Concord Is Estimated to Have Sold Only 25,000 Units. Here's Why Analysts Think It's Failing
I'm finding it very hard to believe that a AAA game from Sony only sold this much.
Link
I'm finding it very hard to believe that a AAA game from Sony only sold this much.
Link
Even that is a bad number but still better than fucking 25k.
Maybe steam numbers are correct, i am wondering about the psn numbers
Apparently, no one has heard of Concord either.
Which shouldn't be possible, since ~2 million people watched the SoP from 3 months ago.
The audience who tune into sop don't care much about gaas, see the comments on the sop ~
Estimates like this are always going to be off on some order of magnitude, and shouldn't be understood as a specific value. The expert isn't telling you that it sold exactly 25K, it's like a bell curve with 25K being its average value, with the real value ranging from something much lower to something much higher.
Fixating on this number feels like people just don't understand how statistics works. You are making an educated guess with your math based on limited data points, you are not playing oracle.
As a side comment, but I always found the name of this game to be so weak. Now, I'm as far from the target audience for a GAAS as you can be, so me not liking the name is probably a good thing, but they really couldn't pick a better name then the English word for "consensus" and "harmony" for a shooter game?
Fixating on this number feels like people just don't understand how statistics works. You are making an educated guess with your math based on limited data points, you are not playing oracle.
As a side comment, but I always found the name of this game to be so weak. Now, I'm as far from the target audience for a GAAS as you can be, so me not liking the name is probably a good thing, but they really couldn't pick a better name then the English word for "consensus" and "harmony" for a shooter game?
Play tracker is a bit slow, after a week guesstimate will be easier ~
This thread is literally the first I've heard of it. I clicked to find out what it was. Maybe that number is right.
I'd never heard of this game until I saw the thread about the number of players on Steam.
I don't really understand the point of releasing an original, non-FTP hero shooter at this moment in time. The potential audience for this game is already too invested in existing games.
I don't really understand the point of releasing an original, non-FTP hero shooter at this moment in time. The potential audience for this game is already too invested in existing games.
I think something people forget is that, in many ways, Helldivers 2 only sold it's crazy amount due to WOM, rather than Sony doing a good job advertising it.
I'm guessing they just assumed that would happen again, and thus now in a world of hurt when they realize that isn't some guaranteed thing.
I'm guessing they just assumed that would happen again, and thus now in a world of hurt when they realize that isn't some guaranteed thing.
Certainly, the most interest I'm seeing in the game is from people who seem to hate PlayStation and want to dance on its grave.
It only has 716 reviews on Steam, and the tiny player count, unless there is some insane gulf between how the game has been received on PS5 vs PC, not a chance it's 100-150k.
There are actual PS fans who openly wanted to see this game fail and happy to see it fail. Because gaas bad. It's not just about platform wars when it comes to Concord.
Luckily GaaS games don't survive or fail based on the views of single player game fans.
I believe it. A large factor for multiplayer games is the player count, and Concord's matchmaking times are notoriously bad. That by itself would be enough to steer a lot of potential players away. Who wants to spend $40 just to wait in lobbies for long periods of time?
I'm not even paying attention to the SoP unless it's a studio I recognize. I'm on my phone.
You could still rate the game if you played the Beta, even after launch. So the ratings don't indicate actual owners.
I don't think it makes a big difference if it sold 25.000 or 250.000 units. It needed to sell millions.
Unfortunately this includes the ratings from the open beta that was freely available. When it ended it had 7.2k ratings already... (Ratings are also a lot more positive post-beta tbf)
In the UK and Japan (smaller population I know) you can be in the top ten and only sell about 1-2000 units of a game
This is something people seem to not be capable of accepting when talking about Concord. They think it was "rejected" by ALL of gamers. They think there is no audience for the game, because people looked at the character designs and rejected them. But I've been saying, people don't know about this game. It's not even on the radar. The game was announced a mere 2ish months before launch and had little awareness raised around it. It didn't even have a steam page to follow for weeks after the announcement. There were a lot of unknowns about the game until the beta (and even after in terms of cosmetics and unlocks). How can hype and WOM form about so many unknowns, in such a short period of time? Only chuds used this to create negativity (and of course people are like, no way chuds don't matter!). Anyway, I think the lesson here is that failing to find an audience doesn't necessarily mean there is no audience. And a game isn't bad just cause it doesn't.
FWIW, the only reason I didn't buy it is because the specs are a little too high for my taste. I don't like when a game runs maybe 60 fps. I am used to 120+fps, so I'll get it when I upgrade my CPU if it's still going. I do think they should have targeted lower specs.
I won't argue that f2p wouldn't help. I don't think it's obviously a silver bullet either. They'd have to attract and hold WAY more players since the vast majority do not spend significantly.
Helldivers 2 also had a collaboration with streamers on launch that gave twitch drops: https://www.reddit.com/r/Helldivers/comments/1aqhbxs/helldivers_2_twitch_drop_clarification/
It is crazy to me that nobody thought to try and replicate that with Concord.
unless you are being inflammatory (which is always the minority, no matter how vocal), there is nothing wrong with wanting the industry to cater to your tastes more.
it is also very understandable being annoyed by service games after seeing studios like rocksteady, crystal dynamics and bioware waste their talents with subpar service games they're not good at making.
the implication that if you are against service games, then you are by definition toxic, is unfair
Is it specific on Playstation ?
GaaS on multi are well recieved when they're well implemented, even if Helldivers 2 has tanked a bit in numbers because of balance problems, the said services provided were really balanced and the weapon / campaign packs were great (well until they said fun isn't allowed much).
Path of Exile is a great GaaS game, I'm certain PoE 2 will also will be one. There's tons of good examples of GaaS out there.
But this is PC front and center. The online / mmo / coop etc. type is really absent from the top 10 PS audience, why is that ?
The game was suppose to be in everyone's hands right after the announcement. Open Beta for everyone.
This game needed to be played by everyone before the narratives set in. 100% potentially the only way this game could have been saved was a Open Beta shadowdrop on announcement. Could have killed alot of negative talking points before they even got to form
Is that something you could only do up until launch or something? I can't rate the full game now based on having a beta entitlement.
The person that greenlit Astro Bot, Death Stranding 2 and convinced Kojima to return to his roots with a new action-espionage game?
Everyone's doing live service games and their success is not guaranteed.
No brainer
That's not a good thing at all
Should have done it way sooner, so overall not impressed with Hermen at all.
All the Steam analytics so far seem to put the game at around 10k owners give or take. Gamalytic (which so far seems to be the most accurate of the bunch imho) puts it at 9k.
You can be against service games (by complety ignoring them), but you can also don't wish a game to fail. There are hundreds of developers who might be affected.
Yes, because Sony's pivot on gaas was not well received by the community. To see this failing would mean more focus on single player games. That's what I understand, generally.
For some, but not when everyone else is convinced that Sony is risk averse and doesn't make these kinds of games at this level anymore.
It'll push expectations for innovation in AAA games even further, be a GOTY contender and just be a batshit crazy, fun time. It's okay that it doesn't appeal to you though.
Fair enough. I'm all for letting creators do what they want, but if you can nudge them in the right direction in the interim, then that's a net positive.
They had to have seen this coming. The lack of marketing must have been intentional.
I guess they reached the point of no return where they couldn't cancel it but didn't want to put any more money into it either. Textbook sent to die.
I guess they reached the point of no return where they couldn't cancel it but didn't want to put any more money into it either. Textbook sent to die.
Marketing strategies change both by genre and just over time. Helldivers 2 is easier for fans to convince their friends to buy a copy is because there's only a few players per squad and the game is PVE. That means you don't need a ton of random players online to find balanced matches, you can customize the difficulty to your group skill level, and there's just generally less pressure to get super competitive.
Basically, the barrier to entry is low so that makes word of mouth very effective.
Apex Legends did do a surprise release five years ago (inspired by Beyonce lol) and ended up doing great but that was still a coordinated all-at-once marketing campaign. Concord just never built big momentum no matter what Sony did and I feel like that's because it didn't do anything to stand out from the hero shooter pack.
At the end of the day, all MP games are primarily dependent on WOM for success. How do you convince your fans to try a game when there are a dozen other options that are F2P? Not to mention all of them have already had years of seasonal content updates, an active community, and are usually tied to a studio with a respected pedigree.
That's what makes me worried and actually confused about the rumors that Marathon development is having trouble. Everything about that game says it should be successful. Hopefully it shapes up as I loved the art style in the trailer.
As for Fairgame$, Sony really has to take some lessons from Concord and figure out a completely different marketing strategy for it.
