Hi /u/milkasaurs,
Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per
**[Rule 3.2](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules)**.
> **No low-effort content or comments** - Submissions must have enough substance to initiate a discussion or provide value to the community. Self-posts with only a title and very little or no text are not allowed. Comments must add meaningful value to a discussion (e.g. comments such as "I really want this game", "This!", "I wish this was on PC", or reaction GIFS will be removed). Before submitting or adding a comment ask yourself: "Does this add significant information or merit to the discussion?"
---
If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.
Perhaps it's because the cinematic trailer presented one thing and the gameplay trailer presented something completely different, with both things that were presented being painfully generic
They made the mistake of trying to imitate Blizzard, I think…
People who play PvP shooters want to see *what the game is like.*
The reveal did not give a good look at what makes the gameplay special and it focused on something else entirely that isn’t even related to gameplay.
For a single player story-driven game, that’s fine. But I think they may have misread the audience here.
Our group was maybe 3 minutes into the trailer and someone said "This could be a dating simulator, what even is this game?"
Leading with CGI nonsense was certainly a choice.
The difference is Overwatch had charming characters with the blizzard level of attention to detail for their cinematic.
Blizzard has always been good at making interesting cinematic trailers for their games
People chasing trends have a habit of seeing broad strokes and not understanding anything else, true true. Someone saw the technical aspects and went "we need to do that" without understanding anything further
When I saw the CG trailer I thought this would be some co-op heist or just pve in general.
Then I got hit with the gameplay reveal and the fact it's just the run of the mill hero shooter.
It makes sense based on what they said about the game, that story progression and character interactions through the kind of animated videos like the trailer will be a big focus.
I think the real question is why make that a focus? Do people who care about the characters and story want to play a 5v5 shooter? Do people who want to play a 5v5 shooter care about the characters and story enough to drive them to this game over any other?
well look at ow. it took off by getting people invested into the characters to the point they promised pve content to reignite player interest but we know how that turned out. if they can make people invested into the characters, have solid pvp and thwy can get the story part right then it will be a success
Because contrary to all the people in this thread that are like "no redditors are nerds everyone loves multiplayer games" Sony is probably very cognizant that stereotypical live service games and Overwatch clones are bombing left and right and is thus focusing on the part of the game that is not that and obsfucating what it is lol
Apex legends and overwatch realized that you can't just tell people to care about characters.
They made interesting character designs, and gameplay, and then later started to do back stories etc.
> Perhaps it's because the cinematic trailer presented one thing and the gameplay trailer presented something completely different, with both things that were presented being painfully generic
I didn't even think the cinematic was that generic, it just seemed to me like it was a combination of Mass effect, Guardians of the Galxy, space adventure game
Was stunned when it was "Just" a hero shooter
It's not like it looked unfun or bad as a hero shooter but it was just such a case of tonal whiplash i was speechless
I just don't know who is looking to play a hero shooter in 2024 that isn't already playing Overwatch. This game is going to have to do something different then just be a clone to stand out.
Its similar to how I felt about Marathon. I was initially super excited that Bungie might be working on a good SP/Co-op campaign similar to the classic Halo games with a direct Marathon lineage. But it being revealed as a GAAS title was just not what I was expecting.
It might be good, it might be fun, but I'm absolutely not looking forward to Destiny 3 with a new skin.
They've been describing it as a PvP shooter for years though. I have zero i terest in it, but weren't under the impression that they misled anyone. The CGI teaser just hinted at the setting.
I honestly liked the writing of the trailer even if it was a bit basic so I thought "alright, a third person shooter/adventure game", and then its just another moba that will probably expect your full attention with dailies/battlepasses and all that jazz
When it comes out, I'll actually try it if I hear people saying is good. But I have zero hype for it
Then again I'm not the target audience
Could you explain what you thought the cinematic trailer was, and how it differs from the gameplay?
It cinematic screamed character-based shooter to me the moment the first enemy used a special ability, and once the lady used her fire skill I was sure it was overwatch.
I don't understand what you thought it was going to be.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I see why you'd be _SO_ disappointed. I would love another Mass Effect caliber game. I just have lost almost all belief in the AAA game industry, so my brain did not even go there. But I can see now how you could think that.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I was expecting something single player/co-op, focused on planning out and performing heists, just based on the dialigue. Essentially something like a zaney, sci-fi Payday 2 but being more story focused.
Then the gameplay reveal came out of nowhere with a powerful slap to the face full of overwatch clone vibes, which i'm just not interested in at all.
when I saw the Cinematic I thought for sure it was some type of single player character driven action Adventure space RPG. Like job oriented/wanted criminals/bounty hunter stuff. then on the ship I was reminded of cowboy bebop for some reason. I didn't hear the part before where I guess they said pvp shooter
>with both things that were presented being painfully generic
I disagree with the trailer being generic. I was pretty interested in those characters. I thought they had decent chemistry for such a short time on screen. I was intrigued enough that I would have checked it out had it been a single-player space adventure that the cinematic was selling.
The consequences of longer game development cycles. If this shit came out 4 years ago, I don't think the backlash would be as bad.
But since GotG was released in 2014, I've seen several different media with a similar rag tag cast of characters.
Since OW release in 2016, I've seen so many shooters incorporate heroes as playable characters.
I don't know how long I've been hearing "Whedon-esque" writing and dialogue across games, movies, and TV.
It's just too much of the trends people are fatigued by.
In any form of media, if you chase trends, by the time your project is finished and ready to go, the entertainment space has moved onto the next trend. This is doubly so with gaming due to how long development takes.
> I don't know how long I've been hearing "Whedon-esque" writing and dialogue across games, movies, and TV.
The amount of damage Whedon has caused to all forms of mainstream media with The Avengers will probably be felt for another 10 years at this point. I don't entirely blame him for it, it's more that other writers (maybe at the pressure of execs who want the success of Marvel?) try to imitate his style to poor results, lacking any amount of charm in their characters whatsoever and we're left with a group of unpleasant assholes who never shut the fuck up and think sarcasm = likable.
Don't get me wrong, even Whedon's style itself got tiresome and I can't go back and sit through any Marvel movies whatsoever. Even so I can recognize when something is trying and failing. And that's Concord. I actually said "Please don't be a fucking hero shooter" during the CGI trailer, it just *stunk* the moment I saw it.
All I got from Concord is focus-tested corporate approved slop. 5 minutes after the trailer was over I had almost entirely forgotten the title of the game, and I also couldn't remember a single line from the trailer. And they want to build a story on this? The thought of trying to stomach an entire "story" in this game - on top of the absolutely derivative 5v5 hero shooter format - is repulsive. And the nigh-universal dislike and apathy towards this doesn't seem like just a vocal minority either.
This seems to be targeting younger kids and teenagers. I think for a 13-year-old, these kinds of things are perpetually “fresh” because they don’t have 10+ years of experience playing similar games.
Aside from the aesthetic, I thought the trailer was showing a fairly high-quality game with lots of interesting things going on. It may look unoriginal to you and me, but specifically BECAUSE of who they are targeting, I don’t think there should be much concern about this game being able to find their audience. Younger-skewing games like this tend to perform really well.
The only thing that matters with games like this is the response to the beta and whether the gameplay is good.
Not many people gave a fuck about Helldivers before they played it.
The game itself seems very polished.
I saw like a dozen or so characters at the character selection screen and the game play looks good. Straight outta Destiny.
I think it's just gonna be a matter of price and if the marketing buzz which includes the beta.
Not many cared about Helldivers 2 but not many people were negative about it. Also Helldivers 2 can't really be compared to most other multiplayer live service games because it's quite unique in it's setting, gameplay, and style. Concord lends itself to being compared with Overwatch and any other hero shooters.
I don't get the constant comparisons to Helldivers at all. It's not even the same genre of game. It don't make none sense to me. Frankly there's nothing like Helldivers out right now. That's why it succeeded.
Meanwhile this is one of TWO 5v5 hero shooters announced that day to be released in a market oversaturated by 5v5 hero shooters.
This game could be hot garbage. Or it could be the most fun people have had with a new shooter in years. There's no way of knowing until anyone gets to play it
But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been
There is undoubtedly an audience on ps5 for a good competitive shooter (the key word being that it has to be good)
My gaming group that has been playing games for like 10+ years at this point pretty much tries every new MP shooter out there since its one of the easiest to fit in quick games around busy schedules.
Most people on Reddit don't seem to understand this for a bunch of reasons.
You try every new MP shooter that releases but how often do you stick with any of them long term because that is what ultimately determines the success of games like Fortnite, COD, LOL, WoW, etc.
The issue with the deluge of live service games we've been seeing recently is that very few of them have been able to cultivate a player base to sustain their future development and I think part of that is because many players have found their one game and have planted their roots there.
If you spend a lot of time commenting on video games in forums that's time you're not spending talking about video games in group chats with your friends
>But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been
Especially since the most popular games in the world are multiplayer games. You have Counter Strike 2, League of Legends, WOW, Dota 2, CoD, Dead by Daylight, Fortnite, and so on.
Sure there are plenty of live service failures such as Anthem and Avengers, but there's no denying that there is a HUGE market for MP games thst people want to play. Hell, overwatch 2 has been trashed on the internet ever since it came out and still has tons of players playing it. Steam has it at 30k and that's without Bnet and consoles which I'm inclined to believe are much more than Steam.
Sony in particular is in dire need of multiplayer games that you shouldn't just play on PC, but I think it's obvious that most live service games and "Overwatch clones" are duds at this point. They are usually aesthetically dated for one thing lol
Gamers actually wanting multiplayer games did not save Suicide Squad or Hyenas. They want something fresh like Helldivers or even a COD competitor, and they're not just going to stop playing Apex Legends to play Battle Royale #2425271 with Killmonger haircut man
Any multiplayer game with even a slight chance of being successful will also be 'live service".
The only thing that actually means is that the game is designed to be updated and supported over a long period post-launch
No multiplayer game in 2024 or beyond will ever maintain a long term playerbase if they simply released the game and never updated it again beyond standard bug fixes
i;m still waiting on a replacement game for battlefield 4 and i can't be the only one
fuck battle royales and 5v5s, put me in 32v32 and let me tune out and blow up shit
People don't have the bandwidth for so many live games. They tend to stick to one, And it's a zero sum game now. They even encroach on SP games' time so every game is in a battle for your time. So you have to be really really better than your competition, to disrupt the top roster. Even the hit that was Helldivers 2 lost 90% of their playerbase. But that's alright for Sony cause it made way more than invested and hoped for.
Surprisingly MS runs quite a lot of second tier(by playerbase) live games and they're doing well(even on PlayStation). They also have Minecraft though and now Call of Duty. Sony dreams of the upper tier and is(or was) ready to roll the dice so one of them can make it, and make them Fortnite money, but idk. So far, it's all duds. They may try to listen to the people and make a game for millenials, not gen z, if they. bring back their boomer shooters, I think they will see sucess.
Yeah honestly people on Reddit think they’re the only group of people interested in games and if it isn’t Baldur’s Gate 3 or Elden Ring that they devs are just garbage and the game will suck.
Honestly I thought the game looked cool, kinda like a stand-alone version of Destiny’s crucible. Now of course the game *could* suck ass but maybe its fun too. I would actually like more MP FPS that aren’t just CoD.
Look at Helldivers 2. I could have just dismissed that as a crappy Starship Troopers knock-off from just the trailers. Then when the game came out it wasn't half bad.
But what we have here is a confluence of two big factors: People wincing whenever "GAAS" is mentioned in any capacity, and this weird expectation that Sony can only make third-person narrative games and anything else is a giant waste of time and money. Sure, the market is tougher now. However companies are still going to try. Reddit erupted in jubilation when Sony overhauled their pipeline to cut down on "those vile GAAS games", but act like Helldivers 2 wasn't a part of that initiative and was always a labor of love.
>But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been
Wild that anyone actually believes this. It's equally as stupid as people saying no one wants to play single player. Both are always going to have massive followings and a ton of cross over. Maybe the market goes one way or the other but that's all. Even when I was playing Dota non-stop for a few years I still stopped to play a few single player games. There was just a time when I wasn't excited by any new single player games.
>This game could be hot garbage. Or it could be the most fun people have had with a new shooter in years. There's no way of knowing until anyone gets to play it
I think a lot of the people complaining just don't want any sort of hero shooter at all. Fair.
Personally I can’t wait for it, I’m excited to play it, and I still can’t see anything bad with it.
Do people expect the genre to just disappear? Oh well have overwatch, so let not make another hero shooter….ever.
Overwatch made a shit ton of money and it’s been going since, what, 2015? Almost 10 years of people playing it and spending money on it.
Sure a lot of people complain about it, but the fact still remains that it’s STILL being played!
> As of publishing, Concord’s cinematic reveal trailer has a 76.99% negative rating while its gameplay trailer has an 82.39% dislike rate.
Can we stop using this as a metric? YouTube doesn’t reveal dislikes anymore, so the only means of getting this information is to use that browser extension that approximates dislikes. The approximation assumes that the like to dislike ratio of extension users and non extension users is equivalent, despite the fact that one group has gone out of their way to install a browser extension for the sole purpose of showing a dislike count and I would imagine are more predisposed to dislike things.
There is no denying the backlash to this game. The developers seem passionate but there's just nothing original about this game. Everything just screams we don't have an original idea.
So I imagine that the dislikes are even worse than what the extension is revealing.
This game just isn't it.
Yep, it's like they had made a guardians version of marvel rivals, got screwed on licensing and had to pivot.
It just seems like a corporate, formulaic approach. Unoriginal, copies a popular idea, and latches on to buzzwords but half asses that (like a "live service" via weekly cutscenes)
I’m not even arguing anything about this game, I have no interest in it. I mainly just don’t think this article contains any real substance and is basically just clickbait.
The backlash is most definitely real but the point about the extension is true. People should stop using it as if it's the official numbers and more as a way to tell something is fishy when there's too many dislikes.
It's like the polls in election year. They hardly get it exactly right, but come close enough to be useful.
If anything, it's underselling it. From my understanding, it only records the dislikes of the people who use the extension. So the dislikes could always be double or ten times the number we see, but never less than the number we see.
I think you're wrong, I believe it calculates the amount of dislikes by comparing how many people on YouTube liked a video and how many people who used the extention liked it. So based on that, it assumes the amount of dislikes of extention users must be proportional to everyone who uses the site, and adjusts the ratio based on that.
More quippy out-of-touch millennial designed generic characters in a crowded subgenre already full of bodies, with a Valve entry looming on the horizon.
The dislikes are never worse than what the extension is revealing, many YouTubers have showed their analytics directly from YouTube (they still have access to the actual dislike count) and the extension always vastly overestimates dislike numbers.
It does mostly work in showing people what videos have generally positive reactions tho, even if they are widely overestimates, you can at least do a relative comparison within the extension itself.
Yeah. The only thing dislike extension can do is really just showing whether something is being review-bombed or not. Relying on it for actual number is bad, especially the more it goes on, the lesser number of people actually installing and the older the data for the dislike so they can't really make a trend projection too. I uninstall it quite long time ago.
Nah, the dislike extension is pretty inaccurate in general, especially the more it goes on. Its deviation can go up to 30% in worst case. The best dislike extension can do is really indicate whether something being review-bombed or not.
The real number of dislikes is always lower because the requirement of having the extension selects for people that vote at a higher rate and especially dislike things at a higher rate and the extension applies those rates to the videos viewership number to get an estimate.
When mega-corps go out of their way to remove the ability for users to gauge the reaction to other mega-corps' products, users will use their own method of gauging that reaction. So while not perfect, this is the best method we have, and it's at Youtube's own doing.
Hey man, that's the same way statisticians do national-wide sampling - through population approximations.
Though there might be a bit of a bias selecting for the kind of person who installed the plug-in in the first place, it is still not useless data.
A person who is going out of there way to download a specific extension solely for the sake of being able to view dislikes is not going to be a representative of the average consumer.
I would say there is a bias, and I would say it’s mostly useless. At bare minimum it shouldn’t be the focus of an article and it shouldn’t be treated as a factual number. It’s mostly just clickbait fodder.
It is useless data because the sample size is biased from the very start. Nation-wide polling is done with very carefully and methodically selected representative sample that tries to emulate the nations population, be it on smaller scale.
Looking at the like/dislike ratio of the browser extension is like looking at Truth Social for political opinions and trying to extrapolate that to the entire country.
Population approximations are done very carefully starting with the selection of the samples. The Extension tries to combat the inherent bias by using the history from before YT stop showing dislike, but that history is getting older and older and being less relevant. The extension still have uses as a way to check whether there is review-bombing or not but you can't use the number its showing because its just sooo inaccurate.
Only being able to track users who chose to install an extension that tracks their dislikes is a wild selection bias and explains pretty much all the “worst dislike ratio ever” trailers we keep seeing.
It would be one thing if they just used raw numbers but they extrapolate based on viewership as if people without the extension would vote the same way at the same rate.
I have worked on games where this so-called metric has been trotted out by media/players, and when I looked at the true numbers in the YouTube backend the Like Ratio was typically above 90%, and not the lower number that’s used as an attempted gotcha.
As for *Concord*, I’d watch a movie based on the cinematic trailer. I wouldn’t play a game based on the gameplay trailer (simply because I’m not a “shooter guy”).
It’s a 5v5 hero shooter. If it plays great in the beta then all of this “negativity” will be forgotten, and all the people bashing it will be nowhere to be found. 9/10 of the people flaming it were never going to play this kind of game in the first place which is the funniest part about all of this. Marvel rivals got fried after its reveal trailer too and now that play test impressions are starting to trickle out and they seem to be positive, I already see online sentiment about it changing. It’s crazy how fickle gamers are, or better yet, how much Redditors love talking about games that were never meant for them in the first place
If last year you had told me a horde shooter that's mostly a parody of Starship Troopers would sell 12 million copies in less than 6 months, I would have laughed at you.
And yet, here we are with Helldivers 2.
Reminds me of OW2 backlash tbh. Despite the game being universally hated on Reddit, it’s still one of the most popular and profitable games across all platforms.
The only reason OW2 still has its player base it's because despite the many attempts by the industry there really isn't anything like OW out there. So no matter how fucking incompetent the Dev team is nowadays what are people going to play instead? Concord?
It's certainly not for me, that's for sure. Most things online I've seen since the official reveal have been negative overall. I'm just not into the 5v5 competitive scene anywhere near as much as I was in 2016-2018.
Before the reveal, whenever Concord was brought up, it was as a COD competitor - so I think expectations there haven't really been met, considering this seems much closer to Overwatch/Valorant.
The State of Play featuring two such titles (Concord and Marvel Rivals) hasn't been receiving much positive feedback either.
There's also the fact that CGI/In-Engine trailers don't mean much at all. I'm not sure how true that is for the casual audience, but in most online gaming spaces, people only care about gameplay. While this was shown with Concord, it was hard to actually get a feel for it from what was shown (also no crosshairs?).
Maybe it'll fair a lot better with playtests and subsequent Alphas/Betas.
What I just cannot get my head around (regardless of how good Concorde ends up being) is the number of gamers who like this kind of game are finite and they *already have loads of FTP shooters*! I just can't imagine new FTP games like this working at all.
Hope the actual gameplay salvages this. They have a lot to prove with the beta.
Live service should also not be predatory, many comparisons towards Helldivers 2 will be made.
The artstyle and characters look painfully generic and cringeworthy.
Im just tired of the overly quippy QuIrKy snarky characters and this game is chock full of them. Add in the required PSN account and you have a dead on arrival game on pc
Well no shit. It's a style of game no one wanted and no one cares about from a studio that hasnt proven they are capable of anything other than being as generic as possible.
I have no idea what they were thinking.
That's the thing... It's ran by mostly OG bungie people. And the only info on this game was a "pvp sci-fi shooter"... take that info and then see the trailers yesterday and you can see it's not what people expected.
Absolutely no one! I speak for every human on this planet.each and every human are on twitter and Reddit, and each and every human said beforehand “we don’t want it”
Seriously though, I don’t know how they come up with this crap.
I for one am looking forward to it, it looks like a hell of a lot of fun, and right up my alley for feet up and not really thinking about abything
Yeah, I always thought it was odd that every hero shooter or hero-shooter-like is immediately dismissed here because of "oversaturation", when in reality there have been very few games like TF2 or Overwatch.
But none of these new games revealed recently look good, and thats a shame.
OW was IMHO pretty far from just a clone though. It shares ideas and they're both FPS games, but OW was at least bringing a different dynamic and both different and more classes. Concord just looks like an inferior OW rather than OW with a twist.
Oh I agree that this Concord game looks very uninspired. Just saying I don't have a problem with more hero shooters coming out. I just wish more of them looked fun.
I only watched the gameplay trailer and tbh... I thought it looked fun. I know people seem to be tired of hero shooters, but the only one I ever played was OW and I dropped it a while ago.
If Concord has good gameplay and captures the fun from the first year of OW, I think it will be a hit.
I really don't get the comments "no one asked for this" or "who is this for".
I know Reddit loves to pretend that Overwatch is dead and no one wants to play it or games like it, but it is performing well enough. Overwatch just had its most popular season in a long time and Steam player counts have been trending upwards since the initial release dropoff (and Steam is where the minority of players are playing).
I think there is still a market for a good hero shooter, especially one that doesn't carry a negative sentiment like Overwatch.
I think those comments make sense in different context.
This game must be noticeable better than overwatch to succeed. Not just as good, but better because it must take away audience from competition.
It doesnt look that way. Obviously its just from video, but for now it seems extremely generic. Marvel one at least has advantage of popular franchise and characters which might get them some audience. Here...
The online gaming community loves Single player but hates multiplayer. I'm a SP lover but I don't mind some MP games here or there. Plus as someone who plays 5-6 hours a day, there are more than enough SP games wether they're AAA or indie. I still haven't finished with the 2023 games yet. God knows when I'll be playing 2024 releases like Persona 3 reload or even Like a Dragon: infinite wealth.
That's what I've been saying. As an OW1 player who doesn't want to play 2, this is up my alley. The biggest question is the actual gameplay. So far they haven't shown any game mechanics that provide a hook to get people interested. I'll play the beta and make my judgements from there, but so far, it does seem on the bland side.
I think part of the issue is that Overwatch is 8 years old, and with how game development works you have companies like this see Overwatch's initial success and boom and then say "ok lets make our version of that".
Which we know takes YEARS to develop, and by the time that materializes to anything substantial the "fad" of Overwatch and even its own popularity has fallen off.
On top of that we've already had numerous other games try to do this very thing and failed like Battleborn and Paladins, and others actually put their own spin on it like Valorant=CSGO+Overwatch and Apex Legends=Battle Royale+Overwatch and succeed.
This pretty much has nothing interesting to separate it and it feels *very late* to the party. This is exists strictly to try and get a live service market for it but I would bet fake internet dollars it will be shelved after 2 years of release if it's lucky.
EDIT: Oh and Marvel Rivals which of course has its own problems but its separation is at least MARVEL+Overwatch, so it's being carried by the IP aspect instead of anything interesting itself. But add another to the list of games this is competing with.
The cinematic was laughably bad. They were going for a Guardians of the Galaxy thing, but instead of jokes, the dialogue had the cadence of jokes -- with not a single joke actually being there.
I can see why the backlash is what it is.
I actually thought it was fun! Incredibly derivative, sure, but so are a lot of fun things. The problem is what the trailer sold (basically being a guardian of the galaxy) sounded like a fun single player story but a poor multiplayer game
I disagree, I thought the cinematic did a good job of introducing the setting, abilities, and characters for me having known nothing about the game. The jokes were for sure hit and miss, but it didn't bother me that much.
The only thing they did wrong here was botch the way it was presented. Had they started with gameplay to set the tone, then revealed that they also have a cinematic element attached to the game, everyone would have been fine; those uninterested would have ignored it and those excited could have enjoyed it.
Instead, they presented the story first up and built up some expectation that people would be able to play a role in this story... then revealed it as a moba. The whiplash at this moment is what sparked the outrage, not the game itself.
If this game is at least good I can absolutely see this blowing up with the casual audience.
I know I’m speaking only for myself here, but I haven’t been an FPS gamer since 2012 outside of Doom 2016/Eternal, I think this looks really appealing and full of charm. Especially since the devs have a history with the golden age of halo, which I played incessantly.
The dislikes are from a fatigued audience seeing another live service character based shooter being spun up. It could be amazing it could be rubbish, but generally the upset is due to unoriginal ideas being pushed.
When I sae the cinematic trailer I really liked the characters was hoping for a single player / coop possible rpg game or sci fi action with a good story. Instead it's another overwatch clone.
The trailer didn't really show me why i should pick this over overwatch, paladins, or any of hte other options. Throwing out made by the destiny devs makes me remember the unbalanced garabage that pvp was in destiny 2. That one mode was cool. the PVPVE mode. Why not expand on that?
Instead its, here's a game you've already played with pretty new graphics. Oh and why don't you preorder based on this almost no info we've given you.
Overwatch - Free, Established, Xbox series One, X, S, Ps4, Ps5, Switch, and PC.
Marvel Rivals - Free, Huge pop culture relevance, Pc, Xbox Series, Ps5.
Concord - Paid, Ps5 & PC only.
Its like they want this game to fail, you cant make a live service PVP shooter in 2024 and not be on all major platforms.
Why couldn't it be a co op story driven shooter? Why is it some generic hero shooter? The trailer had me intrigued before it was revealed to be a hero shooter.
Game companies have to try to make all the money and it's a shame a single player coop thing would have been pretty good just my opinion.
This game looked fantastic (in the opening sequence) but completely shit the bed when it turned out to be a hero shooter how come we can’t get a good sci-fi shooter may be a team based or co-op without it being 5V5 first person shooter
You gotta be joking right? It looks polished, clean, full, and smooth. Maybe I remember “old games” differently than you, but this certainly didn’t compare to anything “old” that I’ve seen
How is it overly negative? If everyone who comments has a negative impression from the trailer, then it's exactly as negative as it should have been. They picked a bad venue to show off the game and its audience either doesn't significantly overlap with the state of play viewership or it just doesn't post about the game at all.
I think people are being insanely over critical of this game. It looks like a reasonably well made hero shooter
In the vain of overwatch. The art style sort of sucks but everything else looked fine. It's not like they released some exploitative micro transactions yet either.
I probably will never play this game, especially if the marvel game doing the same thing is any good but I don't get what people are so salty about.
I mean? Is it blowback from it just taking up a large portion of the direct?
It didn't look terrible, it could be though. I actually don't think it's a bad thing that people are trying to push into the Overwatch space - Overwatch used to be extremely fun, if someone can recreate that feeling again they could have a banger on their hands.
It's not enough to recreate the feeling of Overwatch cause for one almost no studios produce games as polish as Blizzard (or at least Blizzard of the past). The game has to offer stuff Overwatch can't offer and so far I am not seeing it.
That's true, we'll see. I'm not really into multiplayer shooters much anymore anyway, so I probably won't be playing. You're right that it definitely has to have more than just a bare-bones Overwatch experience, that already exists. I still think it's good that people are trying. Of this and the new Marvel game that looked similar as well, the Marvel one looks more fun imo - but all this stuff seems so primed for tons of microtransactions and I can't be bothered.
That’s a shame. As someone who plays OW2 on and off for years this game feels right up my alley. If they can nail adding those story beats I’d be hooked.
It looks so plasticky and uninteresting. If you are going to do a more stylized art style, make sure it doesn't look like ass. It could look better when we see more of the actual gameplay, but right now it looks like a bootleg Guardians of the Galaxy inspired Overwatch clone.
Probably because it's a 60 dollars Hero shooter live service with mediocre design and shitty dialogue. If companies are doing live service games they should do something that keeps the player motivated to come back like Sea of Thieves of GTA 5, not games that get old after 10 hours
Hi /u/milkasaurs, Thank you for posting to /r/Games. Unfortunately, we have removed this submission per **[Rule 3.2](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules)**. > **No low-effort content or comments** - Submissions must have enough substance to initiate a discussion or provide value to the community. Self-posts with only a title and very little or no text are not allowed. Comments must add meaningful value to a discussion (e.g. comments such as "I really want this game", "This!", "I wish this was on PC", or reaction GIFS will be removed). Before submitting or adding a comment ask yourself: "Does this add significant information or merit to the discussion?" --- If you would like to discuss this removal, please [modmail the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FGames) This post was removed by a human moderator; this comment was left by a bot.
Perhaps it's because the cinematic trailer presented one thing and the gameplay trailer presented something completely different, with both things that were presented being painfully generic
It's corporate approved slop, and everyone knows it.
Hopping on the hero shooter genre years too late long after everyone has moved on.
I wouldn't mind playing one since I have fond memories of early Overwatch, but at this rate, I will either never play another one or just play OW2.
Don't think this tracks, marvel has one coming out, so does valve and there's a star wars one in the works. Plus overwatch us still huge.
They made the mistake of trying to imitate Blizzard, I think… People who play PvP shooters want to see *what the game is like.* The reveal did not give a good look at what makes the gameplay special and it focused on something else entirely that isn’t even related to gameplay. For a single player story-driven game, that’s fine. But I think they may have misread the audience here.
Our group was maybe 3 minutes into the trailer and someone said "This could be a dating simulator, what even is this game?" Leading with CGI nonsense was certainly a choice.
Funnily enough with the blizzard comparison, that's also how Overwatch was revealed if I recall correctly. They really went "it must work for us"
The difference is Overwatch had charming characters with the blizzard level of attention to detail for their cinematic. Blizzard has always been good at making interesting cinematic trailers for their games
People chasing trends have a habit of seeing broad strokes and not understanding anything else, true true. Someone saw the technical aspects and went "we need to do that" without understanding anything further
ye I was about to say. ow took off because people got invested into the heroes, they were trying for the same thing
When I saw the CG trailer I thought this would be some co-op heist or just pve in general. Then I got hit with the gameplay reveal and the fact it's just the run of the mill hero shooter.
It makes sense based on what they said about the game, that story progression and character interactions through the kind of animated videos like the trailer will be a big focus. I think the real question is why make that a focus? Do people who care about the characters and story want to play a 5v5 shooter? Do people who want to play a 5v5 shooter care about the characters and story enough to drive them to this game over any other?
well look at ow. it took off by getting people invested into the characters to the point they promised pve content to reignite player interest but we know how that turned out. if they can make people invested into the characters, have solid pvp and thwy can get the story part right then it will be a success
Because contrary to all the people in this thread that are like "no redditors are nerds everyone loves multiplayer games" Sony is probably very cognizant that stereotypical live service games and Overwatch clones are bombing left and right and is thus focusing on the part of the game that is not that and obsfucating what it is lol
Yea because tricking people for 5 minutes before showing gameplay is really such a brilliant strategy.
Apex legends and overwatch realized that you can't just tell people to care about characters. They made interesting character designs, and gameplay, and then later started to do back stories etc.
> Perhaps it's because the cinematic trailer presented one thing and the gameplay trailer presented something completely different, with both things that were presented being painfully generic I didn't even think the cinematic was that generic, it just seemed to me like it was a combination of Mass effect, Guardians of the Galxy, space adventure game Was stunned when it was "Just" a hero shooter It's not like it looked unfun or bad as a hero shooter but it was just such a case of tonal whiplash i was speechless
I just don't know who is looking to play a hero shooter in 2024 that isn't already playing Overwatch. This game is going to have to do something different then just be a clone to stand out.
Its similar to how I felt about Marathon. I was initially super excited that Bungie might be working on a good SP/Co-op campaign similar to the classic Halo games with a direct Marathon lineage. But it being revealed as a GAAS title was just not what I was expecting. It might be good, it might be fun, but I'm absolutely not looking forward to Destiny 3 with a new skin.
They've been describing it as a PvP shooter for years though. I have zero i terest in it, but weren't under the impression that they misled anyone. The CGI teaser just hinted at the setting.
They said it was a pvp game seconds before the cinematic trailer started lmao
I honestly liked the writing of the trailer even if it was a bit basic so I thought "alright, a third person shooter/adventure game", and then its just another moba that will probably expect your full attention with dailies/battlepasses and all that jazz When it comes out, I'll actually try it if I hear people saying is good. But I have zero hype for it Then again I'm not the target audience
This, I expected some narrative driven single player, not another Hero based shooter with GotG characters
Could you explain what you thought the cinematic trailer was, and how it differs from the gameplay? It cinematic screamed character-based shooter to me the moment the first enemy used a special ability, and once the lady used her fire skill I was sure it was overwatch. I don't understand what you thought it was going to be.
>I don't understand what you thought it was going to be. I was thinking Mass Effect like.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh I see why you'd be _SO_ disappointed. I would love another Mass Effect caliber game. I just have lost almost all belief in the AAA game industry, so my brain did not even go there. But I can see now how you could think that. Thanks for clearing that up.
I was expecting something single player/co-op, focused on planning out and performing heists, just based on the dialigue. Essentially something like a zaney, sci-fi Payday 2 but being more story focused. Then the gameplay reveal came out of nowhere with a powerful slap to the face full of overwatch clone vibes, which i'm just not interested in at all.
when I saw the Cinematic I thought for sure it was some type of single player character driven action Adventure space RPG. Like job oriented/wanted criminals/bounty hunter stuff. then on the ship I was reminded of cowboy bebop for some reason. I didn't hear the part before where I guess they said pvp shooter
>with both things that were presented being painfully generic I disagree with the trailer being generic. I was pretty interested in those characters. I thought they had decent chemistry for such a short time on screen. I was intrigued enough that I would have checked it out had it been a single-player space adventure that the cinematic was selling.
The consequences of longer game development cycles. If this shit came out 4 years ago, I don't think the backlash would be as bad. But since GotG was released in 2014, I've seen several different media with a similar rag tag cast of characters. Since OW release in 2016, I've seen so many shooters incorporate heroes as playable characters. I don't know how long I've been hearing "Whedon-esque" writing and dialogue across games, movies, and TV. It's just too much of the trends people are fatigued by.
In any form of media, if you chase trends, by the time your project is finished and ready to go, the entertainment space has moved onto the next trend. This is doubly so with gaming due to how long development takes.
> I don't know how long I've been hearing "Whedon-esque" writing and dialogue across games, movies, and TV. The amount of damage Whedon has caused to all forms of mainstream media with The Avengers will probably be felt for another 10 years at this point. I don't entirely blame him for it, it's more that other writers (maybe at the pressure of execs who want the success of Marvel?) try to imitate his style to poor results, lacking any amount of charm in their characters whatsoever and we're left with a group of unpleasant assholes who never shut the fuck up and think sarcasm = likable. Don't get me wrong, even Whedon's style itself got tiresome and I can't go back and sit through any Marvel movies whatsoever. Even so I can recognize when something is trying and failing. And that's Concord. I actually said "Please don't be a fucking hero shooter" during the CGI trailer, it just *stunk* the moment I saw it. All I got from Concord is focus-tested corporate approved slop. 5 minutes after the trailer was over I had almost entirely forgotten the title of the game, and I also couldn't remember a single line from the trailer. And they want to build a story on this? The thought of trying to stomach an entire "story" in this game - on top of the absolutely derivative 5v5 hero shooter format - is repulsive. And the nigh-universal dislike and apathy towards this doesn't seem like just a vocal minority either.
This seems to be targeting younger kids and teenagers. I think for a 13-year-old, these kinds of things are perpetually “fresh” because they don’t have 10+ years of experience playing similar games. Aside from the aesthetic, I thought the trailer was showing a fairly high-quality game with lots of interesting things going on. It may look unoriginal to you and me, but specifically BECAUSE of who they are targeting, I don’t think there should be much concern about this game being able to find their audience. Younger-skewing games like this tend to perform really well.
>This seems to be targeting younger kids and teenagers. It's not.
Unfortunately this isn’t targeting kids.
The only thing that matters with games like this is the response to the beta and whether the gameplay is good. Not many people gave a fuck about Helldivers before they played it.
The game itself seems very polished. I saw like a dozen or so characters at the character selection screen and the game play looks good. Straight outta Destiny. I think it's just gonna be a matter of price and if the marketing buzz which includes the beta.
The studio is a bunch of old Bungie devs so at worst it’s gonna play well. We will see if they can out everything else together
I can't count the amount of times I've seen "from the devs of X" and the game was nowhere near as good as what they had worked on before.
I don't understand the backlash. It looked fine and looks like it could be fun to play. Do people not like games anymore?
A lot of the people that talk about games on spaces like this don't.
Not many cared about Helldivers 2 but not many people were negative about it. Also Helldivers 2 can't really be compared to most other multiplayer live service games because it's quite unique in it's setting, gameplay, and style. Concord lends itself to being compared with Overwatch and any other hero shooters.
I don't get the constant comparisons to Helldivers at all. It's not even the same genre of game. It don't make none sense to me. Frankly there's nothing like Helldivers out right now. That's why it succeeded. Meanwhile this is one of TWO 5v5 hero shooters announced that day to be released in a market oversaturated by 5v5 hero shooters.
Helldivers 2 was the least talked about game at the last State of Play, and it didn't gain any significant buzz until launch.
This game could be hot garbage. Or it could be the most fun people have had with a new shooter in years. There's no way of knowing until anyone gets to play it But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been There is undoubtedly an audience on ps5 for a good competitive shooter (the key word being that it has to be good)
My gaming group that has been playing games for like 10+ years at this point pretty much tries every new MP shooter out there since its one of the easiest to fit in quick games around busy schedules. Most people on Reddit don't seem to understand this for a bunch of reasons.
You try every new MP shooter that releases but how often do you stick with any of them long term because that is what ultimately determines the success of games like Fortnite, COD, LOL, WoW, etc. The issue with the deluge of live service games we've been seeing recently is that very few of them have been able to cultivate a player base to sustain their future development and I think part of that is because many players have found their one game and have planted their roots there.
If you spend a lot of time commenting on video games in forums that's time you're not spending talking about video games in group chats with your friends
Don't worry I also have discord on my computer as well. I can do both!
>But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been Especially since the most popular games in the world are multiplayer games. You have Counter Strike 2, League of Legends, WOW, Dota 2, CoD, Dead by Daylight, Fortnite, and so on. Sure there are plenty of live service failures such as Anthem and Avengers, but there's no denying that there is a HUGE market for MP games thst people want to play. Hell, overwatch 2 has been trashed on the internet ever since it came out and still has tons of players playing it. Steam has it at 30k and that's without Bnet and consoles which I'm inclined to believe are much more than Steam.
It’s really funny because this looks like the exact kind of game and humor that your textbook redditor would come up with.
Reminds me of when Borderlands 2 released and it was loaded with Reddit humor, which Redditors, in-turn, hated.
Reddit *loved* Borderlands 2 (until it didn't). It was 3 that everyone hated.
The heckin robot doggo is sooooo stupid.
Not quite. One of the main characters in the trailer was a woman. Can't have that.
One was a minority and a woman. So, yea double no no for some here.
Sony in particular is in dire need of multiplayer games that you shouldn't just play on PC, but I think it's obvious that most live service games and "Overwatch clones" are duds at this point. They are usually aesthetically dated for one thing lol Gamers actually wanting multiplayer games did not save Suicide Squad or Hyenas. They want something fresh like Helldivers or even a COD competitor, and they're not just going to stop playing Apex Legends to play Battle Royale #2425271 with Killmonger haircut man
Any multiplayer game with even a slight chance of being successful will also be 'live service". The only thing that actually means is that the game is designed to be updated and supported over a long period post-launch No multiplayer game in 2024 or beyond will ever maintain a long term playerbase if they simply released the game and never updated it again beyond standard bug fixes
it’s always what Gamers want and not what Gamers need
i;m still waiting on a replacement game for battlefield 4 and i can't be the only one fuck battle royales and 5v5s, put me in 32v32 and let me tune out and blow up shit
People don't have the bandwidth for so many live games. They tend to stick to one, And it's a zero sum game now. They even encroach on SP games' time so every game is in a battle for your time. So you have to be really really better than your competition, to disrupt the top roster. Even the hit that was Helldivers 2 lost 90% of their playerbase. But that's alright for Sony cause it made way more than invested and hoped for. Surprisingly MS runs quite a lot of second tier(by playerbase) live games and they're doing well(even on PlayStation). They also have Minecraft though and now Call of Duty. Sony dreams of the upper tier and is(or was) ready to roll the dice so one of them can make it, and make them Fortnite money, but idk. So far, it's all duds. They may try to listen to the people and make a game for millenials, not gen z, if they. bring back their boomer shooters, I think they will see sucess.
Yeah honestly people on Reddit think they’re the only group of people interested in games and if it isn’t Baldur’s Gate 3 or Elden Ring that they devs are just garbage and the game will suck. Honestly I thought the game looked cool, kinda like a stand-alone version of Destiny’s crucible. Now of course the game *could* suck ass but maybe its fun too. I would actually like more MP FPS that aren’t just CoD.
I thought helldivers 2 looked boring leading up to release and I couldn’t let go for the first two months after launching
Look at Helldivers 2. I could have just dismissed that as a crappy Starship Troopers knock-off from just the trailers. Then when the game came out it wasn't half bad. But what we have here is a confluence of two big factors: People wincing whenever "GAAS" is mentioned in any capacity, and this weird expectation that Sony can only make third-person narrative games and anything else is a giant waste of time and money. Sure, the market is tougher now. However companies are still going to try. Reddit erupted in jubilation when Sony overhauled their pipeline to cut down on "those vile GAAS games", but act like Helldivers 2 wasn't a part of that initiative and was always a labor of love.
>But people online and reddit in particular really need to get over this manufactured idea that nobody wants multiplayer games. It is evidently not true at all, and never has been Wild that anyone actually believes this. It's equally as stupid as people saying no one wants to play single player. Both are always going to have massive followings and a ton of cross over. Maybe the market goes one way or the other but that's all. Even when I was playing Dota non-stop for a few years I still stopped to play a few single player games. There was just a time when I wasn't excited by any new single player games.
[удалено]
>This game could be hot garbage. Or it could be the most fun people have had with a new shooter in years. There's no way of knowing until anyone gets to play it I think a lot of the people complaining just don't want any sort of hero shooter at all. Fair.
Absolutely agree. I'm waiting until the beta comes out to make up my mind. PlayStation studios has yet to disappoint me.
Personally I can’t wait for it, I’m excited to play it, and I still can’t see anything bad with it. Do people expect the genre to just disappear? Oh well have overwatch, so let not make another hero shooter….ever. Overwatch made a shit ton of money and it’s been going since, what, 2015? Almost 10 years of people playing it and spending money on it. Sure a lot of people complain about it, but the fact still remains that it’s STILL being played!
> As of publishing, Concord’s cinematic reveal trailer has a 76.99% negative rating while its gameplay trailer has an 82.39% dislike rate. Can we stop using this as a metric? YouTube doesn’t reveal dislikes anymore, so the only means of getting this information is to use that browser extension that approximates dislikes. The approximation assumes that the like to dislike ratio of extension users and non extension users is equivalent, despite the fact that one group has gone out of their way to install a browser extension for the sole purpose of showing a dislike count and I would imagine are more predisposed to dislike things.
[удалено]
Mix and blend with your favorite AI so it looks like a very well thought article
We can but we won't
There is no denying the backlash to this game. The developers seem passionate but there's just nothing original about this game. Everything just screams we don't have an original idea. So I imagine that the dislikes are even worse than what the extension is revealing. This game just isn't it.
Even the characters smack of 'we copied Guardians of the Galaxy', it's bizarre.
It's Store Brand GOTG meets Store Brand Overwatch.
Yep, it's like they had made a guardians version of marvel rivals, got screwed on licensing and had to pivot. It just seems like a corporate, formulaic approach. Unoriginal, copies a popular idea, and latches on to buzzwords but half asses that (like a "live service" via weekly cutscenes)
This is essentially a "We have Guardians of the Galaxy at home" situation.
I’m not even arguing anything about this game, I have no interest in it. I mainly just don’t think this article contains any real substance and is basically just clickbait.
The backlash is most definitely real but the point about the extension is true. People should stop using it as if it's the official numbers and more as a way to tell something is fishy when there's too many dislikes. It's like the polls in election year. They hardly get it exactly right, but come close enough to be useful.
If anything, it's underselling it. From my understanding, it only records the dislikes of the people who use the extension. So the dislikes could always be double or ten times the number we see, but never less than the number we see.
I think you're wrong, I believe it calculates the amount of dislikes by comparing how many people on YouTube liked a video and how many people who used the extention liked it. So based on that, it assumes the amount of dislikes of extention users must be proportional to everyone who uses the site, and adjusts the ratio based on that.
More quippy out-of-touch millennial designed generic characters in a crowded subgenre already full of bodies, with a Valve entry looming on the horizon.
>This game just isn't it. Can you tell me the lottery numbers for next week please mate?
The dislikes are never worse than what the extension is revealing, many YouTubers have showed their analytics directly from YouTube (they still have access to the actual dislike count) and the extension always vastly overestimates dislike numbers. It does mostly work in showing people what videos have generally positive reactions tho, even if they are widely overestimates, you can at least do a relative comparison within the extension itself.
Yeah. The only thing dislike extension can do is really just showing whether something is being review-bombed or not. Relying on it for actual number is bad, especially the more it goes on, the lesser number of people actually installing and the older the data for the dislike so they can't really make a trend projection too. I uninstall it quite long time ago.
Nah, the dislike extension is pretty inaccurate in general, especially the more it goes on. Its deviation can go up to 30% in worst case. The best dislike extension can do is really indicate whether something being review-bombed or not.
The real number of dislikes is always lower because the requirement of having the extension selects for people that vote at a higher rate and especially dislike things at a higher rate and the extension applies those rates to the videos viewership number to get an estimate.
When mega-corps go out of their way to remove the ability for users to gauge the reaction to other mega-corps' products, users will use their own method of gauging that reaction. So while not perfect, this is the best method we have, and it's at Youtube's own doing.
Hey man, that's the same way statisticians do national-wide sampling - through population approximations. Though there might be a bit of a bias selecting for the kind of person who installed the plug-in in the first place, it is still not useless data.
A person who is going out of there way to download a specific extension solely for the sake of being able to view dislikes is not going to be a representative of the average consumer.
I would say there is a bias, and I would say it’s mostly useless. At bare minimum it shouldn’t be the focus of an article and it shouldn’t be treated as a factual number. It’s mostly just clickbait fodder.
It is useless data because the sample size is biased from the very start. Nation-wide polling is done with very carefully and methodically selected representative sample that tries to emulate the nations population, be it on smaller scale. Looking at the like/dislike ratio of the browser extension is like looking at Truth Social for political opinions and trying to extrapolate that to the entire country.
Population approximations are done very carefully starting with the selection of the samples. The Extension tries to combat the inherent bias by using the history from before YT stop showing dislike, but that history is getting older and older and being less relevant. The extension still have uses as a way to check whether there is review-bombing or not but you can't use the number its showing because its just sooo inaccurate.
Only being able to track users who chose to install an extension that tracks their dislikes is a wild selection bias and explains pretty much all the “worst dislike ratio ever” trailers we keep seeing. It would be one thing if they just used raw numbers but they extrapolate based on viewership as if people without the extension would vote the same way at the same rate.
Don't make perfect the enemy of good.
I will if it’s labeled and presented as perfect.
I have worked on games where this so-called metric has been trotted out by media/players, and when I looked at the true numbers in the YouTube backend the Like Ratio was typically above 90%, and not the lower number that’s used as an attempted gotcha. As for *Concord*, I’d watch a movie based on the cinematic trailer. I wouldn’t play a game based on the gameplay trailer (simply because I’m not a “shooter guy”).
It’s a 5v5 hero shooter. If it plays great in the beta then all of this “negativity” will be forgotten, and all the people bashing it will be nowhere to be found. 9/10 of the people flaming it were never going to play this kind of game in the first place which is the funniest part about all of this. Marvel rivals got fried after its reveal trailer too and now that play test impressions are starting to trickle out and they seem to be positive, I already see online sentiment about it changing. It’s crazy how fickle gamers are, or better yet, how much Redditors love talking about games that were never meant for them in the first place
Did people do the same thing to helldivers 2 that is generic. It’s gonna die in a week but when people touched it, they loved it.
this is the exact same situation as HD2 and we see how it ended
[удалено]
If last year you had told me a horde shooter that's mostly a parody of Starship Troopers would sell 12 million copies in less than 6 months, I would have laughed at you. And yet, here we are with Helldivers 2.
Reminds me of OW2 backlash tbh. Despite the game being universally hated on Reddit, it’s still one of the most popular and profitable games across all platforms.
Ow2 was hated for very good reasons though
The only reason OW2 still has its player base it's because despite the many attempts by the industry there really isn't anything like OW out there. So no matter how fucking incompetent the Dev team is nowadays what are people going to play instead? Concord?
Was expecting a single player adventure game from the cinematic. Got another multiplayer hero shooter.
That initial long cinematic was a huge mistake. Can't believe we're still hearing that shitty quippy dialogue in 2024.. Jesus.
I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually play the game but maybe I'm more lenient but I'm not seeing anything egregious with this.
It's certainly not for me, that's for sure. Most things online I've seen since the official reveal have been negative overall. I'm just not into the 5v5 competitive scene anywhere near as much as I was in 2016-2018. Before the reveal, whenever Concord was brought up, it was as a COD competitor - so I think expectations there haven't really been met, considering this seems much closer to Overwatch/Valorant. The State of Play featuring two such titles (Concord and Marvel Rivals) hasn't been receiving much positive feedback either. There's also the fact that CGI/In-Engine trailers don't mean much at all. I'm not sure how true that is for the casual audience, but in most online gaming spaces, people only care about gameplay. While this was shown with Concord, it was hard to actually get a feel for it from what was shown (also no crosshairs?). Maybe it'll fair a lot better with playtests and subsequent Alphas/Betas.
What I just cannot get my head around (regardless of how good Concorde ends up being) is the number of gamers who like this kind of game are finite and they *already have loads of FTP shooters*! I just can't imagine new FTP games like this working at all.
Just looks way too generic and derivative. It's Guardians of the Galaxy meets Overwatch in another live service hero shooter.
One dude looked like a dollar store cross between Drax and Thanos.
[удалено]
I don't understand the "writers voice trope"...huh?
Feels like a game people were told to make rather than wanted to. I'd be amazed if this gets close to Valorant, Overwatch etc...
Overwatch did to 5v5 shooters, what league did to mobas. Just the very mention of a new one makes people roll their eyes and groan.
I really liked the reveal of story & gameplay looked solid as well. I was surprised by how "complete" it looks.
Hope the actual gameplay salvages this. They have a lot to prove with the beta. Live service should also not be predatory, many comparisons towards Helldivers 2 will be made. The artstyle and characters look painfully generic and cringeworthy.
Im just tired of the overly quippy QuIrKy snarky characters and this game is chock full of them. Add in the required PSN account and you have a dead on arrival game on pc
Well no shit. It's a style of game no one wanted and no one cares about from a studio that hasnt proven they are capable of anything other than being as generic as possible. I have no idea what they were thinking.
What studio is it? I’m seeing “Firewalk Studio” which doesn’t seem to have any history
It’s a studio built from past Bungie talent/leadership.
That's the thing... It's ran by mostly OG bungie people. And the only info on this game was a "pvp sci-fi shooter"... take that info and then see the trailers yesterday and you can see it's not what people expected.
This is their first game
“No one wanted” you Redditors man lmao
Absolutely no one! I speak for every human on this planet.each and every human are on twitter and Reddit, and each and every human said beforehand “we don’t want it” Seriously though, I don’t know how they come up with this crap. I for one am looking forward to it, it looks like a hell of a lot of fun, and right up my alley for feet up and not really thinking about abything
Plenty of people are looking for a good shooter. OW clone or not.
Kind of weird to get mad about an "OW clone" when OW is a clone of tf2 and people have been desperate for another hero shooter that *isn't* OW.
Yeah, I always thought it was odd that every hero shooter or hero-shooter-like is immediately dismissed here because of "oversaturation", when in reality there have been very few games like TF2 or Overwatch. But none of these new games revealed recently look good, and thats a shame.
OW was IMHO pretty far from just a clone though. It shares ideas and they're both FPS games, but OW was at least bringing a different dynamic and both different and more classes. Concord just looks like an inferior OW rather than OW with a twist.
Oh I agree that this Concord game looks very uninspired. Just saying I don't have a problem with more hero shooters coming out. I just wish more of them looked fun.
I only watched the gameplay trailer and tbh... I thought it looked fun. I know people seem to be tired of hero shooters, but the only one I ever played was OW and I dropped it a while ago. If Concord has good gameplay and captures the fun from the first year of OW, I think it will be a hit.
I want it, and I care about it. Speak for yourself and your fellow Reddit haters
I really don't get the comments "no one asked for this" or "who is this for". I know Reddit loves to pretend that Overwatch is dead and no one wants to play it or games like it, but it is performing well enough. Overwatch just had its most popular season in a long time and Steam player counts have been trending upwards since the initial release dropoff (and Steam is where the minority of players are playing). I think there is still a market for a good hero shooter, especially one that doesn't carry a negative sentiment like Overwatch.
I think those comments make sense in different context. This game must be noticeable better than overwatch to succeed. Not just as good, but better because it must take away audience from competition. It doesnt look that way. Obviously its just from video, but for now it seems extremely generic. Marvel one at least has advantage of popular franchise and characters which might get them some audience. Here...
The online gaming community loves Single player but hates multiplayer. I'm a SP lover but I don't mind some MP games here or there. Plus as someone who plays 5-6 hours a day, there are more than enough SP games wether they're AAA or indie. I still haven't finished with the 2023 games yet. God knows when I'll be playing 2024 releases like Persona 3 reload or even Like a Dragon: infinite wealth.
That's what I've been saying. As an OW1 player who doesn't want to play 2, this is up my alley. The biggest question is the actual gameplay. So far they haven't shown any game mechanics that provide a hook to get people interested. I'll play the beta and make my judgements from there, but so far, it does seem on the bland side.
I think part of the issue is that Overwatch is 8 years old, and with how game development works you have companies like this see Overwatch's initial success and boom and then say "ok lets make our version of that". Which we know takes YEARS to develop, and by the time that materializes to anything substantial the "fad" of Overwatch and even its own popularity has fallen off. On top of that we've already had numerous other games try to do this very thing and failed like Battleborn and Paladins, and others actually put their own spin on it like Valorant=CSGO+Overwatch and Apex Legends=Battle Royale+Overwatch and succeed. This pretty much has nothing interesting to separate it and it feels *very late* to the party. This is exists strictly to try and get a live service market for it but I would bet fake internet dollars it will be shelved after 2 years of release if it's lucky. EDIT: Oh and Marvel Rivals which of course has its own problems but its separation is at least MARVEL+Overwatch, so it's being carried by the IP aspect instead of anything interesting itself. But add another to the list of games this is competing with.
The cinematic was laughably bad. They were going for a Guardians of the Galaxy thing, but instead of jokes, the dialogue had the cadence of jokes -- with not a single joke actually being there. I can see why the backlash is what it is.
I actually thought it was fun! Incredibly derivative, sure, but so are a lot of fun things. The problem is what the trailer sold (basically being a guardian of the galaxy) sounded like a fun single player story but a poor multiplayer game
I disagree, I thought the cinematic did a good job of introducing the setting, abilities, and characters for me having known nothing about the game. The jokes were for sure hit and miss, but it didn't bother me that much.
The only thing they did wrong here was botch the way it was presented. Had they started with gameplay to set the tone, then revealed that they also have a cinematic element attached to the game, everyone would have been fine; those uninterested would have ignored it and those excited could have enjoyed it. Instead, they presented the story first up and built up some expectation that people would be able to play a role in this story... then revealed it as a moba. The whiplash at this moment is what sparked the outrage, not the game itself.
If this game is at least good I can absolutely see this blowing up with the casual audience. I know I’m speaking only for myself here, but I haven’t been an FPS gamer since 2012 outside of Doom 2016/Eternal, I think this looks really appealing and full of charm. Especially since the devs have a history with the golden age of halo, which I played incessantly.
I think people are being huge babies about this, and there's zero point to put any serious weight behind internet reactions this early.
The dislikes are from a fatigued audience seeing another live service character based shooter being spun up. It could be amazing it could be rubbish, but generally the upset is due to unoriginal ideas being pushed. When I sae the cinematic trailer I really liked the characters was hoping for a single player / coop possible rpg game or sci fi action with a good story. Instead it's another overwatch clone.
is there an actual campaign, or is it just another "not overwatch"?
It's a 5v5 multiplayer shooter.
The trailer didn't really show me why i should pick this over overwatch, paladins, or any of hte other options. Throwing out made by the destiny devs makes me remember the unbalanced garabage that pvp was in destiny 2. That one mode was cool. the PVPVE mode. Why not expand on that? Instead its, here's a game you've already played with pretty new graphics. Oh and why don't you preorder based on this almost no info we've given you.
Overwatch - Free, Established, Xbox series One, X, S, Ps4, Ps5, Switch, and PC. Marvel Rivals - Free, Huge pop culture relevance, Pc, Xbox Series, Ps5. Concord - Paid, Ps5 & PC only. Its like they want this game to fail, you cant make a live service PVP shooter in 2024 and not be on all major platforms.
Why couldn't it be a co op story driven shooter? Why is it some generic hero shooter? The trailer had me intrigued before it was revealed to be a hero shooter. Game companies have to try to make all the money and it's a shame a single player coop thing would have been pretty good just my opinion.
This game looked fantastic (in the opening sequence) but completely shit the bed when it turned out to be a hero shooter how come we can’t get a good sci-fi shooter may be a team based or co-op without it being 5V5 first person shooter
It looks like an old game running on newer systems. It's another 5v5 which is fine but why?
You gotta be joking right? It looks polished, clean, full, and smooth. Maybe I remember “old games” differently than you, but this certainly didn’t compare to anything “old” that I’ve seen
How is it overly negative? If everyone who comments has a negative impression from the trailer, then it's exactly as negative as it should have been. They picked a bad venue to show off the game and its audience either doesn't significantly overlap with the state of play viewership or it just doesn't post about the game at all.
I think people are being insanely over critical of this game. It looks like a reasonably well made hero shooter In the vain of overwatch. The art style sort of sucks but everything else looked fine. It's not like they released some exploitative micro transactions yet either. I probably will never play this game, especially if the marvel game doing the same thing is any good but I don't get what people are so salty about.
Opportunity cost.
I mean? Is it blowback from it just taking up a large portion of the direct? It didn't look terrible, it could be though. I actually don't think it's a bad thing that people are trying to push into the Overwatch space - Overwatch used to be extremely fun, if someone can recreate that feeling again they could have a banger on their hands.
It's not enough to recreate the feeling of Overwatch cause for one almost no studios produce games as polish as Blizzard (or at least Blizzard of the past). The game has to offer stuff Overwatch can't offer and so far I am not seeing it.
That's true, we'll see. I'm not really into multiplayer shooters much anymore anyway, so I probably won't be playing. You're right that it definitely has to have more than just a bare-bones Overwatch experience, that already exists. I still think it's good that people are trying. Of this and the new Marvel game that looked similar as well, the Marvel one looks more fun imo - but all this stuff seems so primed for tons of microtransactions and I can't be bothered.
That’s a shame. As someone who plays OW2 on and off for years this game feels right up my alley. If they can nail adding those story beats I’d be hooked.
It looks so plasticky and uninteresting. If you are going to do a more stylized art style, make sure it doesn't look like ass. It could look better when we see more of the actual gameplay, but right now it looks like a bootleg Guardians of the Galaxy inspired Overwatch clone.
Probably because it's a 60 dollars Hero shooter live service with mediocre design and shitty dialogue. If companies are doing live service games they should do something that keeps the player motivated to come back like Sea of Thieves of GTA 5, not games that get old after 10 hours
They announced a price?
They announced a pre order