PlayStation’s ‘Concord’ Did Not Break 700 Players On Steam On Launch Day
PlayStation’s ‘Concord’ Did Not Break 700 Players On Steam On Launch Day
PlayStation’s Concord, a game reportedly in the works for eight years trying to break into the hero shooter market, has launched with sub-700 concurrent players on Steam
What's Concord? I've literally never heard of this before
Spoiler: if you don't advertise at all, people won't play your game
Its an enormously overproduced Overwatch clone with zany characters that seem to be going for Guardians of the Galaxy, an art style that is basically just bizarre, and gameplay from a decade ago.
Sony wanted their own Overwatch, after seeing its success, then spent a huge amount of time and money developing it, and this is what they came up with.
Oh, right, it isn't free to play, costs 40 bucks, and then also has an astounding amount of microtransactions.
EDIT: Based off of current active player count, Concord has cost approximately $200,000 dollars per active player to produce.
Better hope they are all omega class hyper whale spenders, I guess.
I just watched the trailer because I wanted to understand your comment. I definitely see the zaniness and Guardians of the Galaxy vibes. I always thought Overwatch was bizarre (but that's just me) but this is clearly more.
However, as someone that doesn't play shooters, could you develop more on what defines a gameplay from a decade ago? I wonder what can change that much in that kind of game.
It’s a new game in which you play two folk musicians from New Zealand. You start off in a small NY apartment trying to get gigs and establish a relationship with an official at the local New Zealand consulate who later becomes your band manager.
It cost $4-billion dollars to develop, utilizes the F-14 Tomcat game engine from GameBoy Advance, and is expected to generate tens of dollars of revenue for Sony Corp.
Top notch engine for that Gameboy. It'll do great on itch.io lol
Yeah, hadn't heard about it until today either. But Steam also kind of torpedoed their launch by lifting their NDA for Deadlock on the same day. Not sure how similar they are, but that'll grab most of the attention from gamers right now.
I've seen ads on random apps. But the logo looks like a '90s PC software logo. And nothing showed what the game actually looked like.
The clips they've shown look like the fake video games that you see in an advertisement for a specialized university.
The marketing has been appalling. They've mainly focussed their intentions on PS5, but why release a game on a platform but not advertise it for that platform?
Maybe word-of-mouth about the game and some discounts might improve things over the coming months, but Sony have made a bit of a mess with the PC side of this.
Yep, first I’ve heard of it
I only ever saw one ad for the game, on my PlayStation, the day before it came out and even then I couldn't tell what it was. Is this a game? A movie? A TV show? The trailer fucking sucked at actually advertising what it was. No gameplay, no mention that it even was a game. It just seemed like a scene from an animated show for tweens.
I have, but only from this.
I saw a few adverts for it on Facebook sp they definitely did advertise but people where turned off as soon as they found put it was a FPS
This is one of the problems of growing up in a different age. This was advertised, but are you any of the places they promoted it? It was the main game in a state of play, they bought ad space on steam, and I assume it was advertised elsewhere where I wouldn't have seen it. But not everybody is watching TV anymore, and we are on Lemmy. Probably not the best place to judge what's being advertised to the masses lol.
I watch plenty of streamers (about half of which play shooters), my primary gaming platform is Steam, and I do watch a small amount of TV, where other games have been advertised during this time. If they used those platforms for advertising, they didn't do it well. You got me on the State of Play tho
I was watching a livestream of this game's reveal trailer. The chat was excited at first during the cinematic trailer. Sure, it looked like a Malt-O-Meal Guardians of the Galaxy, but it still looked like it could be fun. Then as soon as they said "5 v 5 live service game" there was a giant, collective "oh nevermind lol" from the chat.
here's Jesse Cox going through the exact process except he predicts it too: https://youtube.com/shorts/l8kq4rIc10g
From what i saw from the game it just looked super bland and boring. No one looked interesting at all, it didn't pop, if someone told me it was a passion project from a 3 man dev team i would've totally believed it.
the live service model will literally never leave gaming no matter how much people hate and avoid products because of it.
Mainly due to the fact that MBA's response to consumer rejection is to go twice as hard.
This is why we are in the golden age of the indie game
There are too many games of this sort. Nobody wants to play them because you have to devote your life to grinding and getting good if you want to be play well.
We need some new ideas and you don't need to bet the company on every game. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into a clone of existing games, develop several smaller more innovative games and see which ones succeed. For every Concord there is a Stardew Valley, Vampire Survivors, or Among Us.
Innovation is risky, MBAs don't care about anything but next quarters profits.
That's why so much of hollywood is just sequels and re-releases. No one wants to take the risk on something amazing and would rather have guaranteed profits.
Can’t imagine convincing a group of c suite folks of that.
I never heard of it and searching for it on Steam doesn't give any results so I'm guessing it's not even available here.
Like the Borderlands movie I'm not really sure who this game is for with the price tag they are asking for it with the f2p options available.
The price tag is likely to try to slow the bleeding when the writing was on the wall.
I don't know why they keep insisting on live service with an upfront cost. The only way these games are successful is by having a fuckton of teenagers with no money to fill the lobbies and make it feel lively and worthwhile. The minute you add an initial cost, there's just not enough of a player base to support a game with microtransactions.
I'm not a business genius, but they don't have to learn from me. There is the very clear precedent of Kill the justice league that they're choosing to ignore!
The only ads I saw suggested it was PS5 exclusive lmao. amazing job Sony
never heard of it. also I don't have a PlayStation account and I'm not willing to make one to play one game.
PlayStation what? Did they announce this thing at the last state of play?
I always watch those, but I'm pretty sure I've never heard of this...
It's dead, Jim.
As expected. The fact that this game wasn't marketed well or even that it is a hero shooter are not its only problems. Game has other issues and that's why people don't play it.
It looks like its simply a bad game.
Concord is ranked in the 25th percentile of games scored on OpenCritic.
As I said, lack of marketing and genre are not the only reasons this is failing.
It also doesn't help when its developers call people who criticize/don't buy the game "talentless freaks." Like, maybe don't do that? Have some class?
looks it up They want you to pay to play a hero shooter?
Well Overwatch was a paid game for a long time It's not unheard of
When was that game released?
Hehehe
I mean, they literally didn't even seem to want it to appeal to anyone.
I've been playing on PS5, getting games quickly and having a lot of fun with it.
If it doesn't last long, I'll still get my £35 worth.
It’s well ranked on steam too, that said I learned of it YESTERDAY.
Sony's executives thought it was a great idea to buy this studio when they first saw the game as it was reported last year. I don't know if the character designs were mandated to be this way because Sony executives demanded it, or if the devs designed them the way they are. Did they want to chase the blue hair vocal minority on xitter that complain about games not being diverse enough, then don't buy the games with these incredibly diverse, brave and quirky character designs anyway? On top of that a $40 price tag is enough to make a dead on arrival game among other issues like a forced PSN account and no Steam Deck support.
Yeah, the "diversity" (aliens and shit, really? You want to tell me they're targeting the "diversity" crowd with non-humans?) is not the reason for this failing. It's a generic $40 live-service game. That market is far too over saturated. Plenty of people like and buy games with diversity, although they have to be good games first and foremost. It's just a way to help your game appeal to a larger audience, but it has to appeal to anyone first. This doesn't.
I just don't understand the insistence on targeting the woke demographic instead of core gamers. They've repeatedly shown that they are masters in the complaining department, but when it comes to buying diversity-infused games, they are a no-show.
In what way are they targeting the woke demographic? Is it because aliens?
Who the fuck is avoiding buying games because they aren't "woke" or "diverse" enough?
Buying forced diversity bug studio shlop you mean. Plenty of tiny diverse indie games that do well for themselves out there.
