Current Events > So Sony's Concord looks to be a major flop

(+) Yeah! (+)

who the fuck told them to release a paid hero based shooter when there are other options out there that not only are free but are also way better?? like come on dude! lol

ZevLoveDOOM posted...

who the fuck told them to release a paid hero based shooter when there are other options out there that not only are free but are also way better?? like come on dude! lol

Hmm, should I pay $60 to play a lame ugly hero shooter with 400 players or...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e1e81ac3.jpg

For free?

I always just feel bad for the devs when I see shit like this.

Hayame_Zero posted...

I always just feel bad for the devs when I see shit like this.

they should be unionizing and walking out, I felt bad the first one or two times, not anymore

they're working on a ship they know is sinking every bit as well as we do and aren't taking the steps they need to to stop it

Hayame_Zero posted...

I always just feel bad for the devs when I see shit like this.

Honestly, I felt bad for them too......until one of the devs started lashing out and called people talentless freaks, =/ *Real bad look since the talent-less freaks tweet was responding to someone giving them genuine sympathy.*
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/d541076d.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c0ae543f.jpg

People like them need to realize that when they do shit like this they are representing the company they worked for. Throwing a temper tantrum like that will do no good for the rest of the team.

Link_of_time posted...

So another one for the garbage heap
* Lawbreakers
* Concord
* Crucible
* Battleborn
* Gotham Imposters
* Evolve

I cant speak for any of the others but Evolve was a ton of fun, and super unique. But a balancing nightmare. Also I think they tried to push too hard to make it an e sports game?

And Lawbreakers was a great game I dont care what anyone says. The characters felt awesome to play. Unfortunately its a genre of shooter that justdied? And the audience isnt there anymore.

The way games fail or succeed now is all word of mouth though. It has very very little to do with the quality of the game.

the dog-piling and the bandwagon negativity that can snowball against a game is insane these days. Gamers wishing a game to fail and then high giving each other when it does will always be fucking sad imho.

pegusus123456 posted...

Gotham City Imposters was apparently pretty good and had its own little niche for a while

I sincerely thought they were just making fun of Gotham Knights, didn't realize this game exists.

DrizztLink posted...

I sincerely thought they were just making fun of Gotham Knights, didn't realize this game exists.

Yes, it was absolutely a weird cash grab concept, but apparently it was good. I even remember TotalBiscuit liking it.

IIRC, it had a fun movement system where basically everyone had roller skates or something?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/f178bbeb.jpg

ZevLoveDOOM posted...

who the fuck told them to release a paid hero based shooter when there are other options out there that not only are free but are also way better?? like come on dude! lol

Asking full price for a completely lifeless hero shooter with no charm whatsoever is certainly a choice

SwayM posted...

I cant speak for any of the others but Evolve was a ton of fun, and super unique. But a balancing nightmare. Also I think they tried to push too hard to make it an e sports game?

And Lawbreakers was a great game I dont care what anyone says. The characters felt awesome to play. Unfortunately its a genre of shooter that justdied? And the audience isnt there anymore.

The way games fail or succeed now is all word of mouth though. It has very very little to do with the quality of the game.

the dog-piling and the bandwagon negativity that can snowball against a game is insane these days. Gamers wishing a game to fail and then high giving each other when it does will always be fucking sad imho.

I agree with your sentiment, but I think it's more that people are just sick and tired of GaaS in general is why we're seeing such negativity like this.

Prestoff posted...

I agree with your sentiment, but I think it's more that people are just sick and tired of GaaS in general is why we're seeing such negativity like this.

This isnt even a GAAS game? Its a $40 with no battle pass or store is what people are saying?

So againgamers are just forever mad and high fiving a game failingthat theyre desperate more developers would put out today.

Oh, to continue the "talentless freaks" saga:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/fe2fb7c2.jpg

SwayM posted...

This isnt even a GAAS game?

Yes it is. Just because there's no IAPs doesn't make it not GAAS

Of course someone would on CE go to bat for this unwanted gaas crap

i'm very curious to know what that dev's job was on the team, to warrant judging everyone else as talentless, but besides that, you don't need talent to be a consumer of a product and have an opinion on the product they're trying to get you to buy. very strange, immature reaction, and that paired with the cringy anime pfp makes me not take this person seriously as a professional at all

It feels like that "I'm working for NASA" tweet chain.

Just in slow motion and way more pathetic.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Yes it is. Just because there's no IAPs doesn't make it not GAAS

So you have no idea what youre mad at.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Oh, to continue the "talentless freaks" saga:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/fe2fb7c2.jpg

The game's selling that badly?

DrizztLink posted...

The game's selling that badly?

Nah he's just evoking that Elon musk "pay $8" energy back when he first rolled out the pay for checkmarks

SwayM posted...

So you have no idea what youre mad at.

I'm pretty sure you just have no idea why you're defending this

SwayM posted...

So you have no idea what youre mad at.

I'm not mad. I'm just stating facts.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Nah he's just evoking that Elon musk "pay $8" energy back when he first rolled out the pay for checkmarks

I'm aware, but it was pathetic when he did it and it's even more pathetic coming from this literally who so I'm going to make fun of it.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I'm not mad. I'm just stating facts.

What makes this a GAAS?

And secondly, why are GAAS automatically bad?

SwayM posted...

What makes this a GAAS?

You have to be online to play it and use their matchmaking.

SwayM posted...

And secondly, why are GAAS automatically bad?

I don't know because that wasn't anything I ever said.

Tyranthraxus posted...

You have to be online to play it and use their matchmaking.

Im at a loss for words

Tyranthraxus posted...

You have to be online to play it and use their matchmaking.

That's not a good definition of GaaS.

SwayM posted...

The way games fail or succeed now is all word of mouth though. It has very very little to do with the quality of the game.

the dog-piling and the bandwagon negativity that can snowball against a game is insane these days. Gamers wishing a game to fail and then high giving each other when it does will always be fucking sad imho.

Name some good games that you think failed due to the "dog-piling and bandwagon negativity" you are describing here.

Likewise, since I assume you've played Concord since you came in swinging to defend it, what do you like about it, in particular? What makes it a good game, to you?

that's not the best description of gaas but he's not really wrong either

I'd call it gaas cause it's an intentionally unfinished experience, focused around multiplayer, based on constant, consistent updates, that wants you to play constantly

even if there are no mtx now you still know they're coming, that's part of being a gaas, they never play the full hand day 1

Tyranthraxus posted...

You have to be online to play it and use their matchmaking.

That's not what GaaS is.

GaaS means instead of just one purchase of a game, the revenue model is continuously getting money from players, through things like season passes, IAP, etc.

HashtagSEP posted...

Name some good games that you think failed due to the "dog-piling and bandwagon negativity" you are describing here.

Likewise, since I assume you've played Concord since you came in swinging to defend it, what do you like about it, in particular? What makes it a good game, to you?

"Yeah fuck this live service game, it deserves to fail!!"

Pointing it it's not a live service game and wishing it to fail for absolutely no reason is just sad. That's where I'm at. I'm not going to answer your leading questions because the game itself means nothing to me. The shitty attitude in this industry is what I'm arguing against, always have and always will.

SwayM posted...

"Yeah fuck this live service game, it deserves to fail!!"

Pointing it it's not a live service game and wishing it to fail for absolutely no reason is just sad. That's where I'm at. I'm not going to answer your leading questions because the game itself means nothing to me. The shitty attitude in this industry is what I'm arguing against, always have and always will.

Aah, I see. So you have no actual point that you can defend, since you can't actually give any examples of the thing you're arguing against having actually taken place.

Carry on, then.

HashtagSEP posted...

Aah, I see. So you have no actual point that you can defend, since you can't actually give any examples of the thing you're arguing against having actually taken place.

Carry on, then.

Yeah funny how people dont want to engage in a bad faith argument. Bye bye.

wtf is happening lol

So many cancelled or abandoned live service games these days. The Platinum one nobody asked for, Cancelled TLOU2 multi, Cancelled Sega Multi, Concord Flop, Deviation Games didn't even MAKE anything. Fairgame$ is probably not even coming out at this point. Foamstars will probably be done by next year. I dunno if many of the rest of the "12 live service games by 2026" dipshit Sony execs wanted are going to even launch.

Surprisingly, like 10,000 people play "The Finals" every day, too bad for Sony that isn't exclusive and it's owned by Nexon.

SwayM posted...

Yeah funny how people dont want to engage in a bad faith argument. Bye bye.

It's bad faith to ask for examples of something you're arguing happens enough to complain about?

"Hey, can you support your argument?"
".........No, I refuse."

I also enjoyed Evolve when it went F2P. One of the problems imo is willing monster players are rare, good ones even rarer.

The pressure is magnified when you're the monster because all failure is all on you. You can't blame your teammates for dragging you down. Most of the times I played, the player who got picked for monster will just quit and the monster's A.I doesn't pose enough of a challenge.

I'll put my input in though I have no idea what this game even is actually. I saw an feed where the developers were insulting their players. That's way too early to do that and not ever a good look lol. So ummm whooops.

HashtagSEP posted...

That's not what GaaS is.

GaaS means instead of just one purchase of a game, the revenue model is continuously getting money from players, through things like season passes, IAP, etc.

If you're required to use the provided online services by the publisher, then it's a GaaS game, period, regardless of what monetization exists.

Had it been a 3rd person shooter RPG with better art direction, it would've found its audience. The instant they announced it was discount Overwatch they buried it 6 feet under.

Tyranthraxus posted...

If you're required to use the provided online services by the publisher, then it's a GaaS game, period, regardless of what monetization exists.

That would mean every single Nintendo game with online is a GaaS game, which is simply not true.

That can be a component of a GaaS game, but it's not the only thing, and JUST having that doesn't necessarily make something GaaS.

HashtagSEP posted...

That would mean every single Nintendo game with online is a GaaS game, which is simply not true.

No. Only the ones where the online is required. Nintendo just straight up does not make online only games unless you count Pokemon GO.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/f178bbeb.jpg

I swear, that "Gollum won the argument" thing from The Lord of Ring Gollum needs to be a bigger meme than it is.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Oh, to continue the "talentless freaks" saga:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/fe2fb7c2.jpg

Now that's the legendary kind of self-awareness.
Or the lack of it.

We really need more people throwing childish tantrums like Musk.

Currently at 101 players.

SocialistGamer posted...

Currently at 101 players.

They thought they were releasing a hero shooter but it was actually a battle Royale. Only one player left standing.

Tyranthraxus posted...

They thought they were releasing a hero shooter but it was actually a battle Royale. Only one player left standing.

Like Babylon's Fall all over again

SocialistGamer posted...

Currently at 101 players.

It's doing quite poorly, isn't it...

Wow amazon's mmo did better.

SwayM posted...

I cant speak for any of the others but Evolve was a ton of fun, and super unique. But a balancing nightmare. Also I think they tried to push too hard to make it an e sports game?

And Lawbreakers was a great game I dont care what anyone says. The characters felt awesome to play. Unfortunately its a genre of shooter that justdied? And the audience isnt there anymore.

The way games fail or succeed now is all word of mouth though. It has very very little to do with the quality of the game.

the dog-piling and the bandwagon negativity that can snowball against a game is insane these days. Gamers wishing a game to fail and then high giving each other when it does will always be fucking sad imho.

Yeah I liked Evolve and was super interested in it until they started saying they were going all in with the bad things in gaming. It never had a chance and they deserved the failure. And they learned nothing because Back4Blood followed it and did even worse.