• How about that Indie World and Partner Showcase? WestEgg, Irene, VolcanicDynamo, and Yakuza Superfan Derachi Discuss the latest on the newest episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Discussion Concord sales ceasing immediately, game will be taken offline on September 6th, all customers getting refunded

They already did, just in less than 12 months we've got:

-Factions cancelled.
-London Studio closed, the last thing they were working on was an online title.
-Twisted Metal Project got tossed around from Lucid Games to Firesprite but never got into full production.
-Spider-Man MP game(Although, from what I gathered from the Insomniac leak, it was barely more than a pitch before it got canned)

I'm sure some were cancelled before we know their existence, so what's left?

We know of
Fairgame$
The Monster Hunter-like Horizon MP project

Maybe one or two more games?
based on things like reporting and job listings, and bearing in mind that 9 times out of 10 "multiplayer"="live-service" these days
  • Bend is working on a new IP and job listings were looking for people with live-service experience
  • Insomniac was hiring for a new multiplayer IP not that long ago
  • Sucker-Punch was hiring for a multiplayer project

TBH it does kinda feel like Sony leadership was encouraging or incentivizing every one of their 1st party studios to pitch or workshop a live-service/GaaS project a few years ago; wouldn't be shocked if it turns out Bluepoint, Housemarque, and Santa Monica also are working or were working on something to that effect
 
I loudly screamed "¡¡NO MAMEEEEEEES!!" when I read the headline. Hoping the best for the employees at Firewalk and for sure this is an incredible embarrassment for Sony.

The company mishandled this terribly, it could've done way better, at least enough to keep the game alive for exponentially longer than a mere couple of weeks.
 
Eight years of hard work in smoke. All because some clueless executive saw Overwatch 8 years ago and went "this is making a lot of money so let's copy it so we can make a lot of money too lol 🤑 🤑 🤑 get to work peons".
I do actually want to make a point - because I keep seeing takes such as yours - that this isn't the end result of greedy old Sony forcing the developers to work on GAAS against their will, when actually by all accounts (and I am admittedly playing catch up here on a few details) Concord was the game that Firewalk wanted to make. The game they have spent 8 years working on and investing all their time into and a project they clearly have a lot of enthusiasm for. Which is why it's particularly sad to see it all go up in smoke.

People have got to get it out of their heads that GAAS = Bad, and realise that not every developer is being chained to their computers to work on them by clueless greedy executives. There are plenty of devs out there who actively enjoy - and indeed take great pride in - the live service games they are actively working on. Let's not belittle their work by rushing to assumptions.
 
It’s interesting to try and see what happened. It was promoted on various Sony shows, and by all accounts it isn’t a bad game- it all works, it’s feature-complete, it’s functional. Most of the reviews landed on 6-7/10 and said it was a good game but just did little to stand out from the crowd. If you imagine how many terrible games would have loved reviews like that…

Unfortunately for AAA service games, not standing out from the crowd in a red ocean is death.
 
Last edited:
It’s interesting to try and see what happened. It was promoted on various Sony shows, and by all accounts it isn’t a bad game- it all works, it’s feature-complete, it’s functional. Most of the reviews landed on 6-7/10 and said it was a good game but just did little to stand out from the crowd. If you imagine how many terrible games that would have loved reviews like that…

Unfortunately for AAA service games, not standing out from the crowd in a red ocean is death.
That was kind of the kiss of death. It wasn’t even incredibly bad in an interesting way like Gollum. It just released and everyone knew it would be dead soon enough.
 
based on things like reporting and job listings, and bearing in mind that 9 times out of 10 "multiplayer"="live-service" these days
  • Bend is working on a new IP and job listings were looking for people with live-service experience
  • Insomniac was hiring for a new multiplayer IP not that long ago
  • Sucker-Punch was hiring for a multiplayer project

TBH it does kinda feel like Sony leadership was encouraging or incentivizing every one of their 1st party studios to pitch or workshop a live-service/GaaS project a few years ago; wouldn't be shocked if it turns out Bluepoint, Housemarque, and Santa Monica also are working or were working on something to that effect

Insomniac is news to me, but I imagine that if that project comes to fruition, it'll be in a long long time.

Bend, I think I can see why they would. Hordes, certain plans for co-op for Days Gone that fell through, the challenges that came post-launch, the Open World. Depending on the wants of key figures at the studio, a project like that could've been greenlit.
Similarly with Sucker Punch, from what I could gather, I think they liked the work they did on Legends? I could see looking into making something more out of that.
 
0
I'm just hearing about this game for the first time today (probably indicative of the problems it faced) and my takeaway is that it looks like one of those fake, generic video games you'd see in a movie so they don't have to pay licensing fees to use an actual game.

No disrespect to the devs in saying that though. I'm sure this was a project countless people poured hours of work into, and it really sucks that their creation is just getting erased. No work of art in any medium should have to suffer this fate.
 
wow Sony is asking people to return physical copies to stores. From a customer standpoint that's as low as it gets, I hope both of them kept the receipt.
 
I do actually want to make a point - because I keep seeing takes such as yours - that this isn't the end result of greedy old Sony forcing the developers to work on GAAS against their will, when actually by all accounts (and I am admittedly playing catch up here on a few details) Concord was the game that Firewalk wanted to make. The game they have spent 8 years working on and investing all their time into and a project they clearly have a lot of enthusiasm for. Which is why it's particularly sad to see it all go up in smoke.

People have got to get it out of their heads that GAAS = Bad, and realise that not every developer is being chained to their computers to work on them by clueless greedy executives. There are plenty of devs out there who actively enjoy - and indeed take great pride in - the live service games they are actively working on. Let's not belittle their work by rushing to assumptions.
GAAS is inherently a predatory model of game development, so to be honest if someone took pride in such a model it wouldn't make particularly sympathetic to them. Obviously it sucks that people might be losing their jobs and years of work goes down the drain. But when a failure like this happens, there needs to be some serious reckoning on what is being enabled when these types of games are being pushed without caution by massive developers. Unfortunately the more likely scenario is companies will continue to write fat checks while chasing trends and then the executives get away with their failures scot free.
 
That was kind of the kiss of death. It wasn’t even incredibly bad in an interesting way like Gollum. It just released and everyone knew it would be dead soon enough.
Good point. No chance of even being a cult hit later on. How can you be if no one can play it, nobody cared about it at launch, nobody remembers anything about it other than ‘it technically hit everything it needed to do to be a GAAS hero shooter’.
 
I think it's pretty obvious if this released on PS4 as well, we wouldn't be having this conversation because the game would be a hit
 
Insane. Shutting down and offering refunds two weeks after launch on a project 8 years in development is for sure the biggest failure a game has experienced in the industry.
 
Going to be honest, I jumped into this convo having seen the initial trailer and plenty of footage of the gameplay but without ever having looked at the character designs up close, I just knew they were poorly received.

But looking at them here, wow... it's not good.

Emari in particular looks like something the Xcom 2 random generator would throw out there, Roka too. These look like the roughest of first efforts at a modern character design, but they were in the oven for 8 years.

There seems to be a commitment to off-beat colour palettes, with many characters having tan or olive paired with something bright like magenta. Magenta and teal in particular show up way, way too often. There are very few traditionally attractive characters, the focus appears to have been on making them look like believably real people. And none of the characters save 1-Off and maybe DaVeers pass the silhouette test. A high-personality robot is a design most games manage to nail, but here... it's just a vacuum cleaner with no face, no expression. Hell, Daw looks like a fan won a competition to get put into the game. He's got a visor! And... gloves...!

I'm looking at these designs and wondering what parts of the standard multiplayer gaming demographic each is supposed to appeal to and I can only see maybe 4 of them hitting home at all. Just very strange.

It really makes me wonder if these standard designs were made so that future skins would be more appealing as a result. That the story would build the appeal of the character, and then when they roll out the "real" skins, people would feel obliged to get their fav character out of the mess of a costume they're originally in.

EDIT: Shit, just thought of something else. If you thought Steam CCU threads were bad enough already (and I never take part) then now with the precedent that a game can just be disappeared after 10 days if the failure is big enough, the excitement over any potential failure will be bigger than ever. There will be bad actors trying to will this into happening again.
 
Last edited:
I think it's pretty obvious if this released on PS4 as well, we wouldn't be having this conversation because the game would be a hit
No, not really, probably. Sure, would have done marginally better as it would reach a wider range of players and probably would have lived past 2 weeks, but it was doing abysmal on Steam too, and PC's the platform where FPS games, especially competitive multiplayer ones, tend to have more people serious about them.
It's a game that massively failed to have an identity or aesthetic that could find an audience, and that wasn't for lack of trying on Sony's part! It was heavily advertised, taking up a huge chunk of their recent State of Play, and had betas before it launched. Turns out, when making not-Guardians of the Galaxy + Overwatch, people are probably either going to stick to actual Overwatch, or even the licensed Marvel Overwatch clone. Or even Valve's new hero shooter. I think the timing of it's release in between Marvel Rivals and Deadlock hurt it more than not being on PS4, but if the game was more interesting, it probably could have had more of a fighting chance! (Not always though, look at Titanfall)
 
The game would have done a lot less bad had its open beta been immediately following its State of Play reveal and if the beta had been much closer to release. Part of the reason people like Nintendo Directs so much is that they always have demos and new games available right away. Those quick turnarounds are more likely to jump on impulse purchases. All that downtime really let people ruminate on the game's shortcomings.

It still would have failed for all the other reasons, but it wouldn't have been a historic failure of this magnitude. It would have been a more typical Paragon or Quake Champions style bomb
 
There has never been a disaster such as this.
Sure, there have been games that likely sold less, but they didn't have the budget, marketing or faith that Concord had. and it gets even worse considering that Sony's first party games are extremely expensive, they are making less and less money from them and are in desperate need for a game that can bring steady ammounts of money without having to wait years between releases.
I wonder why western devs/pubs are not copying and adapting existing gacha games if they wanna make GaaS games.

To me, it seems like there is more room in the gacha market, rather than FPS GaaS games.
I mean FE:Heroes has no PC client and no console ports, low production values, players complaining about power creep, and it apparently made $60M last year lol

There's big room in gachas until Hoyoverse succeeds in making a game in every genre lol.
it's because gachas need a constant supply of content (mostly characters) to stay relevant, something that is simply impossible when you have technical standards you think you need to keep (like having realistic looking characters) or you aren't willing to spend the resouces to do so.
Something like Genshin's 6 week patches are impossible to do without planning in advance, lots of recycling and a simpler artstyle, something that the realistic graphics focused western gaming industry is simply unwilling to do.
Also the gacha market is extremely competitive, even open world games like genshin are receiving more and more competition, and unless you can differentiate yourself, you will fail.
 
Last edited:
It still would have failed for all the other reasons, but it wouldn't have been a historic failure of this magnitude. It would have been a more typical Paragon or Quake Champions style bomb
I agree kinda. Though, I will say, even if they did the beta right after the State of Play, I don't think it would have even had the audience rivalling Quake Champions. Despite that game existing since 2017, it still reaches an average peak of 500-ish players per day, people still love Quake and it has it's own little niche as being an arena/hero shooter hybrid. Heck, it still even gets updates!

Concord for the past like, week has maxed out at around 200-ish players on Steam. It was always doomed to never have a niche cause it was just trying to be Sony making an Overwatch, without any IP strength to back it up and break into the genre. You either make something interesting and gain a following, or follow a trend and risk being totally forgotten, especially with live service games that people don't have a reason to put down.
 
0
Honestly I'm kind of surprise Sony doesn't have any kind of like, super hardcore fanbase to fallback on. I have to wonder what numbers Everybody 1-2-Switch! did from the "super hardcore" Nintendo fanbase that will buy anything (myself, for example).
E12S doesn't seem to show up on the list of confirmed Nintendo-published Switch million sellers, and it's opening week numbers in Famitsu are (while admittedly just a Japan-only, digital-only snapshot of the overall picture) pretty rough. So, not great

But it also has the fortune of being a low-budget relatively short-development game that Nintendo reportedly sat on it for a year debating whether it was even worth releasing. So very unlike Concord, it was a bomb but at least it was a very survivable, inconsequential bomb
 
Wow... I can't even imagine how much this mistake cost them between development time and even the refunds themselves. I wonder if we'll hear anything in the coming weeks regarding a change in future plans based on this.
 
0
E12S doesn't seem to show up on the list of confirmed Nintendo-published Switch million sellers, and it's opening week numbers in Famitsu are (while admittedly just a Japan-only, digital-only snapshot of the overall picture) pretty rough. So, not great

But it also has the fortune of being a low-budget relatively short-development game that Nintendo reportedly sat on it for a year debating whether it was even worth releasing. So very unlike Concord, it was a bomb but at least it was a very survivable, inconsequential bomb
It apparently hit number one in the Aussia charts recently, which is quite funny. An evergreen mass-party game, perhaps!
 
Nothing will ever beat E.T.
E.T.'s definitely very prolific, but it really didn't 'bomb' in the traditional sense. The game sold nearly 3 million copies in its run, with its status as a 'flop' stemming from both ridiculous sales expectations from Atari, and a huge wave of customer and retailer returns later on. In terms of its impact, it was far more of a 'straw that broke the camel's back' than anything, with both Atari and the US gaming industry at large both struggling significantly due to years of mismanagement and issues. If E.T. hadn't come out then the 'video game crash' would've still happened. Its release just expedited the process somewhat.
 
Nah
I’m old ass old and playing since 9.
And I’m still too young to actually know of the gaming industry crash in the US.
My first console was an Intellivision.
i-owe-you-an-apology-i-wasnt-familiar-with-your-game-zenkibo-v0-q9ngtop570jc1.jpg
 
Why you say that?
None of us were gaming at the time to bear witness.
We are all here to see Sony’s greatest blunder however
If Concord flopped so hard that Sony had to shut down PlayStation and stop making consoles, and then the entire video game market crashed so hard that basically no one made any games for the next few years, then Concord would be on par with what happened with E.T.
 
0
GAAS is inherently a predatory model of game development, so to be honest if someone took pride in such a model it wouldn't make particularly sympathetic to them. Obviously it sucks that people might be losing their jobs and years of work goes down the drain. But when a failure like this happens, there needs to be some serious reckoning on what is being enabled when these types of games are being pushed without caution by massive developers. Unfortunately the more likely scenario is companies will continue to write fat checks while chasing trends and then the executives get away with their failures scot free.
The interesting thing which a lot of people are sidestepping here is that Concord was trying to shake things up on the live service front. It was trying to move away from the F2P model which many clearly malign and take a 'Splatoon-esque' approach where gamers pay an entry fee, play some online matches and then stick around for story content, cosmetics and future updates. I suppose this was what Firewalk and Sony were hoping for.

Which is what makes this development all the sadder, and why I think people using this news to line up and lambast live service games are missing the wood through the trees a bit. Concord tried to move away from some of the unsavoury aspects of GAAS. And it failed. It failed spectacularly. The lesson many will take is that audience has chosen F2P models for multiplayer games pretty comprehensively.
 
The interesting thing which a lot of people are sidestepping here is that Concord was trying to shake things up on the live service front. It was trying to move away from the F2P model which many clearly malign and take a 'Splatoon-esque' approach where gamers pay an entry fee, play some online matches and then stick around for story content, cosmetics and future updates. I suppose this was what Firewalk and Sony were hoping for.

Which is what makes this development all the sadder, and why I think people using this news to line up and lambast live service games are missing the wood through the trees a bit. Concord tried to move away from some of the unsavoury aspects of GAAS. And it failed. It failed spectacularly. The lesson many will take is that audience has chosen F2P models for multiplayer games pretty comprehensively.
Fair point. A bit like how paid games on mobile just didn’t survive in the race to the bottom leaving the lions share of the market as free-to-play with microtransactions, gacha and lootboxes.
 
0
Clearly Dring was trying to make a point about everyone having bombs, but Nintendo hasn't really had one in 2024, so he picked the "least successful"
Honestly it would've been a stronger point if he chose like... Redfall or Hi-Fi Rush or something. Choosing a modern Nintendo-bomb is like picking out your favorite Unicorn, why bother it virtually doesn't exist unless you're going to pick something that barely qualifies as one (the NWC is the Rhino of Nintendo-bombs).

The point is sound, it fucking sucks that Firewalk is basically on the chopping block pending imminent execution, but the tweet needed a few more minutes being workshopped ig.
 
Something I noticed when seeing that trailer; it looked like a store-brand Guardians of the Galaxy. Like it wanted to be a legally distinct Guardians as a hero shooter but I guess not have any true identity of its own? Like what was its "it" factor? Aside from it's world-class failure now I mean. :p
 
The interesting thing which a lot of people are sidestepping here is that Concord was trying to shake things up on the live service front. It was trying to move away from the F2P model which many clearly malign and take a 'Splatoon-esque' approach where gamers pay an entry fee, play some online matches and then stick around for story content, cosmetics and future updates. I suppose this was what Firewalk and Sony were hoping for.

Which is what makes this development all the sadder, and why I think people using this news to line up and lambast live service games are missing the wood through the trees a bit. Concord tried to move away from some of the unsavoury aspects of GAAS. And it failed. It failed spectacularly. The lesson many will take is that audience has chosen F2P models for multiplayer games pretty comprehensively.
Audiences have chosen F2P because publishers have significantly devalued multiplayer games to the point where customers now expect them to be F2P. Brashly charging into the market hoping to upend that with an unproven concept that was utterly unappealing is nobody’s fault but Sony’s. How many of these big budget GAAS games in the last 3-4 years have actually been successful? The writing was on the wall but nobody at Sony seemed to care. If you wanna talk about being unable to see the forest for the trees, Sony is the one you should be talking to.
 
Audiences have chosen F2P because publishers have significantly devalued multiplayer games to the point where customers now expect them to be F2P. Brashly charging into the market hoping to upend that with an unproven concept that was utterly unappealing is nobody’s fault but Sony’s. How many of these big budget GAAS games in the last 3-4 years have actually been successful? The writing was on the wall but nobody at Sony seemed to care. If you wanna talk about being unable to see the forest for the trees, Sony is the one you should be talking to.
I actually don't think it's Live-service games specifically. We saw this with Helldivers 2, a unique concept with a strong vision can still sell for 40 dollars in spite of it's GAAS model. The issue is that Hero Shooters are famously free to play titles, at least these days. 12 years ago, Team Fortress 2 went free to play and still is to this day, actually getting rid of it's bot problem the month that Concord got revealed. Overwatch, while originally being paid, eventually became F2P (albeit to mixed results). Other class or hero-based shooters have either an extremely cheap barrier to entry like Siege or are outright free like Apex Legends. Then there's the perfect storm of both Marvel Rivals and Deadlock being revealed/released recently.

It's like strapping on clown-shoes and walking into a minefield, what the hell did you think would happen? The writing was so embedded in the wall that the prisoner next-door probably could break through the stone with a single hit with a spoon. And this was a game that Sony was actively interested in, enough to fund and buy the studio, not to spend that money on another single-player game. The entire movement that Sony/Jim Ryan attempted has been nothing but a waste of time in the long run.

Frankly, I can see any and all upcoming shareholder meetings going a bit like this:
E_K_Yb1X0AUHNQC.jpg
 
I'll be real, as wired as I am to gaming news and outlets, I didn't even know this game existed until the steam concurrent numbers were reported. Bummer for the developer, but it's on Sony mostly for the failure. This game reeks of being focus-grouped the hell and back.

vaguely related, but anybody want to play TF2 with me
 
0


Back
Top Bottom