Support NeoGAF

[Hero of Spielberg]

It's the perfect avatar for everything wrong with modern gaming. The pandering The generic art. The ripped off Marvel tone. The Temu Guardians of the Galaxy character design. The hero shooter trope. The comically slow movement and aiming. It just ticks every single box.

It’s difficult to move quickly with the weight of the patriarchy on your shoulders

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

You won’t own shit once they shut down the servers months after it completely flops.

 

[VolticArchangel]

Why would I pay $40 for a Hero shooter in 2024, and end up with less than 3K players even in an open beta (let alone the full release), when I can play a better playing, way bigger (more than 20x bigger as of now, could get bigger) community driven hero shooter, for free (F2P)?

Sony are deluded if they want people to pay upfront for this garbage.

On PC, even more madness because the game isn't available for purchase in 180 countries.

 

[Plague Doctor]

I fucking love this game! The news cycle will be glorious for weeks if not months.

I have marshmallows ready for this trainwreck fire.

 

[digital_ghost]

8% aint that bad for the 50 online players.

 

[BravoZero]

It's a shame because the game is actually pretty well-made and quite fun to play, from what I played on PC.
Should've launched as free to play.

 

[T-0800]

I fucking love this game! The news cycle will be glorious for weeks if not months.

 

[GymWolf]

You own concord...

 

[GymWolf]

 

[Bert Big Balls]

The game obviously has issues to overcome, but the post-launch strategy reads like something I’d like to see a hell of a lot more of.

Agreed, makes me laugh that most people shit on live service / GaaS shit, but the moment a battle pass is taken away people still to mental. Fuck me.

 

[Rivet]

All that time and money wasted. That's what happens when you start chasing trends, they're already dead by the time your game releases. Carve your own path.

Sony was very successful at making high budget single player games. Why not just keep doing that ?

 

[DrFigs]

All that time and money wasted. That's what happens when you start chasing trends, they're already dead by the time your game releases. Carve your own path.

Sony was very successful at making high budget single player games. Why not just keep doing that ?

But isn't Marvel Rivals chasing the same trends and doing well?

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

Why would I pay $40 for a Hero shooter in 2024, and end up with less than 3K players even in an open beta (let alone the full release), when I can play a better playing, way bigger (more than 20x bigger as of now, could get bigger) community driven hero shooter, for free (F2P)?

Sony are deluded if they want people to pay upfront for this garbage.

On PC, even more madness because the game isn't available for purchase in 180 countries.

Sony's idea of paying 40€/$ for a game and then release everything else with no battle passes and free of extra charge is honestly better than going F2P but with battle passes and DLC's etc...but maybe it's just the old school gamer in me saying that.

That said...i wish this were a better game cause i'd jump right into it.

 

[Ozriel]

The pre-order beta was available to PS+ members as well though, which is pretty much every multiplayer player on Playstation, so might as well be considered as 2 open beta wknds on Playstation.

And since there barely was any difference between both betas apart from 1 (later 2) gamemodes, it doesn't have to mean much to see a 8% drop.

The first beta was widely advertised as one available only to preorders. The PS+ pivot came later.

The other one was advertised as being an open beta. It should not have dropped.

 

[Ozriel]

These numbers are from data harvested by https://gameinsights.io/ and unlikely to be representative of the general public. The data is self-selecting, as it is only from players who use apps that sell them user data. To top it off, they only used data from 3 million accounts. It’s estimated that there are 120 million active PSN users.

I’m not saying this game will sell well. I’m just saying this particular data and related article are rather meaningless.

3 million is a very large sample space. Large enough to come up with credible insights.

Certainly not ‘meaningless’

 

[Killjoy-NL]

The first beta was widely advertised as one available only to preorders. The PS+ pivot came later.

The other one was advertised as being an open beta. It should not have dropped.

It should not have dropped if the first wasn't opened up to PS+.

Let's be honest, if you played the first weekend, there was little reason to play the second one. No matter if you liked the first weekend of the beta.

 

[Ozriel]

It should not have dropped if the first wasn't opened up to PS+.

Let's be honest, if you played the first weekend, there was little reason to play the second one. No matter if you liked the first weekend of the beta.

Firewalk widely advertised a new mode in the open beta.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Firewalk widely advertised a new mode in the open beta.

So?

It still doesn't change anything about what I said.
And anyone who played the beta should know that.

 

[Diddy X]

They wish I owned it.

 

[Angelcurio]

Why would I pay $40 for a Hero shooter in 2024, and end up with less than 3K players even in an open beta (let alone the full release), when I can play a better playing, way bigger (more than 20x bigger as of now, could get bigger) community driven hero shooter, for free (F2P)?

Sony are deluded if they want people to pay upfront for this garbage.

On PC, even more madness because the game isn't available for purchase in 180 countries.

Even more crazy is the fact that they were so impressed by this game that they ended up buying the studio.

 

[DryvBy]

Just before anyone starts thinking it was 3.1 million Concord players: it wasn't.

The wording is very odd, but basically the website has a database of 3.1 million PSN accounts registered to it that they use to poll for their gaming data. Some number of that (not specified) played Concord. Out of that percentage, there was an 8% drop week-over-week between the Closed and Open Beta.

It's very possible that there could've been 50K - 100K PS5 players in the Concord betas, but I do personally find that hard to believe. FWIW, Steam has a sampling size of 130+ million and we know what the numbers are there for Concord. Just statistically speaking, it's hard for a sampling size over 40x smaller to have provided a player base 50x larger for a single game...though it's not impossible...

130+ million accounts on Steam doesn't mean they're active or that they have 3D graphics cards. Lol

 

[mayham2199]

Have they delayed this game yet? If not, do we get the announcement by the end of the week? Seems like no way in hell they can actually launch this thing in a few weeks.

Delay it for what? It's a hero shooter and it's complete. Nothing they change is going to appease people here unless they just take the assets and make a completely new game.

Even more crazy is the fact that they were so impressed by this game that they ended up buying the studio.

Maybe they were more impressed by their work in general and wanted to keep working with the studio even if the game failed. Say what you want about the game but it's at least well made and came out in a reasonable amount of time on top of that. That's a studio that's well managed and even if they fail here they might be worth keeping around for other IPs and games. Not every studio puts out nothing but hit after hit.

 

[clarky]

It should not have dropped if the first wasn't opened up to PS+.

Let's be honest, if you played the first weekend, there was little reason to play the second one. No matter if you liked the first weekend of the beta.

Fun? if i like I a game I generally cant wait to jump back on.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Fun? if i like I a game I generally cant wait to jump back on.

Sure.
But although I did check out the new mode, I didnt see a need to do so, because there really was no reason.
Probably more people who felt that way.

Those who were interested likely already tried the beta the first wknd (on Playstation).

So the 8% drop doesn't have to say much.
At best, 92% played the beta for 2 wknds (which would be kinda good, considering all the hate the game get), at worst they didn't gain much additional interest.

 

[mayham2199]

Fun? if i like I a game I generally cant wait to jump back on.

I don't plan on getting the game but I honestly don't like playing a beta more than a couple of hours either. It just feels like wasted time because all my info is wiped and then the game is taken away from me before I can actually play. I prefer to just wait until I can actually play the game nonstop without having my progress wiped or my enjoyment paused until the full release.

 

[clarky]

Sure, but I still liked to game enough to play it on release, as I have pre-ordered it already (really couldnt give a shit about all the drama).

But although I did check out the new mode, I didnt see a need to do so, because there really was no reason.
Probably more people who felt that way.

Those who were interested likely already tried the beta the first wknd (on Playstation).

So the 8% drop doesn't have to say much.
At best, 92% played the beta for 2 wknds (which would be kinda good, considering all the hate the game get), at worst they didn't gain much additional interest.

Fair enough.

I bet you wont see a drop in second week numbers for something well recieved like say Rivals or COD ( if they are well received that is of course, rivals looks to be doing well so far)

Edit: did they not have exclusive beta stuff to grind for? i cant remember already, thats usually the norm with these types of things

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Why would I pay $40 for a Hero shooter in 2024, and end up with less than 3K players even in an open beta (let alone the full release), when I can play a better playing, way bigger (more than 20x bigger as of now, could get bigger) community driven hero shooter, for free (F2P)?

Sony are deluded if they want people to pay upfront for this garbage.

On PC, even more madness because the game isn't available for purchase in 180 countries.

How often has Sony released any kind of F2P game? I dont know. But probably not too many. Helldivers 2 was also $40 and it sold a ton. So their GAAS pricing model seems pegged at $40 lately (unless it's bigger budget legacy game like GT or baseball which are full priced).

Maybe $40 will be their standard starter price for all their new GAAS games?

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Far enough.

I bet you wont see a drop in second week numbers for something well recieved like say Rivals or COD ( if they are well received that is of course)

Maybe? Personally, I wouldn't even care.

I took out this part from my previous post, but:
I still liked to game (Concord) enough to play it on release, as I have pre-ordered it already (really couldnt give a shit about all the drama).

So it doesn't matter to me either way. I'll see what happens.
Just saying that the 8% drop in itself doesn't say much, especially given the drama surrounding the game.

 

[rm082e]

Delay it for what? It's a hero shooter and it's complete. Nothing they change is going to appease people here unless they just take the assets and make a completely new game.

It's not about appeasing people who are dancing on the grave. If people have no interest in another hero shooter, they're not going to play it even if it were reworked significantly. I'm in that camp.

But I just can't see their management team actually launching this game now that they know how little interest there is in it. It seems like they would delay the game, offer refunds on the pre-orders, and rework it. It seems obvious they should:

• Replace or seriously overhaul the characters into models into something more appealing. Trying to push fat queer women in a hero shooter is a great way to turn off the vast majority of people who would potentially play this type of game.
• Get rid of the pronouns - this is just asking to be a punching bag.
• Make it F2P with a battle pass system. As much as one segment of the gaming player base bitches about this, it's clearly working well for a much bigger segment. The current monetization plans don't make sense for continued support over time.
• Replace the VO people have found grating and annoying, or eliminate it outside of cutscenes (like Fortnite).
• I've heard a number of people say they expected the game to have ult skills. Not having them because they don't want to be compared too much to Overwatch doesn't make sense when it's already getting directly compared to Overwatch. I haven't heard anyone say they think the game is better for not having them.

These are the common complaints that have surfaced. If they know the game is DOA, then just don't commit to the A part yet. Give it some chance of success down the line.

But maybe this is where corporate accounting logic kicks in and the way to loose the least amount of money is to launch it DOA and write it off.

 

[clarky]

Maybe? Personally, I wouldn't even care.

I took out this part from my previous post, but:
I still liked to game (Concord) enough to play it on release, as I have pre-ordered it already (really couldnt give a shit about all the drama).

So it doesn't matter to me either way. I'll see what happens.
Just saying that the 8% drop in itself doesn't say much, especially given the drama surrounding the game.

Personally, I think it will find an small audience on PS, if they sort the balancing and other matchmaking related issues out, dunno if that will be enough to sustain the game long term though but we'll see I guess.

They've fucked it with the wider audience though, most wont play out of spite even if it turns out to be the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Maybe they were more impressed by their work in general and wanted to keep working with the studio even if the game failed. Say what you want about the game but it's at least well made and came out in a reasonable amount of time on top of that. That's a studio that's well managed

No, it's not. Kojima took three years to make Death Stranding. You don't take double that time to make this crap. It's the definition of incompetence.

And it can't be a well-run studio if it's full of yes-people. There's no way those character designs were a product of an open discussion among teammates. Same as Jar-Jar Binks, they are the crazy idea of a mentally ill person and everyone else agreeing with him, no further discussions allowed.

One of the dumbest purchases in history.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Personally, i think it will find an small audience on PS, if they sort the balancing and other matchmaking related issues out, dunno if that will be enough to sustain the game long term though but we'll nsee i guess.

They've fucked it with the wder audience though, most wont play out of spite even if it turns out to be the best thing since sliced bread.

Oh yeah, for sure.

And tbh, if they really stick with the Woke shit and keep adding more of those shit characters, I'll leave the game and move on as well.

Anything can happen with Gaas titles though, so I'll see what happens.
They certainly fucked up up the reveal and lead-up to launch though. No denying that.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

For you guys above talking about success and adjustments, I dont think anything would work unless they revamped the graphics first. The art style and faded pastel look is not good looking. I dont think any gamer (or studio) cares about that colour palette. If anyone did you see way more games with that art.

And that would involve a massive overhaul. As for any gameplay issues , that's important too, but it can be overcome. Rainbow Six Siege got crap launch reviews. But after a slew of updates and content, suddenly gamers started buying it up and it was a top 10 seller for ages. So a shooter can be patched up and hook in gamers after a crummy launch.

But, Siege never had art style issues to begin with. It was your typical modern military soldier shooter which everyone can understand. And many gamers (like me) like that art style and setting.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

For you guys above talking about success and adjustments, I dont think anything would work unless they revamped the graphics first. The art style and faded pastel look is not good looking. I dont think any gamer (or studio) cares about that colour palette. If anyone did you see way more games with that art.

And that would involve a massive overhaul. As for any gameplay issues , that's important too, but it can be overcome. Rainbow Six Siege got crap launch reviews. But after a slew of updates and content, suddenly gamers started buying it up and it was a top 10 seller for ages. So a shooter can be patched up and hook in gamers after a crummy launch.

But, Siege never had art style issues to begin with.

I dunno, it's really only the character designs that are shit.

No idea what's supposedly wrong with the maps aesthetically. (Level design is a different matter).

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

It's not about appeasing people who are dancing on the grave. If people have no interest in another hero shooter, they're not going to play it even if it were reworked significantly. I'm in that camp.

But I just can't see their management team actually launching this game now that they know how little interest there is in it. It seems like they would delay the game, offer refunds on the pre-orders, and rework it. It seems obvious they should:

• Replace or seriously overhaul the characters into models into something more appealing. Trying to push fat queer women in a hero shooter is a great way to turn off the vast majority of people who would potentially play this type of game.
• Get rid of the pronouns - this is just asking to be a punching bag.
• Make it F2P with a battle pass system. As much as one segment of the gaming player base bitches about this, it's clearly working well for a much bigger segment. The current monetization plans don't make sense for continued support over time.
• Replace the VO people have found grating and annoying, or eliminate it outside of cutscenes (like Fortnite).
• I've heard a number of people say they expected the game to have ult skills. Not having them because they don't want to be compared too much to Overwatch doesn't make sense when it's already getting directly compared to Overwatch. I haven't heard anyone say they think the game is better for not having them.

These are the common complaints that have surfaced. If they know the game is DOA, then just don't commit to the A part yet. Give it some chance of success down the line.

But maybe this is where corotate accounting logic kicks in and the way to loose the least amount of money is to launch it DOA and write it off.

This reminds me of Bud Light with their Dylan Mulvayney stunt. If they reverse on the character designs/gender pronouns/stupid dialog now, they’re going to end up pissing off even more people (including the wacko activists within their company who thrive on victimhood and grievance).

Agree that’s what Sony should do if they actually care about making money and giving their audience what they want. But I don’t know if they have the balls to do it.

 

[rm082e]

This reminds me of Bud Light with their Dylan Mulvayney stunt. If they reverse on the character designs/gender pronouns/stupid dialog now, they’re going to end up pissing off even more people (including the wacko activists within their company who thrive on victimhood and grievance).

Agree that’s what Sony should do if they actually care about making money and giving their audience what they want. But I don’t know if they have the balls to do it.

The difference here is that Bud Light was the most popular beer when they had that incident. It became a new story because they had a lot to loose, and the sales were significantly impacted for a long time.

Concord has shown it's DOA. There is little to no audience to worry about pissing off. Because they have nothing to lose, there's nothing to risk.

 

[GymWolf]

Yeah the lack of super moves was a strange decision.

Everyone and their mother already call you wish.com overwatch...you just limit your gameplay this way.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

The difference here is that Bud Light was the most popular beer when they had that incident. It became a new story because they had a lot to loose, and the sales were significantly impacted for a long time.

Concord has shown it's DOA. There is little to no audience to worry about pissing off. Because they have nothing to lose, there's nothing to risk.

Fair enough but I do expect they’ll get a lot of pushback from The Professor and pals within the company, as well as their allies in the gaming media.

Kotaku already went to bat for Concord accusing the detractors of “hate”, and I’m sure the other shill sites have their narratives ready to go if they haven’t published them yet. Just imagine the pushback if Sony caves and appeases the toxic online trolls.

 

[MayauMiao]

You own Concord, Concord doesn’t own you

This tells me how the people at Firewalk Studios are desperate and probably in panic mode.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Sure.
But although I did check out the new mode, I didnt see a need to do so, because there really was no reason.
Probably more people who felt that way.

Those who were interested likely already tried the beta the first wknd (on Playstation).

So the 8% drop doesn't have to say much.
At best, 92% played the beta for 2 wknds (which would be kinda good, considering all the hate the game get), at worst they didn't gain much additional interest.

Progress in the beta also didn't carry over to full release. I can see a percentage of players waiting to grind up in August.

Yeah the lack of super moves was a strange decision.

Everyone and their mother already call you wish.com overwatch...you just limit your gameplay this way.

I suspect it's because they wanted a degree of predictability. They want you to identify your opponent and make a decision based on their location / team composition. Ultimates create another layer of unpredictability that makes quickly identifying things harder.

 

[GymWolf]

Progress in the beta also didn't carry over to full release. I can see a percentage of players waiting to grind up in August.

I suspect it's because they wanted a degree of predictability. They want you to identify your opponent and make a decision based on their location / team composition. Ultimates create another layer of unpredictability that makes quickly identifying things harder.

Yeah but it also strip the gameplay of another layer to consider during a match.

Using the ulti at the right moment and getting the play of the game at the end is one of the best thing about overwatch.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

Yeah but it also strip the gameplay of another layer to consider during a match.

Using the ulti at the right moment and getting the play of the game at the end is one of the best thing about overwatch.

I don't think the lack of ults is an issue, but high TTK to come along with it is.

 

[PeteBull]

Fair enough but I do expect they’ll get a lot of pushback from The Professor and pals within the company, as well as their allies in the gaming media.

Kotaku already went to bat for Concord accusing the detractors of “hate”, and I’m sure the other shill sites have their narratives ready to go if they haven’t published them yet. Just imagine the pushback if Sony caves and appeases the toxic online trolls.

All those sellout professional journos amouted to 2,3k peak concurent players over beta, meaning besides those woke retards barely any1 else played it, its so bad, and they got their game copies for free, even transformers and alphabet community doesnt wanna play concord, and they got pandered to hard.
Normal/sane/avg players avoid and will keep avoiding this artrocity like normal hetero guy avoids beached whales for even casual sex

here proof, official polish playstation channel streamed it durning beta, ofc it was given for free, and thats how those pathetic numbers were made, imagine week/two after, funny thing is, even tho it was official/paid for, that streaming guy barely made it required 2 hours and changed to other game

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Yeah but it also strip the gameplay of another layer to consider during a match.

True, but it was probably too much complexity for the vision they were going for. More sugar doesn't necessarily make your cookie better.

Using the ulti at the right moment and getting the play of the game at the end is one of the best thing about overwatch.

They didn't want to make another Overwatch. They wanted to make CONCORD.

 

[GymWolf]

True, but it was probably too much complexity for the vision they were going for. More sugar doesn't necessarily make your cookie better.

They didn't want to make another Overwatch. They wanted to make CONCORD.

Yeah and concord does nothing new in the genre and everyone already consider it a bad overwatch clone, great fucking job letting your pride getting in the way of just making a better game with more gameplay possibilities.

They failed in both department, making concord unique and not being considered an overwatch clone, kinda impressive really.

 

[RoadHazard]

Literally the only thing I like about this game is the logo, gives me WipEout vibes.

 

[plip.plop]

 

[BigBeauford]

Delay it for what? It's a hero shooter and it's complete. Nothing they change is going to appease people here unless they just take the assets and make a completely new game.



Maybe they were more impressed by their work in general and wanted to keep working with the studio even if the game failed. Say what you want about the game but it's at least well made and came out in a reasonable amount of time on top of that. That's a studio that's well managed and even if they fail here they might be worth keeping around for other IPs and games. Not every studio puts out nothing but hit after hit.

I'm sorry, but 6 years of dev time for a pvp arena shooter is not reasonable at all.

 

[Fbh]

But isn't Marvel Rivals chasing the same trends and doing well?

Because it's Marvel, a massively popular brand with an 80 years history. When you have IP that's that valuable you can get away with it.
You think Marvel Rivals would be doing the same numbers if it was some new IP called "Superhero Rivals" and was just a bunch of random new characters that look like cheap Marvel knockoffs?

 

[EverydayBeast]

The exclusive shooter scene is wide open, Microsoft no longer supports halo or gears like they use to, Metroid on Nintendo doesn’t do multiplayer realistically a last of us 3 mp could outperform. I like a new rainbow six (siege wasn’t great) if I’m going to bet I think maybe we’ll see an exclusive multiplayer shooter from Sony.