There's no getting around it: Sony Concordia is one of the biggest AAA flops in years. Although generally acclaimed from a technical standpoint, the live-action team shooter gained almost no traction with the gaming public, slipping well into obscurity and eventually being canceled by Sony after just two weeks after release.
Concordia it's a fascinating failure, not only because its weaknesses aren't among the usual suspects – poor performance, glaring in-game spending, excessive errors – but also because of how quickly it was abandoned. In recent years, you'd almost expect a big-budget live service to stumble in its infancy, slowly gaining renewed interest as new content, bug patches, and quality-of-life improvements trickle into the product. basis. However, this kind of post-launch shuffling seems to become less effective as the years go by, and even more dramatic changes have proven far less successful in changing public opinion about certain titles. A good example of this would be Square Enix FoamstarsA Splatoon derivative that struggled to gain a strong fan base at its premium price, prompting a shift to the free-to-play model. But that didn't move the needle much, and the same strategy could prove just as ineffective for Concord.
2:37
Related
Why the rumored $40 price tag on the Marathon might not be a death knell like the Concord
Bungie's upcoming revival of the Marathon series is the subject of a problematic rumor, but the game may yet avoid Concord's fate.
Foamstar's lack of Free-to-Play success could foreshadow Concord
A free switch for Concord has been rumored
Fortnite, Warzone, Genshin Impact: three of the most popular and influential games of the contemporary era, and all are free-to-play. The success of such titles isn't a sign that free-to-play is the way to go for every game out there, of course, but they represent the power of the low-risk, high-reward dynamic that characterizes the GaaS model. Of course, it's a model that many companies want to capitalize on, although some publishers are trying to recreate the same gameplay loop with immersive live services while charging a premium price for the core product, usually alongside countless in-game purchases . This can be considered as one of the reasons Foamstars failed.
But even removing that premium price tag didn't do much for Square's hapless Splatoon clone, which suffered from a steady decline in player base even after becoming freebie. There were rumors that Concordia could follow Square Enix's lead here, returning to the fray as a free-to-play title in an attempt to recoup some of its losses. Assuming this is true, then it could follow Foamstarslegacy in more ways than one, jumping into the free-to-play waters only to drown again.
Concord's problems go beyond the price tag
Concordia it's a game that screams free-to-play at first glance, so its $40 price tag could certainly have contributed to its weaknesses, but it's far from the only thing wrong with it. indeed ConcordiaHis low player numbers can be attributed to a number of factors, but most of them focus on one particular pain point: a lack of soul, identity and charm.
Take a game like Overwatchwhich Concordia obviously, it draws a lot of inspiration from. Overwatch it's defined by its unforgettable character designs, storytelling, and variable gameplay, all of which come together to give it a certain verve. Despite being made by a billion-dollar company, it manages to feel witty, bold and catchy – qualities that the inevitable corporate feel Concordia shortages.
There is also the more pervasive problem of market saturation. Live-service competitive shooters are everywhere, and it's getting harder and harder for new releases to stand out in this space. This is to say nothing of the GaaS model itself, which is defined by a constant demand for players' time, and time is the quintessential finite resource. The truth is, many players have never felt this way Concordia it was worth their time, making its return unlikely, $0 or not.