It’s a weak overwatch clone that came out years too late to ride it’s coattails
Comment on Sony cracks down on Concord custom servers, issues DMCA takedowns on gameplay videos
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day agoPlease, tell me how it’s objectively terrible.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
That’s a subjective opinion.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Fine. Objectively it failed because very few people wanted to play it. Those people largely didn’t want to play it because it was a weak overwatch clone that came out years too late to ride it’s coattails. Happy?
treesquid@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That doesn’t make it terrible, that simply makes it not original
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
That’s just laundering your opinion through Argumentum ad populum.
ripcord@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That’s not an answer to the question that was asked.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
And you’re not the person I was answering
ripcord@lemmy.world 1 day ago
…so?
mechoman444@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Look, the reason Concord crashed and burned isn’t some deep philosophical mystery. It’s because the game simply wasn’t good enough to survive in a genre that’s already stacked with better, cheaper options.
It launched with no real identity. Everything about it felt like a watered-down version of other hero shooters, same structure, same archetypes, none of the charm. Characters were forgettable, abilities didn’t mesh well with the modes, and the balance was all over the place. The movement was slow, the time-to-kill was absurdly long, and fights dragged on like you were playing in molasses. That’s not “a bold design choice,” that’s just poor pacing.
Then you add the fact that they tried to charge forty bucks for something that, by every metric, should’ve been free-to-play. On top of that, content was thin at launch. Maps were bland, the mode selection was tiny, and there wasn’t enough variety to keep anyone invested. When a live-service shooter launches with barely anything to do, the writing is already on the wall.
Players didn’t walk away because they “didn’t give it a chance.” They walked away because the game gave them no reason to stay. Sales were abysmal, concurrency numbers cratered immediately, and Sony pulled the plug in record time. That’s not player bias or community toxicity; that’s a product failing on its own merits.
You can dress it up however you want, but the reality stands: Concord entered a crowded market with nothing special to offer, priced itself like it was a premium experience, and then delivered something that felt half-thought-out and generic. It wasn’t some misunderstood masterpiece. It was just a bad game.
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 hours ago
Those are subjective opinions about the game.