Sony’s latest attempt at live service success has proven to be the exact opposite, as Concord has been shut down after only two weeks of its release. Initial reports on its sales were not promising, with player counts for the Steam version barely breaking 700 concurrent players.
The shutdown of Concord is almost certainly some kind of new record. The only game I can think of with a launch this bad was Crucible. Don’t worry if you don’t remember it, I’m sure I’m one of a handful of people who do. That said, I don’t remember anything about the game itself, just how badly it did. Released in May 2020 as the first game from Amazon’s publishing division, Crucible was pulled back into closed beta a month later and then canceled entirely by October. And yet, it still lasted at least two weeks longer as a public release than Concord.
There are many things that led Concord to do this poorly. The characters were bland and uninspiring, revealing little about the character personalities (if any). Its most prominent trailer was misleading and suggested a narrative-driven experience that the game wasn’t going to deliver. It charged money up front as a new IP in a market full of free-to-play alternatives. All these reasons are contributors to Concord’s demise, but mostly, it’s simply a victim of the realities of the live service gold rush happening within the games industry.
Big companies are desperate for their own live service game. It’s easy to see why from an executive perspective. A quick glance at the billions of dollars being made by the likes of Fortnite is enough to make any investor ask why their money isn’t going towards the same thing. When a live service succeeds, it can be a huge earner, bringing in a lot of regular income. However, these seemingly obvious calculations frequently collide with the cold, harsh reality of the market they’re trying to get into.
The truth is, the live service market has proven itself to be a gamble. Sure, there have been big success stories. But for every game that makes it, there are significantly more live services like Concord, crashing and burning within months, and now even weeks, of their release. I already mentioned Crucible, an uninspiring hero shooter with PvE elements, but the list goes on.
Let’s not forget the likes of Anthem or Babylon’s Fall, where studios known for single-player games were forced into making live service games that no one cared about. What about Hyper Scape, where Ubisoft boldly asked, what if Fortnite had exactly zero personality? Even within the last twelve months we’ve seen mass indifference to Foamstars and the cancelation of Sega’s Hyenas after it became obvious that no one was going to pay much attention to it if it did release.
These games are just the tip of the iceberg. There is a parade of live service games that have been sent out to fall right into a mass grave sitting off to the side of the games industry. The live service market is one where success can be lucrative, but the failures are crushing and much more likely to happen.
The live service market is wildly oversaturated. Not just because everyone’s chasing after Epic’s V-Bucks but also because the nature of live service games means that there simply can’t be that many out there at any given time. Live service games demand your constant attention, with daily login bonuses, time-gated events and other requirements to keep coming back and make the game your exclusive forever game.
When a standard single-player game releases, the time commitment is only as long as the game’s story. An RPG may be a long experience, but once it’s done it’s easy to hop into another game in the genre. For something like horror games, their shorter length means horror fans can easily jump from one game to the next. And what’s more, a lack of players at launch isn’t a death sentence, as players can discover the game months or years later while still getting the exact same experience.
For any given live service game, you have to convince people already invested into the existing similar games to simply stop playing and move over to your project. Players certainly don’t have the time to play more than one, maybe two, at a time, so if your game doesn’t match up, it will simply be ignored. And without enough other players, these games simply aren’t worth playing. The fewer players there are, the quicker those players will disappear and accelerate the game’s demise.
It’s not impossible to succeed, just highly unlikely. Fall Guys and Helldivers 2 show that having a unique enough hook can bring people in, while Valorant and Apex Legends show the importance of good community engagement during development or around launch. But even some of these games are operating at significantly reduced player numbers from their hugely successful launches, while other games which could have succeeded, such as the unique dodgeball battler Knockout City, failed to achieve much success at all. The idea that there is a magic formula for success has simply not played out in reality.
The live service gold rush has been a disaster, and Concord is merely the latest casualty of it. Talented developers have wasted years of their lives working on canned projects, resources have been funneled away from games with more community interest and the few players who have paid into these have simply lost their money to a game they can no longer play. It’s an unsustainable strategy driven entirely by the pursuit of short-term profits. Profits that also have failed to materialize, raising the question of who, if anyone, has gained anything from this strategy.
With Concord shutting down in such a short space of time, I hope it’s the final nail in the coffin for the live service gold rush. While I don’t believe it’s the end for these games altogether, I hope the sheer numbers of them get reduced. And in the process hopefully more publishers will allow developers to build on their strengths and make much more appealing games for their audience.
Published: Sep 5, 2024 03:00 pm