beta, 75 GB is expensive for many players’ primary drives. The size will impact adoption among laptop users and those on space-limited systems.
• Stable 16 GB memory baseline: Requiring 16 GB for minimum implies that the game’s engine holds substantial persistent data (draw calls, voice chat buffers, NPC systems). Players with 8 GB systems will not be supported during CBT.
• GPU floor: The minimum class of GPUs is a GeForce GTX 1060 / Radeon RX 5500 XT. These are mid-range cards from several generations ago; on many modern PCs this will be fine, but older integrated GPUs will be excluded.

Practical steps for Windows players preparing to test:

• Ensure the primary drive has at least 80–100 GB of free space to account for patches and temporary files.
• Use an SSD for installation; mechanical drives will likely fail to meet load-time expectations.
• Update GPU drivers to the latest release and check DirectX 12 compatibility.
• Test microphone and network stability in advance; proximity voice chat will be central to the experience.

---

The developer/publisher dynamic: Tactic Studios, Square Enix, and TBS GAMES​

KILLER INN is notable as a cross-industry collaboration. Square Enix brings publishing muscle and global distribution channels; TBS GAMES (Tokyo Broadcasting System’s gaming division) brings entertainment IP and content design sensibilities; Tactic Studios is the credited developer partner responsible for execution.
This collaboration is significant for several reasons:

• It reflects Square Enix’s mid-term strategy to build new IP through partnerships and to diversify beyond core JRPGs.
• TBS’s involvement is part of an ongoing trend where broadcasters and media companies back game development to create cross-media properties.
• Tactic Studios, a smaller studio, gains access to Square Enix resources but will face expectations to deliver a polished multiplayer netcode and content roadmap.

The arrangement can accelerate production values and marketing reach, but it also creates complexity in decision-making and long-term live service planning. Questions to watch:

• Who owns future IP extensions (TV tie-ins, series, merchandise)?
• How will responsibility for live service operations (servers, content cadence) be divided?
• Will TBS’s entertainment background push the game toward more narrative or spectacle-led events that impact balance?

---

Market positioning: where KILLER INN fits and who it will compete with​

KILLER INN enters a crowded ecosystem of social deduction and hero-based multiplayer games. Its closest conceptual peers are social-deduction titles like Among Us, Town of Salem and Mafia-style games, but its action-forward take risks comparisons to competitive shooters and battle royale titles.
Opportunities:

• Differentiation: Combining physical evidence collection with action resolution creates a unique hook that could attract players who find pure deduction games unsatisfying.
• Spectatorship: Large matches and dramatic reveals are inherently streamable; KILLER INN could find a niche in streaming and content creation if early influencers adopt it.
• Cross-media potential: The TBS connection opens doors for TV-style events, seasonal content, or IP adaptation.

Risks:

• Audience split: Players who love deduction may dislike the mechanical skill element; shooter fans may find the detective work slow or cumbersome.
• Monetization friction: If post-launch monetization (cosmetics, battle passes) becomes pay-to-win through purchasable convenience or loadout boosts, the community could fracture rapidly.
• Retention and matchmaking: Maintaining a consistent player base to fill 24-player matches globally is harder than for smaller-lobby games; launch regional servers and tight matchmaking windows will be essential.

---

Community feedback and the road to launch​

Early hands-on previews from media outlets highlighted the game’s promise and its rough edges. Common praise focused on atmosphere, inventive integration of forensic clues, and the satisfying tension of close-range confrontations. Critiques centered on:

• Match pacing and the potential for chaotic conclusions that negate investigative work.
• The learning curve of combining social deduction with shooter mechanics.
• Concerns about in-match moderation tools for voice chat and griefing.

Square Enix’s explicit focus on collected player feedback in CBT 2 suggests the team intends to tune these pain points. The company’s public messaging frames CBT 2 as an iterative, player-informed process—not solely a stress test—so the improvements will be measured by whether the design changes demonstrably reduce random outcomes and enhance the sense of justice and discovery that deduction games rely upon.

---

Potential pitfalls and mitigation strategies​

Several key risks deserve scrutiny, together with the mitigation paths developers should pursue:

• Risk: Overreliance on voice chat leads to harassment.
• Mitigation: Provide default muted voice on public servers, robust reporting, server-side moderation tools, and optional text alternatives like stamps and emotes.
• Risk: Mechanical skill dominates social deduction, marginalizing less-gifted players.
• Mitigation: Introduce non-combat counters (traps, investigative tools), loose aim assist for Lambs, and role-based abilities that reward deduction over aim.
• Risk: Match balance favors Wolves due to outnumbering in late-game scenarios.
• Mitigation: Implement dynamic balancing systems (supply drops to Lambs, victory conditions like escape gates that Lambs can pursue).
• Risk: Live service monetization compromises fairness.
• Mitigation: Restrict monetization to cosmetic items and progression accelerators that do not alter combat or investigative power.

Successful adoption will hinge on how effectively the team preempts these common multiplayer traps and how agilely they respond to data from CBT 2.

---

Practical advice for players joining CBT 2​

For players planning to participate in the Steam playtest, a few tactical considerations will improve both personal experience and the collective test value:

• Prepare your kit: Install on an SSD with 100 GB free to accommodate patches. Update GPU drivers and confirm DirectX 12 functionality.
• Test voice settings: Verify microphone levels and proximity-chat functionality to reduce friction when the beta begins.
• Join with a small group: Squadding (2–4 people who are kept together on assignment) is supported and can teach the developers whether party mechanics affect balance.
• Report thoroughly: Use the provided feedback tools and any post-session surveys. The dev team emphasizes player reports; well-documented bug reports and gameplay impressions will have outsized influence.
• Play roles deliberately: Try both Lamb and Wolf roles to understand the interplay of evidence systems and combat—developers will be looking for both sides of the experience.

---

Final assessment: promise tempered by practical challenges​

KILLER INN presents a high-concept hybrid: a murder-mystery built around tangible clues and resolved through action. The concept is compelling—especially for players seeking social deception with an adrenaline outlet—but execution will be the difference between a fresh, sustainable multiplayer IP and an overblown gimmick.
Strengths:

• Unique blend of investigation and combat that can expand the social-deduction genre.
• High production value and publishing strength from Square Enix.
• TBS partnership opens cross-media and promotional possibilities that could broaden the audience.

Risks:

• Balancing a 24-player asymmetrical action game is inherently difficult.
• Voice chat and large public matches raise moderation and community-health concerns.
• PC-only launch (Steam) and large disk/SSD requirements could limit early adoption among casual players or those on limited hardware.

The second Closed Beta Test scheduled for October is consequential. It will reveal whether the design changes enacted after July’s test successfully address core balance and pacing issues while preserving the emergent drama that social-deduction games depend upon. For Windows players and PC enthusiasts, attention should be paid to the technical baseline—SSD requirement, 75 GB of storage and the fixed 16 GB RAM baseline—because these are hard constraints for participation.
If the game can find a balance where investigation matters as much as marksmanship, and if Square Enix can steward the community to prevent toxicity, KILLER INN could carve out a distinctive niche in multiplayer gaming—one that prizes accusation as much as action. The October beta will be the clearest early indicator of whether that ambition can be turned into a robust, long-term game.

---

Source: Square Enix press site " SQUARE ENIX ANNOUNCES SECOND CLOSED BETA TEST FOR MURDER MYSTERY ACTION GAME KILLER INN " - Square Enix North America Press Hub