FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Helldivers 2 isn't a game made by a first party, if I remember correctly. Not quite the same situation.
Concord |OT| As we Firewalk through the valley of Live Service...
- Thread starter Men_in_Boxes
- Start date
Angry_Megalodon
Member
This game right now has a total of 27 viewers on Twitch...
They don't want to get spoiled on its thrilling story.
Imagine the plot twist if a she/her turns out a they/them. You want to experience that firsthand.
Zathalus
Member
The first two were pretty bad, but Halo Infinite peaked at over 270k on Steam, this will be lucky to have 1% of that.
Killjoy-NL
Banned
It's a 2nd party title, which might as well be considered a 1st party release.
This was always the case.
PeteBull
Member
clarky
Gold Member
Im fully aware of that.
Although im surprised they tried it for this particular title, usually its for the big releases to pray on the FOMO.
If it fits my schedule and im sure on the title i usually bite on those kind of things if im honest,yes I'm part of the problem.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Yea, you are. ha! I think paying for the real release date is the latest terrible practice Xbox popularized. Now basically every title is doing it. Even indie titles are doing it.
Killjoy-NL
Banned
What's wrong
vaibhavpisal
this has always been the case.It's the same as how Resistance is considered to be a Sony 1st party title, while Insomniac was still an independent studio.
Therefor Resistance is a 2nd party franchise.
clarky
Gold Member
Nah you can't blame xbox for everything. I believe EA or possibly Activision started this shit, Xbox can't popularise anything these day lol.
Like i said i work 3 weeks on, 3 off and if a title that im after falls in the 3 off and i ll pay up because it suits me.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Member
They already gave us paid online but won't stop delivering new innovations without a fight. You can't knock MS's dedication to leaving a big mark on gaming.
vaibhavpisal
Member
.
Last edited:
clarky
Gold Member
Don't do it. You keep that can of worms firmly in your pocket mate.What's wrong
It's the same as how Resistance is considered to be a Sony 1st party title, while Insomniac was still an independent studio.
Therefor Resistance is a 2nd party franchise.
clarky
Gold Member
Like i said above you cant blame MS for the practice, they didn't start it, and you cant blame them for popularizing it and they sell fuck all these day, even as a bolt on the gamepass releases.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
They didn't start it but they definitely popularized it by trying to get more money out of people subbed to GamePass. They were doing it with all their titles over a year ago.
Most other devs are just starting to do it this year.
vaibhavpisal
Member
Keep fighting the good fightWhat's wrong
It's the same as how Resistance is considered to be a Sony 1st party title, while Insomniac was still an independent studio.
Therefor Resistance is a 2nd party franchise.
BlackTron
Member
They didn't both start and popularize it? Who did, AOL?
clarky
Gold Member
Nah you're just not remembering that every other slimball publishers that do it as well it's been a thing long before Starfield and Forza.
WB EA and Activision have been at it for a good few years.
Last edited:
Killjoy-NL
Banned
It's not wrong, though:
"Refers to a developer who works exclusively with one of the Big 3 publishers on a franchise while still maintaining their independence. Examples include Insomniac Games (Ratchet & Clank franchise), Bungie (Halo Franchise), etc."
2nd Party - The Gaming Dictionary Guide - IGN
Refers to a developer who works exclusively with one of the Big 3 publishers on a franchise while still maintaining their independence. Examples include
But this is going to be way off-topic anyway.
BigBeauford
Member
Why does everyone keep comparing Concord to Helldivers. Just the price?
Helldivers: PvE horde shooter set in universe similar to the beloved Starship Troopers IP
Concord: 5v5 Hero shooter featuring a cast from your local community college's Palestine Club
Helldivers: PvE horde shooter set in universe similar to the beloved Starship Troopers IP
Concord: 5v5 Hero shooter featuring a cast from your local community college's Palestine Club
clarky
Gold Member
Ea have been charging for early access to Fifa for years and Battlefield DLC's for a fair while.
So no they didn't start it, and I'm fairly certain they dont have a title that is more popular that FIFA.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Member
Oh. I thought you were talking about paid online, lol
clarky
Gold Member
See my post above you are incorrect, EA have been doing it for years with titles far more popular that what Xbox puts out.
Last edited:
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I'd still say it's a little different when a platform holder does it for all their first party releases. Paying to play online wasn't that popular until a platform holder did it. Same concept.
They should be judged differently than just some 3rd party publisher.
clarky
Gold Member
Ah ok we'll just hold MS to different standards to everyone else so we can blame them.
I don't particularly like MS, but thats just double standards to fit your narrative.
They are all cunts equally iny eyes.
Last edited:
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
No. Like I said. We hold platform holders different cause they are different. The impact is different. PS and Nintendo probably would have never charged to pay online until another platform holder did it. They didn't see WoW subs and were like, we need to charge to play online.
You're just overly defensive of MS for some reason.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
clarky
Gold Member
Explain why we should blame a practice thats been happening for years on one particular company which adopted it years later and has become common place. Like i said they were not the first and definitely didn't popularize it. Your arguement makes no sense.
Is this the only practice this applies to or shall we blame them for all MTX while we are at it now they own BGS?
Im overly defensive of common sense mate and I'm very critical of MS when its deserved, which is most of the time. Just not in this particular case. I think you just have a hate boner for them.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Damn you Micro$oft for making Concord have an absolutely abysmal early access release.
Zathalus
Member
Still way higher daily users then Concord will have. When the brand new GaaS game can't compete with Halo Infinite several years after that has launched you know it's in trouble.
Killjoy-NL
Banned
And people move on to other games and life goes on.
Zathalus
Member
Sure? Still makes it a far worse failure then Halo Infinite ever was. Which is what I was addressing.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Sony as a platform holder started giving away games with PS+, MS and Nintnedo followed suit. Same concept but in a positive way. Once a platform holder does something it holds more weight and causes more of an impact.
It's competition between platform holders. Not that hard of a concept . . .
clarky
Gold Member
Xbox is dead in the water, i doubt anything they do will have an impact on any strategy Nintendo or Sony have.
And for fear of repeating myself this practice has been going on for years, you think Sony is only doing this because MS does? Why start now?
Might as well blame them for COVID while your at it.
Last edited:
Killjoy-NL
Banned
Likely.
The question would then be:
And then what?
The only people getting mad about it are people ranting about Sony's Gaas strategy.
Nydius
Gold Member
I usually agree with most of your comments but lately you've really been doing some impressive mental gymnastics to spin this game's impending failure as "no big deal".
I do completely agree with you that Firewalk Studios could cease to exist tomorrow and no one would really miss it (although I honestly feel like we could probably say the same about 343i). But clearly SONY has major expectations for this game, whether we gamers do or not.
Sony obviously believes it's their next big thing or they wouldn't have spent the last month pushing it on social media outlets. They made a damn limited edition controller for it, something usually reserved for a handful of established properties. Sony clearly believes they have their own Overwatch and have spent a LOT of money propping it up. That's why the game flopping is a big deal despite the fact that the studio and IP is new.
Angry_Megalodon
Member
This is a major fuckup for Sony, there's no way to soften the hit. It's not just that they support the game, they also bought the studio, which is left in a very bad situation.
I would quietly get some heads rolling and start up the studio from scratch.
I would quietly get some heads rolling and start up the studio from scratch.
yurinka
Member
Helldivers 2 is a first party game in PS, and 3rd party in Steam.
As you can see in their game credits, in AAA games the lead dev studio provides only around 10% of less of the total amount of people who works in a game. The rest are from the Sony, either from the publishing, editorial and corporate side, or from internal or extearnal support/outsourcing teams funded and managed by Sony.
That approximated percentage applies to 1st, 2nd and 3rd party AAA games. So in Sony's first party games there's not much difference if the lead dev team is owned by them or not.
Specifically, Helldivers 2 is a second party game in PS. Which means it's a first party game (1st party game = it's published by the platform holder) that had a 3rd party lead dev studio (3rd party studio = not owned by the platform holder).
3rd party games are the ones published by a company not owned by the platform holder. 3rd party publisher = publisher not owned by the platform holder.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Sure. Sony was trying to make it a big new IP
How is that different from any other property? They did the same for Helldivers
some of them won't work out.
The failure of a new studio is far less of a relative failure compared to a studio like 343 which is chartered with carrying Microsoft's previously held most important IP
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Doesn't matter. They're both low.
Halo being this low is a far bigger embarrassment and disaster
The fact that it's in the sane convo as concord is sad how far they've fallen
Zathalus
Member
There is a massive difference between 270k and the likely less than 2k Concord will launch with. The only reason that they are even in the same conversation is that you brought it up. Halo Infinite is a failure yes, Concord is just an absolute disaster.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Doesn't matter if it launched to 270k when very quickly it was down to less than 1% of that
Zathalus
Member
By very quickly, you mean over 2.5 years later?
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
It did not take that long, it became painfully low in just months
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Most devs didn't do it and the platform holders didn't do it until platform holder MS started doing it all the time. Just the facts jack.
Zathalus
Member
I just checked SteamDB, it's only in the past few month that the daily low has dropped under 1% of players. Daily average is still above that.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
And that's good for the IP that put Xbox on the map?
Zathalus
Member
Never said it was did I? It obviously a failure for a Halo game in terms of player retention but it's just not at the level of Concord. Hell, the player drop off of Helldivers 2 is just as extreme as Halo yet nobody here thinks that's a failure.
Varteras
Member
Jokes on us. They're into that.
Similar threads
- Poll