Thanks for the question! And yes to your point, Splitgate 1 did not fail, it was a big success for us when we were a very small team! We view it as a stepping stone towards our larger goals, but a stepping stone we are very proud of!
That said, it obviously did not sustain itself and this really boils down to 2 major reasons. One of course was the servers and code base not being scalable. We were a team of 4 engineers at the time, so we really did not have the resources to handle that many players. But we also did not have things structured in a way where we could quickly iterate and pump out new content efficiently with a larger team. Our codebase and workflows worked perfectly well for a small team where everyone knew everything, but we needed to refactor and start over (especially since we are also in a new engine with UE5 now) to be able to have 175 people working on the same game at the same time without stepping on each others toes.
The other big reason was that we did not have enough people to push meaningful updates frequently. You look at other successful f2p shooters and there are always new things coming out, whether its a new map, gun, mode, etc. and we just simply did not have the team or tech to do this. And of course we have more coming with our live ops plan to share at a later date, but you can definitely expect a massive increase in the frequency and amount of content coming.
In terms of making sure we don't lose what made Splitgate special, that's exactly what tests like this are for! We wanted to lead with our more controversial changes (like hotzone being shared progression, TTK being shorter, and showcasing smaller simpler maps) because we wanted to see how the community would react early on so that we could adjust accordingly based on our community's feedback. But also, to answer your question in a different way, I think the biggest strengths of Splitgate were its awesome gunplay and the amazing plays you could do with portals, so that is what we are trying to preserve and emphasize while adding an extra layer (and significantly more content) on top of that. Thanks for the great question!