Yeah, ain’t no monetizing scheme is gonna save this one.
This is the key marketing fail. They released an OW clone, and then failed to highlight the differences. I might have thrown $40 at it, if I’d known that there wasn’t going to be a battlepass or something equally asinine to come with that price tag.
I played through their free weekend beta some time in July and didn’t hate it, but it was clunky and the designs were uglier than OW. That said, I had expected them to clean it up before release; anything except let it stand with its overarching veneer of greyige+olive green over every character.
I think they just released it to say it was released and be able to do the write-offs. Otherwise, any game that had been in development this long would have seen a huge marketing campaign that highlighted why players should abandon OW, et al for Concord instead.
billiam0202@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
On the one hand, that’s not a bet I’d take since No Man’s Sky exists.
On the other hand, NMS is definitely the exception, not the rule.
Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
I assume, NMS made money from their launch, despite it being so underwhelming, and that’s what they used to patch up the game.
Concord seems to have made essentially no money…
drcobaltjedi@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
25K units sold TOTAL. 10 on steam, 15 on psn.
Some quick math, steam takes a 30% cut (10k * 40 * .7 = 280k), and since this is a sony published game sony got to keep 100% on their platform (15k * 40 = 600k). Sony made less than 1 mill in revenue on this game which allegedly cost 100M to develop.
ms_lane@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
People wanted NMS, they wanted NMS to be good.
It was a let down when it wasn’t.
No one wanted this. No one thought it would be good.
It was a laugh when it failed.
They aren’t the same.