jdreyer wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 18:31:SimplyMonk wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 16:29:I think the opposite is true. The game was functional at launch, and had solid mechanics from what I've read and seen. The problem as you say is the marketing, art, and design were bad, and once that reputation was solidified, there was a huge uphill climb to undo that perception. They could change all the art and characters, and spend another $100M on marketing, but it would just be throwing good money after bad as it's unlikely it would ever attract the playerbase to be profitable after becoming a laughing stock and synonymous with failure.
You’d think with that much investment they would want to maintain the talent that managed to launch a technically sound game.
Yes. The design, art, and marketing were horrible, but those are fixable problems and finding a competent team of people that can actually launch a functional game is really hard.
Easier to scrap the whole team I guess than try and salvage the components that worked well.
The best option would be to keep the engine and mechanics in place, completely redo the world and characters, and launch under a different title, hiding the fact that its origins were Concord. But that ignores the tactical decision to even pursue a hero shooter in the first place. There are already established brands, and the market is saturated. Even with a stellar title, it's a tough sell. Maybe it could be done if tied to some popular IP. I would say "Star Wars," but that star has fallen quite a bit. Marvel maybe?
Riahderymnmaddog wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 22:48:No they only sold supposedly 25k copies, their max concurrent player count was way lower (like 700 on Steam). As for the fraud aspect, there was the claim that someone was sleeping with someone and gave tons of money in return for cinematics that will never see the light of day. I don't think the game itself was intentionally a scam but I wouldn't be surprised if things had US Army pricing, aka $10,000 toilet seats. Maybe there was a scam element Chris Roberts style since they got $200 million in funding before starting on the game in earnest but then, "fumbled" it. Given how obscene these game budgets have become lately,Xeth Nyrrow wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 20:49:
I think even if the game managed to fire on all cylinders from the word jump, that the $40 price point would have blunted its acceptance at best. Maybe not kill it outright, but getting your foot in the door as a hero shooter you need to at least be on par with the rest of the industry. I think they felt too much that they had something special that was going to buck the industry entirely. When most of the management was inexperienced and the money was flowing faster than 1980's cocaine fueled celebrity party, nothing solid was going to take form.
didnt they have 25k players day one, not a lot.. but more then Read Dead Redemption by 13k... RockStar; Didnt pull the plug. This is some bullshit. Something happened here, and i the only thing I am sure of; is, that isn't legal. I want to know more! Also fuck this game, nothing about it interested me.
Xeth Nyrrow wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 20:49:
I think even if the game managed to fire on all cylinders from the word jump, that the $40 price point would have blunted its acceptance at best. Maybe not kill it outright, but getting your foot in the door as a hero shooter you need to at least be on par with the rest of the industry. I think they felt too much that they had something special that was going to buck the industry entirely. When most of the management was inexperienced and the money was flowing faster than 1980's cocaine fueled celebrity party, nothing solid was going to take form.
SimplyMonk wrote on Oct 30, 2024, 16:29:I think the opposite is true. The game was functional at launch, and had solid mechanics from what I've read and seen. The problem as you say is the marketing, art, and design were bad, and once that reputation was solidified, there was a huge uphill climb to undo that perception. They could change all the art and characters, and spend another $100M on marketing, but it would just be throwing good money after bad as it's unlikely it would ever attract the playerbase to be profitable after becoming a laughing stock and synonymous with failure.
You’d think with that much investment they would want to maintain the talent that managed to launch a technically sound game.
Yes. The design, art, and marketing were horrible, but those are fixable problems and finding a competent team of people that can actually launch a functional game is really hard.
Easier to scrap the whole team I guess than try and salvage the components that worked well.