I always hate to see a game fail. It doesn’t matter what game it is. I have this innate desire to see as many succeed as possible. This stems from the fact that the variety of games available seems to pale in comparison to my teenage years during the PS2 era. This is probably just an optical illusion, as there are way more games available today than there ever have been. Gaming is as popular as it has ever been. Many games in this era seem to be chasing the same audience and the same dollars. There is only so much money to go around, and only so many consumers enjoy certain games. So what happens when that audience and those dollars are already accounted for with the selection of other games? We can point right to the quick failure of a game like Concord.
8 Years Wasted
Concord was a game that had reportedly been in the pipeline at Firewalk Studios for around eight years. EIGHT YEARS! Sony even brought the studio into the family under the PlayStation Studios banner. They believed in what this team was building. This game received a big focus from PlayStation and was poised to be supported well into the future as part of the company’s live service initiative. It received a lukewarm reception when its reveal trailer was shown. Many people in the comments on YouTube criticized it for being a Guardians of the Galaxy rip-off. It seemed to be trying to capitalize on the success of live-service juggernauts like Destiny, Fortnite, and Overwatch.
Something We’ve Seen Before
I’ll admit that when it was released, I was also quite skeptical. In my eyes, this game didn’t appear to do anything new or innovative. It looked like a game that many other studios had already done and done better. I reserved some of that judgment until I saw the gameplay reveal, which gave me vibes of Overwatch or the short-lived Lawbreakers. After that, it didn’t interest me in the slightest bit, and I wondered if this game could find an audience. It looked great, but I felt it didn’t do enough to distinguish itself in a sea of similar live service games. If anything, it felt like it could have evolved into a single-player narrative experience or a co-op experience, given the amount of focus on the characters and the story behind them. That felt like its only defining feature, which isn’t good for an online-only game with no story mode.
Lack of an Audience
As you can see above, Concord never found an audience in the two weeks it was available for sale. It reached an all-time high of 697 on Steam shortly after its launch. According to IGN, the game sold an estimated 25,000 copies. This is incredibly low for even a minor game, but this is one backed by the titan that is PlayStation. The game retailed for $39.99 US, which is steep considering that many of its competitors are free-to-play. Many people become hooked on F2P titles before spending money on cosmetics and other in-game items. I feel like that model could have worked well here. Somehow, the powers that be settled on it being a forty-dollar game, and people didn’t bite. Couple that with the fact that this game was only revealed earlier this year and wasn’t heavily marketed. I never saw anything outside of two trailers.
Another Studio Lost
That disaster struck today when PlayStation and Firewalk Studios decided to pull the plug on the game on September 6th, 2024. Game Director Ryan Ellis had this to say on the PS Blog:
while many qualities of the experience resonated with players, we also recognize that other aspects of the game and our initial launch didn’t land the way we’d intended. Therefore, at this time, we have decided to take the game offline beginning September 6, 2024, and explore options, including those that will better reach our players.
Over-Saturation
While he says that they will explore their options, they are offering refunds for the game on all platforms and pulling it from sale. Please take what you will from that, but I think this game is done for good. Perhaps they will rework it into something else, but I don’t see Concord returning after all the negative discourse about it online. It’s sad to see, because, even though the player base was small, those who did play it seemed to enjoy it and were mostly upset and angry to see the company shut the game down so soon after launch. This brings us to the main point of the article. Are there too many live-service games with insufficient player numbers and financial support?
Time Sink
I enjoy playing Fortnite every weekend with my girlfriend and friend. Do I love the game immensely? No. It’s fun to get a win here and there and to have fun together, but I only play it because it’s something we can all do together that’s accessible to everyone on multiple devices. It has cost me money many times for some of the cool customization options. It’s the only live-service game I play. I don’t have time to play another game like that with friends because I barely have enough time for games between the website, work, and life. I couldn’t imagine even playing two of these games at once. The time sink is real, and I don’t believe I’m alone in that thought.
I love multiplayer games, but with how much I have going on, it’s much easier to pop into a single-player game, get through it in 20-40 hours, and call it a day. It’s not enjoyable playing the same thing over and over again for the most part, and that’s generally what all of these live service games are at their core. I like the story; I like the pacing. You don’t get much of that when trying to rank up to level 100 to get that particular cosmetic that doesn’t give you any competitive advantage. Unless you’re a streamer or exclusively in video game media, you probably can’t play all kinds of these games at once. It’s just not feasible.
Final Thoughts
So, where do we go from here? We’ve had the high-profile failure of Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League from Rocksteady, who did phenomenal work on the Batman: Arkham series. Now, Concord, a game that PlayStation had high hopes for. Variety is the spice of life, and all of these publishers seem to follow the leader. Instead, they should be innovating and creating new experiences. Players like me have been clamoring for more single-player (or even co-op) story experiences with the big budgets that some of these big live-service games have received. How many more flops does the industry need to see to realize that the market is oversaturated with these games right now? I’m not saying these games don’t have their place. I think things need to be scaled back a little before players become disillusioned with the same old tropes. This trend has already started, if Concord is any indication.
What do you think? Do you want to see publishers be more selective with the types of games they’re trying to develop, or are you just looking for that next big live-service game? Let us know in the comments!
