Concord is a good game – but sometimes being good just isn’t enough anymore. After attracting some pretty pathetic Steam player numbers during its closed beta – which, admittedly, required participants to pre-order the game – Firewalk Studios’ free open beta is not doing much better. According to SteamDB data, the test peaked at just 2,388 concurrent players this weekend – and that figure has fallen as low as 557 concurrent players during off-peak times.
Twitch.tv viewership is also pretty low, attracting just 71 watchers at the time of writing. While that number will likely increase as America gradually begins to get up, these kinds of figures will have the higher-ups at Sony furrowing their brows.
While the beta is likely doing better on PS5, where Sony sadly doesn’t share player data, it suggests the arena shooter has an uphill battle ahead of it. Many have complained about the Japanese giant’s decision to charge $40 for this title, but considering the current demo is free for everyone to try, it suggests there’s a level of apathy surrounding the release that may be hard to reverse.
The problem for Concord is that many PlayStation fans have had their pitchforks out for the project since the start, with some seeing it as a symbol of Sony’s push towards live service. Many feel that the platform holder should be focusing on the cinematic single player games it’s known for – although ironically there is still plenty of pent-up social media demand for classic multiplayer franchises like Warhawk, Killzone, and Resistance.
Ultimately, it can be hard to shake the sense of failure, and while it’s not necessarily fair, Concord is going to have to pull out all the stops to attract players ahead of its 23rd August release date. It’s going to be interesting to see how Sony approaches this problem, and whether it has any impact at all.
Are you playing the Concord open beta? (3,079 votes)
- Yes, of course I'm playing it
- Yeah, I'll probably give it a try
- Maybe, I haven't decided yet
- Nah, I'm busy with other games
- No, I have zero interest in Concord
[source steamdb.info]
Comments 126
It doesn't help that most people don't know there is a free open beta.
I think the game will mainly do better on playstation 5 and that will be it's main audience as we know by now that PC players ain't the nicest towards Playstation. If HellDivers 2 wasn't made by a third party dev and had the PSN requirement day one then it wouldn't have done as well as it has on PC.
Calling it now, if this game flops then by this time next year Firewalk will be shut down, Fairgame$ cancelled and then not longer after that Haven will be shut down, Sony will then cut more staff to recover the losses.
@UltimateOtaku91 Well, that would be a terrible outcome.
@get2sammyb Well it depends on the reason Sony bought these devs, if their sole purpose was live service and they flop then they will 100% be shut down. But if they had plans for them to make single player games as well then maybe they will get another shot.
Good. Let this uninspired copycat of a game with atrocious characters flop out of existence.
I will never forgive Sony for cancelling Factions 2 and financing absolute atrocities like this. I have been here since PS1, gotten all the consoles and handhelds. I will think twice before purchasing a PS6 as I am not a fan of Sony anymore and I think many others are done with them as well.
This game perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with our industry since PS4.
I think it would have been better if they didnt have that cinematic trailer at state of play. Alot of people thought it was going to be single player or coop not a 5v5 shooter.
Also i keep thinking that character s one of the twins in square enixs guardians of the galaxy game
@WhiteRabbit Exactly, like they've done with most of their other acquisitions. Im surprised they haven't acquired Arrowhead yet since HellDivers 2 has done so well.
Its like they panicked and thought we need to rush onto the live service train and bought whoever was up for sale even though two of them had no track record and the other one (bunjie) was overpriced.
Man, we really could have had a new killzone game.
It's a shame because it's a decent game. Not amazing, but definitely something I would play with the lads for an hour or two on a Friday night.
I read an article last night describing it as the Team Fortress/Destiny spinoff I didn't know I needed, and I have to agree. It really feels like playing old TF.
Maybe the initial reveal should have skipped that CG character trailer? I'm not sure it would have helped.
At this point maybe it needs something drastic like a big delay and a campaign mode.
@Shepherd_Tallon I think adding a campaign mode might take a year or two which by then means more resources spent which will most likely turn it into a £60 game, which will turn off a lot of people.
"The problem for Concord is that many PlayStation fans have had their pitchforks out for the project since the start"
Not really. People with strong enough feelings about this type of thing are always a vocal minority, they do not doom a game by themselves.
"Many have complained about the Japanese giant’s decision to charge $40 for this title, but considering the current demo is free for everyone to try, it suggests there’s a level of apathy surrounding the release that may be hard to reverse."
See, you had hit the nail on the head on your previous paragraph. It's not the vitriol of a few, it's the apathy of many. Whatever the individual reasons may be, most people simply don't care about this game.
@UltimateOtaku91 Indeed.
And launching as it is, it just doesn't seem to have enough to convince people whose minds are already made up. There's just not enough interest in it as it stands. It's unfortunate because again, it's a decent game.
@Gaia093 or! the vitriol of a few leads to the apathy of the many. It has happened countless times so far. With psvita, PSVR1+2 and many games. If you keep reading bad things about something (e.g. xb1), it's unlikely that you'll give it a shot.
They needed to be bold and create similar game as Marvel Rivals, but with Playstation IP's characters. That would be more interesting.
As much as I have seen, then Concord is uninspiring. It doesn't provide any new stuff comparing to similar games.
I don't have hate for PC users as others do here, but why would Overwatch player swap out from OW2 for Concord? Why Valorant player go for Concord? It is so saturated gaming space that with generic game it is hard to gain traction.
Maybe if it didn’t feature the ugliest characters ever designed for a champion shooter people would give a f*
Damn haters.
Or maybe it’s just all been done before. For free. So what’s the incentive to drop £40 on it?
I don’t think it will even have a hardcore player base to keep it going for long.
Stick with your bread and butter, Sony. You're not going to do well enough in the live service space to justify the cost of developing and marketing this crap.
@naruball Spoken like someone permanently in a hardcore gamer bubble.
The mainstream audiences don't even know nor care to know about all the forum posts and half-baked YouTube essays saying a game is worthless and/or doomed. Their main interaction with these products is Sony's marketing, and in this occasion said marketing failed to entice them.
All pointing fingers at a handful of angry nerds accomplishes is making them feel as though they've got more power than they truly do.
The main problem I see is that its just a $40 copy of a popular free to play game. Why would people bother when they can just play the original for free?
Maybe there’s just NO reason for most people to spend money for a copy of unknown success while they can get the original for free with a vital player base. Not that hard, right? Why did Big Jimbo and Hermen Hulst decide to make Concord at all?
@get2sammyb nah, it's much needed culling. I don't root for people losing their jobs but there's way too many ass games coming out. Judging from that high quality CGI trailer alone there's a lot of money being poured into Concord, money and resources that could have been used to make games people actually want to play (and buy).
For a site full of 'hardcore' Sony fans, it's shocking how few of you actually get it.
The single player games we all love are taking longer and costing more than ever to make.
If we want Sony to keep churning them out while hitting our quality demands, games like these NEED to succeed because they have the potential to generate enormous profits.
Jim Ryan gets a lot of heat in these parts but he identified the problem and offered a solution. Sony needs more live service games in order to continue to develop high quality single player games. It's as simple as that.
Concord would have been a better game if it was a story campaign fps.word up son
Avon Barksdale: "What I tell you about playin' them ******' away games? Yeah. They saw your ghetto ass comin' from miles away, *****!"
I have no interest in Concord but I can't help but think this game would actually perform better on PS5 (sales wise) if there was no PC version at all.
There would be definitely be less people kicking up a stink about it but oh well you reap what you sow I guess.
@Specky Well, as long as we're not exaggerating too much, eh?
@Atreus97 You're largely correct but unfortunately your comments will fall on deaf ears.
At this point, the best PlayStation can do is bite the bullet when it releases in August and then forget it exists once Astro Bot comes out. I'm sure most of the negative PR around Concord will dissipate if Astro Bot is the enormous win I think it will be for them.
As for Firewalk, if this beta period is any indication of their future, they'll be finished within a few years.
Sony could get Firewalk to do live service game of
Last of us factions
Socom
Resistance
Killzone
I could see those being successful
Also, I don't even think delaying the full release and adding a PvE mode is the solution, because the writing and character designs suck. Do you guys really want a campaign mode with these ugly-ass characters constantly spewing quips and dull exposition? I certainly don't.
Not knowing your own audience is wild.
Unfortunately for this game the competitive PVP playerbase is very Chud heavy and the Chuds hate this game for not having any white dudes and for being “too woke”. Just go on the steam forums and read the comments for like 2 minutes and you’ll see exactly what I’m talking about.
@get2sammyb When it comes to trolling PlayStation, Exaggeration has no limit.
It's mindblowing that Factions 2.0 was cancelled. Maybe it was too serious for today's standards. Grim and dark. Don't forget that all these liveservice games are milking mostly underaged players.
@Atreus97 not every single player game needs to be a gargantuan 200 million AAAAA project
and even if you're right, nobody wanted Concord, people were calling for another Killzone game or maybe return of the SOCOM, not this Overwatch from Wish, not sure if those games would actually be successful but I know this one or Fairgames won't be
@Atreus97 if you refer to live service games in general then yes, Sony needs these to maintain high profits to bring more single player hits, but they already have tons of third party live service games that generates lots of money thanks to royalties.
Now, if they want to make their own live service games, they should not be specifically like this concord. The hero shooter phenomenon was the thing 6 years ago, not anymore. Also there's a big chunk of the community concerned that this game was made to push and prioritize certain narratives by the pronouns issue. Not to mention the uninspired gameplay and ugly characters. If we let this game succeed we'll be installing a dangerous precedent on the gaming landscape, it's clear that for the people who loves good and quality games this is unacceptable.
Imagine the money to greenlight this bland ass live service game and Fairgame$ along with a couple of billions to acquired Bungie, Firewalk, and Heaven Studios could be used to greenlight Gravity Rush 3, Wild Arms 6, Rogue Galaxy 2, a new Syphon Filter, Legend of Dragoon remake, Dark Cloud 3, a new Socom, Warhawk, Ape Escape, Soul Sacrifice, or Freedom Wars.
sigh 😔
It’s a lil jittery , i had minimal problems with it , and still rather play on PC than con$ole
@Atreus97 I agree with your take on this in theory, because addressing portfolio gaps and diversifying is smart. But, I would argue Sony already reaps the rewards from live services being a console manufacturer and digital store owner, and their attempted live service pivot was so ludicrously excessive that it has caused obvious splash damage to their studios, project management pipeline, and outlook to their hardcore audience. Outside of Helldivers II, their live service push has been an objective failure because their approach has not been smart nor calculated. The live services can't financially contribute towards the expensive single-player games if they keep bombing or getting canned.
I cant for the life of me understand what sony saw in concord that made them then want to buy firewalk studios
@Shepard93n7 i mean , sony has been on this “DEI” wave since the late ps4 days, thats not new , but the $40 price tag (and needing ps plu$) to play is beyond dumb
@ChrisDeku
I mean, if that's the case then why even greenlight a game that "non-chuds" won't even play? Who was this game for?? This just screams of a disconnect between Sony and their audience, which people have really started to complain about lately.
Game is going to bomb, wouldn't be surprised if they either delay it or make it free to play, maybe both. If the game fails, they should give the studio factions, that way all the work naughty dog spent on it can be taken over by firewalk since they are a live service studio.
@Specky
The thing is, we gamers who made Playstation successful are simply no longer the biggest or most lucrative audience. Hence going after this rubbish.
I think marketing wise they've done a lot wrong because if your not following PlayStation news/blogs, all people have really got was one cinematic trailer with a little bit of a gameplay montage during one single PlayStation showcase.
If they wanted people to latch on to the characters and lore then they should have followed what overwatch did by posting cinematics in the lead up, like they did with their widowmaker vs tracer, and Winston vs Reaper ones.
They needed to show more people playing the gameplay modes before the beta launched, instead of having one hands on preview for people to only write about it.
Plus a beta that was originally only for people who had already pre ordered it is never a good move.
@Atreus97 "The single player games we all love are taking longer and costing more than ever to make."
SP games that tooks longer to make are usually AAA games who focused a lot on graphical fidelity about character sweat or reflection and bloated open world contents.
So what Sony needs to do is scale down the budgets. Making good and fun games that attractes a lot of gamers doesn't need $200-300 million budget which is unsustainable. People still love linear games without realistic graphic as long as the game has solid and fun core gameplay.
Insomniac Spider-Man 2 for example. It's just crazy how it cost $300 million while R&C Rift Apart cost $81 million and it looks as beautiful and fun if not more fun than Spider-Man 2. Or Astro Bot, i'm sure it cost a lot less to make than Spider-Man 2 or R&C Rift Apart but it looks beautiful and fun to play.
"Jim Ryan gets a lot of heat in these parts but he identified the problem and offered a solution"
His solution is to follow the trend of a oversaturated market and so far i don't think it's working since Sony cancelled a lot of live service games including Faction 2.
I gave the beta a few hours of my time this weekend. I don’t like it. My problems:
1. Apparently no incentive not to quit a session and no option to join an ongoing session. People would just quit as soon as the opposing team pulled ahead, guaranteeing a loss. Hopefully that’s easily fixed by launch, but annoying for now.
2. No sandbox to try the characters out. I was picking characters on a pure guess as to what their kit would do, and then be a total liability to my team as I experimented.
3. I didn’t think the abilities gave enough feedback on what they were actually doing. Sometimes I’d get a direct hit with something and it was unclear whether the ability had done damage directly, or was applying a debuff causing my teammates to do more damage to the enemy, or… what? In comparable games I’ve played, it’s been much more obvious what your abilities were doing.
I wish Sony and firewalk well with this one, but not for me.
Out of all the live service PlayStation stuff, helldivers 2 is the only one doing well. The reason? It’s natural. Helldivers 2 was designed around an idea, the devs having a vision of what the game should be. This abomination is just forced. Why is it live service? Why a hero shooter? There’s no reason for it to exist in its current form, except to chase trends. I don’t understand it.
Concord is a good game? Its pretty much the only website that seems to think it is, after THAT 3/10 review for a game thats doing far better than this. I just dont trust this websites reviews anymore.
I dont wish for any game to fail, as it must be soul destroying for anyone working on a title that ends up that way, but this game is DOA, its not even up for debate. Those Twitch figures are utterly abysmal, if the game was any good it would be attracting an audience, I'm a complete no-mark streamer who only streams once in a blue moon, but even I've had more viewers than that.
i kept being told representation matters but none of the characters represent me and if i dare mention it im told boo hoo go play another game then, so ok i will. looks like most gamers are too
So far I’ve played 3 hours but every session I can’t play more than 3-4 matches, the game is just TOO SLOW, half the time you aren’t playing you’re just trying to catch up to your team because maps feel very slow to traverse even though they’re not that big, if you have a tank character you’ll never get anywhere and if you have a fast character (that still feels slow) you’ll get killed in 3 shots, because also health recovery is a mess, why if both me and a teammate need health we need to fight over a pick up point or wait 20 seconds for each?
The more I play the more I notice these little things that add to frustration and frankly boredom, I even download Overwatch after years of not playing and I swear I had more fun in the very first match I was thrown in than all my time in Concord.
It's the first FPS from Sony in over a decade. Plays REALLY well. Team Fortress meets Destiny. It's $30 in Japan, so it's an easy buy for me. There are other "hero shooters" out there like Overwatch 2, but who plays or wants to play that? I waited 25mins to find a match and couldn't find one
@Toot1st I honestly never pay attention to things like these, but they really went a mile further making sure there wasn’t any appealing or dare I say attractive character at all, they all have that generic af look, and the unnecessary cutscenes at the beginning are a ripoff from Guardians of the Galaxy.
@Atreus97 Correct, but the live service games they want to push have to not look like a steaming heap of garbage for people to be interested.
@get2sammyb Question about the Concord “open beta” on PS5. Is the beta really open to everyone b/c the info, at least on the shop in the app, says PS+ required, which wouldn’t make it open to everyone and would instead only make it open to PS+ subscribers, which, while there might be a lot of them, is not everyone.🤷🏻♂️
Edit: I was able to start the beta so it looks like it is open to everyone. Didn’t land on the planet b/c touchscreen controls on my tablet are not the way to go but it did let me get that far. Too bad there’s no campaign, I kind of enjoy the B-Team GotG. 🤷🏻♂️
"The problem for Concord is that many PlayStation fans have had their pitchforks out for the project since the start"
Well that doesn't apply to the PC gamers, they don't care either way they just want to play fun games regardless of who makes it. But yeah this game looks like it's going to bomb like Destruction Allstars, if you had forgotten that game existed well you're not alone.
@Specky I somehow are Factions was cancelled they said it themselves it wouls have been the end of their singleplayer efforts.
@Atreus97 Like some have mentioned Sony has ips that would actually translate perfectly to live service, no one here would have anything negative to say if they announced a live service Socom game. That would be amazing, but they seem to think a live service game has to be a new ip or go to hell 😐
@get2sammyb Is he exaggerating though?
Sony decided to chase an oversaturated market and thought they could get away with charging for a product in a free-to-play ecosystem.
It was a huge strategic error and possibly the reason Jim "retired."
Overwatch 2 has grown by 20% in players thanks to Concord. That says it all.
Saw a youtube ad the other day that was just replaying parts of the trailer and no gameplay. They are seriously advertising it as a story game, when it has no story whatsoever.
That right there, frustrates me.
Only issue for me is a lot of the characters are not good.
@Gaia093 couldn't be further from the truth, but ok. If that's what you believe, then by all means.
Going with the majority here:
I have zero interest in Concord.
@Coffeeglitch Thank you!
@Atreus97 @get2sammyb I agree. And I think most of the critical voices here don’t conplain about the Why, but the How: Sony has such a great heritage of IPs, and they embrace them with Astro Bot. But here, they made a generic looking copy. Or they could create a completely new artstyle, as Nintendo did with Splatoon. But here, they made a generic looking copy. What a waste of creative potential!
@PuppetMaster
"Gravity Rush 3, Wild Arms 6, Rogue Galaxy 2, a new Syphon Filter, Legend of Dragoon remake, Dark Cloud 3, a new Socom, Warhawk, Ape Escape, Soul Sacrifice, or Freedom Wars."
I'm crying right now 😭
Maybe add mfkng Beyond Good and Evil 2 in there. I have hope!
Concord is gamepass material.
If it were a good game, it would be attracting an audience.
It's made well. But it is not a good game.
@MFTWrecks so all the games, like Gravity Rush 2, Tearaway, Concrete Genie, Sackboy's Big Adventure weren't good?
Who asked for this tripe?
Sony should bring back Killzone and Resistance: Fall of Man asap. I think even a live service adaption of those games could be good 😊. I dont have high hopes for those ohter games atm.
Removed - inappropriate
@UltimateOtaku91 they haven’t acquired Arrowhead cause why the ***** would arrowhead sell? They have damn near universal good will and can get deals with any publisher they want. Vs being bought by a large corporation that is in a rough situation cause of the economy and could shut you down.
Won't bother with it at all even if the beta is free. Would rather use time on something else.
This is sad but not surprising. The game does play really ***** good. But that’s not enough in this genre nowadays. This game doesn’t do anything different or special compared to other similar games. And when a game doesn’t stand out and charges $40 for it, it’s not gonna succeed.
@nyr2k2 this is also the wrong mindset to have. Them investing into live services isn’t a bad thing, but they need to be smart about it. Helldivers 2 was a good bet. Concord on the other hand was a bad trend riding bet and seems to be a bad bet.
@Fishmasterflex96 I get what you're saying but you have to remember Sony own the HellDivers IP, so without that what do Arrowhead have to offer? At the moment they kind of need each other unless Arrowhead go and make another original game that becomes a hit.
@UltimateOtaku91 they have the experience and the talent that made the game lol 😂. Come on man don’t be so dense. The creative talent is the most important thing in this industry. Helldivers as an ip wasn’t worth ***** until Arrowhead made it what it is. In the turbulent times this industry is in it’s the smart bet to bet on yourselves vs selling to a large corporation that doesn’t have the best track record with Live service.
Noooo quel surprise
If only they conducted the same poll as PushSquare before starting development on the game itself. Pretty brutal lack of interest and the player count mirrors it.
It might actually be the way to go, as live service is often design by committee anyway, to ask the actual players what they want in a game before making the next attempt to hit GaaS gold...
@Fishmasterflex96 I get it, there's enormous revenue to be had in the live market space. I'm just really concerned with what I've seen so far that Sony has no idea how to navigate here. They're going to need to do a lot more than derivative clones of things that are being done elsewhere. Particularly given the skepticism of their player base (those just on consoles, not those who also have PCs). Concord was never going to be for me anyway, but I surely wasn't rooting against it. Just seemed like it's failure was evident from a mile away.
That's too bad. It really is much better than people give it credit for. Hopefully Firewalk gets another shot as they definitely have some talent but I just don't see Concord performing well even if it deserves to find an audience. It's just an incredibly difficult genre to step into.
@nyr2k2 completely agree that it’s failure was clear. They need to do a better job of making more unique live service games. Know it’s a lot harder said then done but they need to do a better job of trying to figure out what games will work. They are capable of it and Helldivers proves it. It’s a hard line between trying to find a game that has the capacity of being a hit but is also niche enough to separate itself from the competition.
"Concord is a good game – but sometimes being good just isn’t enough anymore."
No, not really. I mean, if it was even remotely good it would attract numbers.
Concord is a solid game from a technical standing, but it is FAR from being good.
"some seeing it as a symbol of Sony’s push towards live service" Were those people under a rock the last 5 years or what? lol People who think like that are so out of tone they don't know we are already in the age post service push and the games that are releasing are projects that were too advanced to cancel.
Sony knew about Valorant, Marvel and the other game with anime girls releasing close to Concord. They didn't do anything for people to know there was a free weekend demo. Even more, they are showing Astro Bot every 5 minutes at EVO but they aren't showing Concord, they already know is going to fail and they already moved on LOL.
Their services had to fail at some point, this is it.
I was already leaning heavily towards passing on this one. Now that I know that there won't be much of a player base I'm committed to not paying a cent for this. It needs to be free to play or have a really good launch (seems very unlikely) for me to reconsider.
@naruball I don't see your point. Those games sold decently and attracted audiences larger than Concord is managing.
Those titles, even if they end up having sold fewer copies, will have made back a larger portion of their budget than Concord will in the end. Guaranteed.
@Korgon agreed. i had fun with it, love the bazooka chick(ruka i think it is?). just needs more maps and more quality of life like play of the game, visible scoreboard all times, tutorial/practice range, killcams etc. oh and more modes
@MFTWrecks my point was good games don't always attract a large enough audience. Never discussed budget or anything like that.
I’ll be that guy in the room. Can’t stand Valorant and, while I gave Overwatch a 10/10 at release, it lost me when it went F2P. Felt like I wasted money on Helldivers 2 and I still don’t get what made it such a flash in the pan. But I actually enjoy a couple of matches of Concord. I like that it’s a bit slower. Yeah, the character designs suck (not that they’re worse than designs in other games of similar genres though that are aiming for mass appeal), but I actually thought about purchasing the game for a second during the beta. The game feels polished and visually flashy. It feels good to play in a sort of similar way to how Destiny feels good to play (even though Destiny is practically impenetrable to return to if you dropped out of it for a few years now). Then I saw the player count and I was sort of scared the game wouldn’t be alive in a year, so I changed my mind. I mean, I really liked Knockout City, bought that, and look what happened there. Oh well! I’ll get it when it discounts, which I imagine will be pretty soon after release if the low player count doesn’t have them shift their strategy with the game. Can’t imagine Sony just… sending the game out to die… though they did sort of let Forspoken get eaten alive by the press and talking heads too (I know it’s Square but it was still advertised by Sony before launch). I wish Marathon more luck!
I sort of feel like the internet echo chamber is sort of bad for good, but not great games.
@UltimateOtaku91 I don’t think Fairgame$ will get cancelled. I sort of feel like it was supposed to release this year, but Sony slated it back because of the reception to its trailer. Otherwise the fact that they had people sign up for a closed beta last year doesn’t really make sense. I have a feeling it’ll launch as a functional game, but it’ll get an even more hostile reception than Concord. Though I could be wrong. Sega cancelled Hyenas, their most expensive production to date, after doing a closed beta with media representatives.
@naruball I didn't say otherwise. But my point still stands independently of yours. If this game were good, it would be attracting an audience.
It's pretty fun at first but my second day playing the game the fun factor wore off pretty fast. I find the characters special moves to be very lackluster in this game
"The problem for Concord is that many PlayStation fans have had their pitchforks out for the project since the start, with some seeing it as a symbol of Sony’s push towards live service."
Oh maybe we have no interest in a premium live service hero shooter when there's plenty of F2P ones out and coming out. That and the game is generic as hell and offers nothing new.
You can't make a hero shooter where all the hero is lame as heck. Overwatch 2 is free, they just got a cute character juno, who the heck want to play (and buy accessories) in concord as "granny", an "overweight man", "pronoun robot", etc and paying $40 for it?
Gee, how surprising. If we're counting on the captive ps audience driving the game because there's not a better option idk how that'll work considering the better options are also on PS.
@Atreus97 it doesn't work that way. If gaas games are far more profitable than single player games, they didn't just take those profits and dump it into unprofitable single player games, they give the investors their boon and double down on replacing the low margin single player with more high margin services to double that boon for investors.
Fortunately the gass games appear to be proving less profitable, so that doesn't seem likely to happen now. The only losers are the investors not getting their mobile style windfall.
@Toot1st IDK I thought the green guy bore an uncanny resemblance to you.
@zebric21"game pass material"
Who'd pay $20/mo for this?
I’ve been playing over the weekend and have been quite enjoying it. Personally I wouldn’t pay £40 for it though I probably would consider a season pass if it was decent value.
I am sad for the devs behind the game. But there is no excuse to find like ps plus account or bad buzz. This game is unfortunately very shallow at all levels. You can feel there is no direction. Everything is generic. Even gunplay is disapointing...
I don't play hero shooters.
I would play a new Killzone campaign though.
@FPSfan1337 who plays or wants to play overwatch? 100 million people apparently with nearly 30 million active players in the last 30 days. i dont get why people try to pretend that overwatch isnt sucsessful overwatch 1 is one the best selling games of all time for a reason
As stated above I think Fairgame$ should just be cancelled and have that dev team work on something else. I do feel really bad for Firewalk, hopefully they can survive this (I mean if 343 can) then they focus on a different genre.
@get2sammyb It would absolutely be a terrible outcome for the devs and creators but that's not the fault of gamers. In my opinion, any live service game should be free to play and be open to as many platforms that can handle them.
Restricting games like this makes no sense at all.
It's another hero shooter in a sea of gaas now. It's not good enough(or good at all imo, I don't get any sense of satisfaction after matches) and not unique enough to warrant me caring about it to be honest. The beta only solidified my thoughts going into it. My only thought about whole thing now is who are all the players involved in greenlighting and cultivating this. Cuz I don't want them fired.....but I just don't want them to be allowed to do this anymore under PlayStation.
The biggest Problems are that it so 'generic' and the game-play, whether 'Good' or not, is not different enough from all the FREE to Play games on the market that people have Invested time and money on 'Cosmetics' etc that it needed to be something 'special' and 'different' enough to warrant the barrier to entry...
The thing about Resistance and Killzone is that they were 'different' from CoD and Halo yet still had some commonality. At the time, these games too weren't monetised for 'Cosmetics' or XP boosts, weren't monetised with season passes and drip fed 'new' weapons to add to a 'sparse' starting collection and Cosmetics were earned by playing the game, doing the challenges etc.
Point is, these types of games should be Free to Play - unless they are 'Special', Unique and come with some Single Player content too. If its going to be 'monetised' with Seasonal content, then it has to be F2P to compete with F2P games that have been doing that for years.
Overwatch 2 has 'lost' much of its crowd and I can't see people wanting to play an alternative... Its about 8yrs too late...
Concord reminds me of the era of the MMO rush when everyone was trying to bring out big budget MMOs to be the next "World of Warcraft killer". A new MMO would come out, people would flock to it for the first "free" month, realize it really wasn't new or innovative, or they'd question why they should abandon years of progress in WoW to play a new game, and gradually just flock back to WoW, leaving each of these MMOs decimated and looking for new ways to survive.
GaaS games like this are suffering the same fate. It doesn't do anything special or innovative so people are just going back to the games they're already established in. Why would I want to pay $40 for Concord and have to start all over collecting cosmetic unlocks when I have literal years of unlocks in Overwatch, which plays very much the same?
As the MMO gold rush companies found out, there's only so much time and money to go around and once people get invested in one place, it's very difficult to get them to drop it and go somewhere else.
I don't think it ultimately matters if the quality of the game is fantastic. What matters is that there are other games within the same genre that have similarly great quality that don't have a $40 upfront cost.
Factions would have been the better gamble because at least it would have been a different kind of multiplayer experience rather than chasing trends with yet another the Hero Shooter.
I know Naughty Dog didn't want to become a studio that solely focused on a single GaaS, but Sony could have brought in another studio to assist Naughty Dog with development and then take over the maintenance/updates after release.
I'm not in the hate live services side I'm not fussed, I get why companies make them, I'm not their audience but I still look at the news. I knew it was a MP game even before the SOP trailer, but some people didn't know that. I have no interest in it but I was still curious.
Ambitious games can be good/bad but no one cares other than a small audience. Some that are good enough are popular due to the gameplay/story telling/characters & world.
Live service or not, if OW/Valo do what people are after why would they move? Same with MMO audiences, distinct game or samey? Also MAG/Warhawk existed? It needs a training mode, it needs compelling team/mode/map design to it.
I am in the is this game distinct enough camp, same as I do for any retro games I buy or any modern singleplayer games I buy for their gameplay, or has good ideas they could implement and I don't see it with Concord the way I did Foamstars and to me if it can't balance it's cutscenes that Titanfall 1 & Anthem as story core elements or even Overwatch has it for marketing only. Why Concord?
If those proved it then that's their problem of not understanding oh a story mode in a racing game well if it's good enough people will care besides it's other modes and well compelling cars or compelling gameplay even if fake cars.
But if a multiplayer game that audience wants in and out, good modes/maps and good cosmetics, if it's not fun progression systems or other aspects of it's core why would they bother playing.
The gameplay ideas and moves aren't anything that compelling, and the other character/other factors then well it's not surprising even besides the $40 what people think about it.
I had ideas for Foamstars, I posted in any article about it my thoughts on modes/map details, I never played it, I thought it had potential but it wanted business model first priorities and deserves to die. That's their problem for making a bad multiplayer game too weak on content, being behind in the multiplayer space, wanting an entrance and by publishers that don't understand.
Same issues I had with Diofield they made a boring story driven tactics RPG besides it's more real time differences. The gameplay was repetitive. I platinumed it like i planned, but Valkyria Chronicles 4 had more depth and appeal from 2018.
Some companies just suck at gameplay and see trends but don't have the skill, insight or enough content prepped for their live service.
If an MMO player wants something new they will jump, but none do that much a dramatic shift for their game because it's too risky, but how large is that audience going that want dramatic change and the rest go eh happy with this one due to this gameplay design, their hours into the games, these themes/setting and so on or just already enough hours into it.
Like any multiplayer game if the crossovers, cosmetics, core game design and their hours into one is the case, why would they jump ship other than to cover it, and move on if it isn't for them.
The problem with multiplayer games, is the design, the business model and actually being distinct enough or people going eh I'll be into this one.
Besides the glaring problems of Concord of cosmetics/characters, progression or their movesets and the general flow of the game not being fun to people (depends on the person and the size of the audience), but is to others but we know it will flop and many people that may want to jump in want to save their money which makes sense.
Sony had two IP's that probably could've been great for a live service game Socom or MAG
"The problem for Concord is that many PlayStation fans have had their pitchforks out for the project since the start"
Yup. "Doomed from the start" is just another way to say "Dead on arrival." Everyone knew this game wasn't going to pop off. For some reason, no one at Sony or the media listened. IT'S OUR FAULT!!!
Shrug. Live and learn.
@Toot1st Well, shoot... I'm clearly outta touch lol. I'm glad it's doing well. Surprised now I guess lol
Not my cup of tea as I didn't like overwatch and I never bothered with the 2nd game either. And incidently warhawk was over rated trash and was awful to play online on the ps3. Killzone is one of my fave franchises but the multiplayer wasn't that great and resistance was a bloody mess online. Socom was sonys greatest online shooter and its a crime that Sony have been sitting on this for so long now. This game should have been free to play. The first descendant is great fun but only because its free. Had they charged £40 upwards for TFD I'd have given it a miss but I can forgive its quirks because it cost me nothing.
I bet it’ll be off within a year and a half.
It looks like multiple 'we already have . . . at home' examples rolled into one. Add the visually unappealing characters and who is this for?
A better idea would be to invest in smaller games and spin-offs between the big ones. Lost Legacy and Miles Morales did well. I would buy a Tsushima, or Last of Us spin-off for £40 in a heartbeat.
Or work with smaller studios on new exclusives. Would love to see what (for example) Don't Nod or Spiders would do if backed by Sony resources.
This is the first hero shooter I've tried (not done much online gaming for a few years due to kids). I like the different characters and the variety of abilities and weapons. The maps feel really bland though, I always enjoyed the Killzone maps that felt more like real, functional locations. Sony may need live service for revenue but this doesn't appear to be a strong entry into the shooter genre.
I've had fun with it but the 5v5 means that one player dropping out pretty much guarantees game over. It doesn't seem to allow people to join and fill a team so it becomes too one sided to enjoy (are others of this type like this?).
It will be interesting to see what else there is to come beyond the beta.
@Carck Amen to that. The characters are weird and unappealing.
People defending this saying "Sony needs these smaller games to do well to fund the big single player games!"
Are you forgetting that this dumpster fire probably cost between £100-200m to make including the studio purchase which was a decision made solely off of this game.
@MFTWrecks no it doesn't. I mentioned several examples that show otherwise.
Quality =/= sales
Been playing the beta, it’s a good game, looks great but needs to be free to play. It’s no different to any of the other free shooters out there. DOA unless they change that
so finally tired it last night and it a competent shooter but it just brings nothing new to the table its just the same team death match and hold points we have seen a million times. I need more then that these days been playing overwatch for 8 years and still play it nearly every day i couldnt see me playing this longer then 8 hours, i dont even think making this f2p would help
From the votes obviously people agree, what ***** this is. But Sony choose to throw money at crap like this instead of developing great AAA single player experiences or more to the point VR2 quality content. After mugs like me spent over 500 quid on the thing. Sony need to get with the programme & seriously think about what made them great in the first place.
A game like this has no appeal to me. My son is really into Overwatch and he probably would not even want to play it.
Open worlds and RPGs are the only things that spark my interest these days.
I think an idea for a hero shooter from sony would be to include there own famous characters.
imagine a 5v5 of
kratos, Cole, Nathan hale, Helghast, Sam porter bridges
vs
Aloy, Joel, ratchet and clank, sack boy, sweet tooth
now thats something different to get peoples attention
When I finish the other 8,431 games exactly like this... maybe I'll give it a try.
@WhiteRabbit An then put those in a position where they can refuse to sale, like Arrowhead reportedly did.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...