PlayStation has dominated the headlines this week, and for good reason: Astro Bot is a triumph! Currently rated at 94 on Metacritic, the game proves that smaller-scoped titles can be massive successes if you trust the development team to deliver on its vision. Flip the record over, however, and we can’t ignore the rot on the other side.
The infamous Concord, a 5-v-5 hero shooter developed by Firewalk Studios, was sentenced to death after only two weeks. As of 6th September, the shooter is offline indefinitely. Sony looked at the numbers and decided it was better to fall on the sword now and offer refunds to players than suffer further losses trying to salvage the live service game.
Sony’s decision will undoubtedly have a ripple effect on the industry. Concord’s budget was reportedly £100 million. A heavyweight like Sony does not make such an aggressive decision unless there is no hope to recoup any development costs. Firewalk’s statement said it is looking at ways to bring the game back when the time is right– and stranger things have happened – but I don’t think anyone expects the game to return.
The most frustrating thing about the Concord saga is that Sony essentially sent the game to die at its reveal. The decision to lead with a cinematic trailer was a colossal blunder. Although riffing hard off Guardians of the Galaxy, I liked its look and assumed it was a Destiny-like PvEvP experience. It had my attention.
I quickly realised I was wrong, as the gameplay feature followed to provide the context that it was a cookie-cutter hero shooter. I’m pretty sure my eyes rolled into the recess of my skull. Some of the abilities looked interesting, but these games don’t tend to do it for me –especially not when a new Black Ops game is mere months away.
Despite my reservations, I participated in the closed Beta and had an okay time with it. Most would likely tell you the same. It was fine! It was certainly more polished than many games I’ve played. Unfortunately, fine doesn’t quite cut it when you charge $40 upfront for a multiplayer-only experience.
That isn’t to say going free-to-play would have made Concord a success, but it might have lived longer than two weeks. When your competition, Overwatch 2, Valorant, and the forthcoming Marvel Rivals, are free-to-play titles, you must bring something new to the table to justify the price tag. Concord’s big selling point was weekly cinematics and no battlepass (despite a premium shop).
When making a hero shooter, your heroes need to be… well, heroic. They will be seen purely as their gameplay mechanics if they don’t look cool and have attractive traits or personalities. Overwatch has survived countless controversies, developmental issues, and an entire “new” game because of the player base’s investment in its cast of soldiers. With Marvel Rivals impending, would anyone choose Spider-Man over the yellow dustbin with a Hoover?
I can’t even imagine putting close to eight years of your life towards a project, only for it to be panned at launch and canned two weeks later. I feel for the developers. Some will no doubt say it’s their own fault, but that would seriously overestimate the influence of most rank-and-file developers on a project like Concord.
Should there be difficult questions aimed at those calling the shots? Absolutely. But there’s a noticeable pattern when a game doesn’t hit its (sometimes lofty) targets: the developers on the lowest rungs of the ladder are the first to go. I cannot support a developer getting fired because they did what their boss told them to, regardless of whether I liked or disliked a game. Some are saying Concord’s demise is a “win” for players. It certainly isn’t a victory; it’s a warning shot.
Sony has set the precedent that an unsuccessful game can be punted off the shelf, no matter how much time, money, or resources are invested. Publishers will learn from Concord and Sony’s decision, but will it be the correct lesson? How long before another game that misses the mark vanishes from existence? I’d wager sooner than we think.
In times like these, I’m somewhat glad Zombies is part of a massive franchise. I often curse the mode for being chained to the rest of Call of Duty by Activision. Zombies fights for air with the other pillars like Multiplayer and Warzone as the irreverent middle child. It doesn’t always get satisfying support and often makes concessions to get out the door. As soon as momentum starts to pick up, developers are whisked away to work on the next project.
What would it look like if Treyarch could develop the mode away from the COD Factory and focus specifically on the Zombies community’s wants and needs? There’s a perfect universe where Zombies is priority number one and is no longer governed by Call of Duty’s live seasons and monetisation targets.
Yet, a level of security is afforded when working on Call of Duty. Its performance can upset executives, sure, but one bad year isn’t going to see the game wiped from existence. Many fans and critics slammed Call of Duty: Vanguard, but the title sold 30 million copies despite the noise. Even a flop can keep the ship afloat when you work with Call of Duty money.
Take three of the rockiest Zombies launches: Black Ops 2, Black Ops 4, and Vanguard. Had these modes been released separately from the Call of Duty IP, the reception to any one of them could’ve sunk the mode for good. Black Ops 2 Zombies was arguably saved by campaign team members coming in to work on Mob of the Dead and Origins, rejuvenating the mode and its lore.
Many development teams don’t have the luxury of being as across the board as a Call of Duty studio can be. While you could question whether Modern Warfare Zombies was necessary in the first place, Treyarch passed the baton to Sledgehammer Games after its launch. The support was minimal, but it enabled Treyarch to focus on Black Ops 6 Zombies while keeping players engaged (if only for a week or so, in-season…).
Not to say I wouldn’t be excited to see Zombies break free from mainline Call of Duty titles one day; it’s just a risk that could signal the end of the mode if all the pieces didn’t fall into place. Much like the mode itself, the aim of the game is survival. The high of Black Ops 3 would never have happened without Zombies prevailing over the trials and tribulations of Black Ops 2. Sometimes, you die in the boss fight, and sometimes, you get a max ammo with three bullets left. Survival is the key!
The industry is stepping into uncharted waters. Concord‘s execution was the shot heard around the world. Publishers, developers, players, and even onlookers will all think about video games differently now. Some will learn the correct lessons; others won’t. The industry will be as ruthless as ever – if not more.
I’ll take what I can from the niche inside Call of Duty that Zombies has carved for itself. While I wish it could grow by receiving more extensive support and having fewer down periods, at least it’s still here – and as long as it exists, anything is possible. I will always champion the best part of Call of Duty, remembering that not every game can survive like it has.