Cakeboxer
Member
Sony president reflects on why Concord failed | VGC
Hiroki Totoki discusses what went wrong and how PlayStation can learn from it…
www.videogameschronicle.com
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony president reflects on why Concord failed
- Thread starter Cakeboxer
- Start date
www.videogameschronicle.com
TheRedRiders
Member
cuz it was a bag of shite
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
“So for us, for our reflection, we probably need to have a lot of gates, including user testing or internal evaluation, and the timing of such gates. And then we need to bring them forward, and we should have done those gates much earlier than we did."
For the most part, I agree with most of the interview, even those of us who don't care about any of the culture war shit this thread will continue to war about, we didn't even get the try out the game based on their own messagining, it was like...
Oh you need to pay for the beta.
Oh sorry, its free now...
Too late its gone
lol
This never needed to be, this is a unknown team, you are charging a beta to play something that is a mystery to a lot of us and it didn't help that its marketing was so narrative focused, those of us who cared about the trailer, only did so cause we LIKE SINGLE PLAYER GAMES! lol I was like " oh wow, that looks cool"
ANNNNNNNND GAAS lol
Now those who did want some MP shooter, how many of them knew that is even what this was?
So longer marketing window as this is a new IP and the team is unknown, make the beta free and have it in waves to make corrections about the games design issues and the trailer must be focused on what the game actually is, ie make it understood day 1, its a multiplayer game and its trailer out of the gate should reflect that.
For the most part, I agree with most of the interview, even those of us who don't care about any of the culture war shit this thread will continue to war about, we didn't even get the try out the game based on their own messagining, it was like...
Oh you need to pay for the beta.
Oh sorry, its free now...
Too late its gone
lol
This never needed to be, this is a unknown team, you are charging a beta to play something that is a mystery to a lot of us and it didn't help that its marketing was so narrative focused, those of us who cared about the trailer, only did so cause we LIKE SINGLE PLAYER GAMES! lol I was like " oh wow, that looks cool"
ANNNNNNNND GAAS lol
Now those who did want some MP shooter, how many of them knew that is even what this was?
So longer marketing window as this is a new IP and the team is unknown, make the beta free and have it in waves to make corrections about the games design issues and the trailer must be focused on what the game actually is, ie make it understood day 1, its a multiplayer game and its trailer out of the gate should reflect that.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
There's literally nothing new there. Sony never stopped having single player games as their main focus even after starting to invest in live games. That has always been blown out of proportion in places like neogaf.
Let's hope they learned the right lessons though.
Robb
Gold Member
I know, that’s why I said reiterate.
VenomousCoffee
Member
Article doesn't say anything, that I saw. But that's not unexpected; the boss can't go out in public and just say "Hey, we made an historically bad product."
At the same time, I have no idea how they didn't see this coming a mile away internally. A live-service game with unappealing characters, released 'for pay,' into an extremely crowded marketplace with no pre-existing IP to help sell it? Yeah, no shit it bombed. (I should add that I'm aware of the 'this was the boss's pet project and no one was allowed to correct him' thing. Still baffles me.)
At the same time, I have no idea how they didn't see this coming a mile away internally. A live-service game with unappealing characters, released 'for pay,' into an extremely crowded marketplace with no pre-existing IP to help sell it? Yeah, no shit it bombed. (I should add that I'm aware of the 'this was the boss's pet project and no one was allowed to correct him' thing. Still baffles me.)
Angry_Megalodon
Banned
He can't state publicly what everyone can see with their own eyes.
But it would have been good if he referred to the ridiculous level of risk Sony took by acquiring an unproven studio. That's the thing a CEO should explain.
But it would have been good if he referred to the ridiculous level of risk Sony took by acquiring an unproven studio. That's the thing a CEO should explain.
Radical_3d
Member
LOL Totoki forced to say a bunch of lies while he’s thinking: “you’ll pay for this, Hulst…”
RagnarokIV
Battlebus imprisoning me \m/ >.< \m/
How's the professor nowadays?
They will never say this even if it's the case. What do you expect lol?
Accountability.
What's even worse, it sounds intentional.
sainraja
Member
I don’t believe it had strong marketing, though. I closely follow gaming, and I only discovered the release of Concord shortly before its launch. Perhaps the marketing campaign was planned for after the game’s release, as they worked on a controller (which looked quite good, actually); I don’t think it even had a dedicated State of Play showcase like Deathloop, for instance.
Radical_3d
Member
InterMusketeer
Member
Definitely. Unproven studio, new IP, supposedly super high budget, toxic work environment. Why did Sony think any of this was a good idea? The studio should've been tasked with remastering/remaking an older (MP) title to prove themselves before giving them unlimited funds to make "the professor's" dream project.
No but until it’s demanded or punished we aren’t getting back to a merit based game industry.
I actually don’t expect this big publishers to change. Unless they cease to exist.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
and for that, the deserve to fail forever
ChorizoPicozo
Member
killzone will be too "problematic" for them
Omnipunctual Godot
Gold Member
I just want a new Killzone in general. Guerilla doesn't like Killzone anymore and just wants to make Horizon games? Fine, give it to someone who does.
Hayriko
Member
They got weak knees to be a little problematic nowadays
Hayriko
Member
Couldn't they outsource the ip to an other team within sony? Who is familiar with shooters
MiguelItUp
Member
People joke about DEI, woke, and whatever. Cause it certainly made itself an easy target for all that. But the reality is that the game just wasn't innovative enough or fun. I'm sure if the game was a blast to play and unlike anything else, people still would've checked it out regardless if it was any of the things I mentioned previously. I mean, people tried saying the same thing about BG3, and that didn't affect it at all. Hell, Veilguard is doing a LOT better than Concord did. Sure, different genre and all, but still. I feel it's proof that the labels can only go so far to negatively affect a game that may be worth a bit more.
Concord just wasn't that. The writing was on the wall when the beta was open to everyone and hardly anyone touched it. I played 1 game, didn't even finish it, and that was enough for me. It was all very, very telling.
Concord just wasn't that. The writing was on the wall when the beta was open to everyone and hardly anyone touched it. I played 1 game, didn't even finish it, and that was enough for me. It was all very, very telling.
GHG
Member
Literally all they needed to say is that the game didn't resonate with the audience, both on Playstation and on PC, so they need to do better and make games that actually connect with players on all levels.
Not this waffle he came up with. It's not like it's their first rodeo in launching a new IP, they know how to successfully build and launch new IP (Hulst's whole career is built on this), so I don't know why they are suddenly acting like it's something they are clueless about.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
true, sort of, but I think the awful character designs really turned people off. And the characters were obviously designed by a DEI checklist and with zero masculinity/femininity or sex appeal.
If instead of characters who looked like this:
they had a bunch of scantily clad waifus. It EASILY would’ve had 20x as many players, probably much more.
Still would’ve been an uphill battle but I think it’s disingenuous to pretend that the fucking terrible DEI character roster had nothing to do with it. It’s a damn hero shooter, of course you need characters who look sexy, badass, visually striking, and strongly masculine or feminine.
lughnasadh123
Member
I'm more baffled how any management could be that confident going pay to play in today's gaas environment with established free games with damn near better everything. Needing some long post-mortem on something so obvious is hilariously stupid.
MiguelItUp
Member
It's not that I'm pretending, it's that I'm saying it wasn't the only glaring issue like many are acting like it is. If you had the exact same game with better character design, not much would've changed at all because the game itself just wasn't fun or innovative. There were/are plenty of F2P games out there that offered a lot more than this did.true, sort of, but I think the awful character designs really turned people off. And the characters were obviously designed by a DEI checklist and with zero masculinity/femininity or sex appeal.
If instead of characters who looked like this:
they had a bunch of scantily clad waifus. It EASILY would’ve had 20x as many players, probably much more.
Still would’ve been an uphill battle but I think it’s disingenuous to pretend that the fucking terrible DEI character roster had nothing to do with it. It’s a damn hero shooter, of course you need characters who look sexy, badass, visually striking, and strongly masculine or feminine.
AtomicStarving
Member
they still don't know
AmuroChan
Member
He's not going to actually call those things out specifically (the first two especially) even if he wanted to. He's gotta give the intentionally vague corporate answer as the CEO.
Last edited:
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
Okay maybe we agree then. I don’t think that DEI/ugly characters was the only problem either. IMO a LOT more people would’ve at least given the game a shot if they loved the character designs. But they still wouldn’t have stuck around for long because the game just wasn’t that great regardless.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Since OP won't put it in the post.
FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
Moriarty1889
Member
Trying to hard to appeal to a certain group that don’t support gaming as much as others do. Woke trash doesn’t do well…….Concord’s quick demise is proof of that.
MiguelItUp
Member
Probably? I can only speak for myself, and when I hopped into the open beta I didn't scroll through all the characters to even see what they looked like. I just jumped in and was like, "Yeah, this is lukewarm across the board." almost immediately.
I also think a lot of people were pretty deflated when they found out it was just another run of the mill hero shooter rather than something else. I mean, the early teases didn't allude to ANYTHING, but I don't think people were expecting that.
Gamerfan81
Member
This is like the Budlight situation, where Budlight's main customers were straight males. What did they do? Insult that customer base verbally and then proceed to cater to .5% of the population, they still haven't recovered.
Sony, you're on your way to being the next Budlight.
Sony, you're on your way to being the next Budlight.
chokotoureiki
Member
They said that they were a siloed organization. Yeah, i think thats part of the problem. Communication is imporrtant.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
*make subpar games in a saturated market
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
I work at a very high point in the ladder of a well known brand globally…and that exert sounds like stage gates he’s referring to.
We a year ago started using stage gates process for new launches of product, and nothing has improved. It’s a pointless exercise because the people responsible at those stages are the same people and just keep doing shit the same way as before.
We still keep launching without samples in time, marketing done, not enough inventory, etc.
So my expectation here for Sony is nothing will change either because the people responsible are the same. You need to fire and rehire people willing to execute correctly.
Last edited: