• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Concord sales numbers show PlayStation’s biggest failure yet (1 Viewer)

Haymar is not black or female. 😆 He is an Asian guy. He is indeed obese, however, and dressed like he’s ready to tackle cleaning a sedimentation tank at a sewage treatment plant. I guess the shoulder pads are to protect him from turds dropping out of an overhead pipe. 🤷‍♂️
LMAO really? All the characters look like fat black chicks in this game. Its truly that bad.

I know there’s all the “woke” stuff people have a problem with this game but all that stuff aside.

It was a massive:

Failure of marketing.

Failure of development and character design in the fact that without getting into all the woke stuff, they were not very interesting.

Failure of Sony for chasing trends and entering a massively oversaturated subgenre.

Failure of price point to compound that with entering an oversaturated market with a $40 price point of entry.

And now Sony has released a pointless mid generation upgrade at a massive price point.

Along with that it appears they have a bizarre extraction shooter live service coming about stealing from the rich while the game will be a greedy live service certainly chock to the brim with micro transactions…

Their VR headset while allegedly a fantastic hardware, has failed and there are almost no reasons to buy it.

Sony has absolutely ****ed themselves into the dirt.
Lots of woke games are going down. Dustborn, Suicide Squad and a whole bunch of others are total bombs, and the new Assassins Creed game is being demolished online even before its release.
 
LMAO really? All the characters look like fat black chicks in this game. Its truly that bad.


Lots of woke games are going down. Dustborn, Suicide Squad and a whole bunch of others are total bombs, and the new Assassins Creed game is being demolished online even before its release.

The Assassins Creed screwup is kind of hilarious. Asian gamers have been wanting an Assassins Creed set in Asia forever, and when they get it, the main character is a black guy.

Tell me you don't understand the Asian market in a single decision. Haha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
The problem that the entertainment industry need to come to grips with is that the whole underlying premise to the DEI/Trans push, if fundamentally true, would mean their game would fail when appealing to it.

Is Gaming mostly a male driven hobby? Yes.
Are Superhero and Fantasy primary male interests? Again, yes.

If from that you conclude that most women avoid gaming and super hero and fantasy movies because there isn't enough "strong" women represented in the genres you MIGHT be correct, but then you would have to also assume the corollary that men enjoy those genres for the strong male characters. So creating these movies and games to appeal to women would, at best, based on that assumption, lose as many male fans and it gains women fans... it's a wash.

The problem is that men and women are different and largely have different interests in stories and plot mechanics. They are not interchangeable.

What happens when you decide to overhaul a male genre to attract women is that to push away a large portion of the male audience and attract a small fraction of the female audience who were holdouts due to a lack of women.

You lose audience.

Making traditionally masculine franchises into female franchises is like adding a John Wick plot to Bridgerton.,, it wouldn't attract many more men to Bridgerton, but would drive off a lot of women.

Nothing is going to change. The industry needs to accept that their underlying assumptions that they could create a one-size fits all genre simply doesn't work because such attempts only address the small groups of people who fit into the overlaps in the personality Venn Diagram.

I heard the difference between males and females it best described based on how boys and girls play. If you give a boy a Batman figure, most boys will play as Batman. If you give a girl a batman figure most girls will play as if Batman was them. I think this is at the heart of why masculine and feminine franchises exist.

Interestingly, the traditionally feminine franchises have not had to suffer attempts to make them more masculine...

The Trans movement only further confuses matters since the whole premise of the Trans movement is that the primary differences between Men and Women are in personality and emotions, but not physicality... those personalities and emotions are the very things that establish franchises as masculine and feminine.

Moreover, the whole idea of a game/film adding in Trans characters is counterproductive to the Trans movement, or what the Trans movement pretends to be. The very act of putting Trans characters in a game differentiate them from males and females. In theory, a transman should just identify with male characters, and transwomen to female characters. By demanding "Trans" characters in games all they have established is that they are, at best, neither represented by males or females.

Anyway, trying to navigate these illogical waters is why all of these traditionally masculine franchises are failing miserably. AAA games were always going to be hardest hit because they take years to complete, and will launch invariably championing culture fads that are 5 years past their prime.
 
The problem that the entertainment industry need to come to grips with is that the whole underlying premise to the DEI/Trans push, if fundamentally true, would mean their game would fail when appealing to it.

Is Gaming mostly a male driven hobby? Yes.
Are Superhero and Fantasy primary male interests? Again, yes.

If from that you conclude that most women avoid gaming and super hero and fantasy movies because there isn't enough "strong" women represented in the genres you MIGHT be correct, but then you would have to also assume the corollary that men enjoy those genres for the strong male characters. So creating these movies and games to appeal to women would, at best, based on that assumption, lose as many male fans and it gains women fans... it's a wash.

The problem is that men and women are different and largely have different interests in stories and plot mechanics. They are not interchangeable.

What happens when you decide to overhaul a male genre to attract women is that to push away a large portion of the male audience and attract a small fraction of the female audience who were holdouts due to a lack of women.

You lose audience.

Making traditionally masculine franchises into female franchises is like adding a John Wick plot to Bridgerton.,, it wouldn't attract many more men to Bridgerton, but would drive off a lot of women.

Nothing is going to change. The industry needs to accept that their underlying assumptions that they could create a one-size fits all genre simply doesn't work because such attempts only address the small groups of people who fit into the overlaps in the personality Venn Diagram.

I heard the difference between males and females it best described based on how boys and girls play. If you give a boy a Batman figure, most boys will play as Batman. If you give a girl a batman figure most girls will play as if Batman was them. I think this is at the heart of why masculine and feminine franchises exist.

Interestingly, the traditionally feminine franchises have not had to suffer attempts to make them more masculine...

The Trans movement only further confuses matters since the whole premise of the Trans movement is that the primary differences between Men and Women are in personality and emotions, but not physicality... those personalities and emotions are the very things that establish franchises as masculine and feminine.

Moreover, the whole idea of a game/film adding in Trans characters is counterproductive to the Trans movement, or what the Trans movement pretends to be. The very act of putting Trans characters in a game differentiate them from males and females. In theory, a transman should just identify with male characters, and transwomen to female characters. By demanding "Trans" characters in games all they have established is that they are, at best, neither represented by males or females.

Anyway, trying to navigate these illogical waters is why all of these traditionally masculine franchises are failing miserably. AAA games were always going to be hardest hit because they take years to complete, and will launch invariably championing culture fads that are 5 years past their prime.



Or Concord was a mid level game in a genre that has a lot of similar games with a existing player base. The advertising for Concord was poor, the graphics and game play average and it may have worked as a free to play game, but when priced at $40 it has zero appeal

I will hazard a guess and say the developers knew they had nothing special, tried to make something about it different but overall failed


That it cost as much as it did is the worst thing about it. GTA5 only cost $400 million to develop, and is 10 years older than Concord. Yet is by far a better game in terms of detail, plot, graphics etc
 
Or Concord was a mid level game in a genre that has a lot of similar games with a existing player base. The advertising for Concord was poor, the graphics and game play average and it may have worked as a free to play game, but when priced at $40 it has zero appeal

I will hazard a guess and say the developers knew they had nothing special, tried to make something about it different but overall failed


That it cost as much as it did is the worst thing about it. GTA5 only cost $400 million to develop, and is 10 years older than Concord. Yet is by far a better game in terms of detail, plot, graphics etc

A couple of points:

1) The developers didn't funnel $400 million into Concord because they knew it was mid. Unless they were laundering money...

2) GTA5 is a more successful game because it appeals in all of the escapist ways that attract people to games. Minecraft is the best selling game of all time and has worse graphics and no plot.

3) I don't think Concord would have worked as a free-2-play game since the whole business model for F2P is cosmetics and one of the chief complaints of the game was the characters you'd be selling cosmetics for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
A couple of points:

1) The developers didn't funnel $400 million into Concord because they knew it was mid. Unless they were laundering money...

2) GTA5 is a more successful game because it appeals in all of the escapist ways that attract people to games. Minecraft is the best selling game of all time and has worse graphics and no plot.

3) I don't think Concord would have worked as a free-2-play game since the whole business model for F2P is cosmetics and one of the chief complaints of the game was the characters you'd be selling cosmetics for.
Point 1. It was a new studio that probably did not know what it was doing

Point 2 I could have gone with Fortnight, or Pubg or any other team based shooter that is popular

Point 3. In a shooter game, the cosmetics are the easy part. Changing the skins of a character can be done quickly and easily. If the base game of Concord was good the skins and character backgrounds of the characters could be changed in 2 months. The base game was average at best. I guarantee you the game " went " woke at the last minute to be different abd hopefully gain sales

Redfall sucked and it was not woke, Suicide Squad sucked and it was not woke
 
Point 1. It was a new studio that probably did not know what it was doing

You miss the forest for the trees. You need to understand how a "new studio" landed a $400 million budget... and that reason is it's game checked all of the DEI boxes that Sony was looking for.

Point 2 I could have gone with Fortnight, or Pubg or any other team based shooter that is popular

Why, when Minecraft is sitting right there at the top, by a wide margin? But then Fortnite, PUBG etc. also sit out there as evidence that if you provide compelling gameplay you don't need a $400 million budget.

The problems with Concord development were two fold:
1) They set out to make a DEI game with representative characters first, not a game that was fun to play.
2) They were so enmeshed in the message that the office took on a case of toxic positivity. You couldn't question a character's look, or play style or budget without being labeled a phobe.

It was essentially a money laundering enterprise by DEI watchdogs.

Point 3. In a shooter game, the cosmetics are the easy part. Changing the skins of a character can be done quickly and easily. If the base game of Concord was good the skins and character backgrounds of the characters could be changed in 2 months. The base game was average at best. I guarantee you the game " went " woke at the last minute to be different abd hopefully gain sales

Character design is more than skins. Skins, meshes, skills sets, balancing, animations, voice lines, etc. etc. go into developing a character that you can't change with skins... nor could you in a climate where the characters were developed specifically around "marginalized" cultural archetypes. When they are being created for purposes of inclusivity you are touching the third rail if you want to speak up that the fat lady in beetle armor looks pretty stupid.

Redfall sucked and it was not woke, Suicide Squad sucked and it was not woke

I don't know anything about Redfall, but Suicide Squad was most definitely "woke". The explosion of Harley Quinn based games and movies were to capitalize of the "Yaas Queen" persona, and they reduced all male characters to oafish idiots, and placed the female characters on pedestals ("good" and "evil" alike)

I'm not saying games can't suck without woke, but woke helps a game suck more and signals to the customer that "Hey, this game will suck".
 
The game was in developing for 8 years. Sony bought the studio in early 2023. The game sucked, regardless of being woke or not, I bet it went woke as an attempt to stand out on a crowded market
 
There was an interesting statement made in a video I was watching that was about the movie industry, but it really applies to gaming as well, probably more so to gaming, really.

The conversation was in regard to the general truism that movies based on games are awful. The argument was that the primary issue with making movies about games is that they are designed top down, meaning that most of the development process is tied down before the development even begins, and the more constrained that the studio is in the final product, the less interesting the resulting movie will be.

What seems to have been happening in the last 5-7 years is that DEI has become its own intellectual property layer that has been draped over whatever intellectual property was already being developed.

That wasn't entirely the case with Concord, though since it was an attempt at a new IP, but the problem was that it was being built on a cookie cutter game style, and developers and Sony relied of the notion that DEI would set it apart from the other competitive shooters. It DID set it apart, but in all the wrong ways. It was the equivalent of trying to break into the steak house restaurant market and deciding you will stand out by being vegan. They had a AAA budget for a game whose primary appeal is niche.

The DEI advocates will quickly launch into attacks on people for not liking the game because they are some various forms of "phobes", but in reality the whole concept of DEI is built on the presumption that gamers and filmgoers need somebody like them in order to fully enjoy the product which means that a game like Concord will have very limited appeal.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom