🤣 Funny!.... But keep in mind the difference between Bungie and Firewalk is night and day and let's not forget how much Bungie changed the gaming world forever with Halo..
@@BlueBARv5 Let's also keep in mind that both these studios are still companies and the mass majority of OG halo developers aren't in Bungie anymore. So naw, I'll compare them.
@@dudebruh8534 Well Time will Tell?.. But I will admit if rumors are true that Bungie and Sony are fighting behind the scenes then I see the game launching in a bad state, But we will see if sony has a second Concord or a Hell Divers 2 scenario?
Did Sony really think that everyone was going to just dedicate all their time to all these live service games all at once? It’s hard enough to stay up to date in even one of them these days
no they just wanted to target several markets at once and the ones that were hits would get full support while ones that die are closed and studio refocused
No. They were gonna throw as many darts at the board and see what sticks like Fortnite levels. All it takes is a single SUCCESSFUL Fortnite killer to make them infinite money. They want the peak of Battle Royales Hype to return but for their own game. Fortnite has generated like $25 BILLION last I checked. That makes the failures like Concord mean absolutely nothing. You could have 10 failed Concords and still be winning if you can create the next Fortnite.
@@zaster101 There’s no way that would have been a viable tactic even with the infinite cash at their disposal. If that’s the case then hot damn these people are ignorant
If they didn't fck Helldivers, game could've been their main service like csgo for steam, Fortnite for Epic game and Helldiver for playstation. They really fck it up with PSN account and Fcking REGION LOCK !!!!! for over 180+ countries !!!! wtffff. They have a bunch of LIve service upcoming, TBH the Helldiver was good enough and allocate their budget on Helldivers then focus on making single player games, when it comes to single player experience ,playstation is GOD tier.
@@carlosianaasis7345if you bother paying any attention at all, Helldivers 2 crash was going on long before Sony enforced the terms of service no one bother to read. Arrowhead the independent studio of their own free will almost brought Helldivers to the brink of collapse.
Hear me out: - It's a Games as a Service game - It's a hero based shooter - It's from PlayStation - It's from an empty shell with a Bungie logo on it - It'll be late - That'll be $40 please
@@samhyatt4863 Pretty sure he's simply opposed to most live service games being cheap cash grabs. I'd rather pay full price (which is what I do unless there's a sale) and get quality content. Most free DLC's are mediocre at best and a way to keep you playing hoping you'll spend money on mtx's. There are exceptions ofc.
From the outside looking in, It was funny looking at the D2 community saying the last Xpac was Peak. The Witness doesn't look cool or threatening, He looks Pixar Cute with the big round eyes he was given. I always thought Oryx was the most Destiny looking BBEG.
@@kellywilson137 Listen, man, I get what you're trying to say here. But you describing the Witness as non-threatening is literally the point of his design. Cool is subjective, you can say it isn't, I can say it is, we'll be here all night and nothing will change. But non-threatening? Yes. That was literally the point. That's their character. Their whole fucking thing is that they will calmly, level-headedly explain to you why you and the entire universe should die, and still seem like such a calm and reasonable person that you're almost inclined to agree with them. Also, if the design of a single character is your metric of a game being fun then I think you really need reevaluate your priorities. There are SO many things to roast Destiny for. This isn't one of them.
The biggest problem with Marathon is going to be the high expectations. It doesn't matter if the game comes out at $40, free, good, or bad it's still going to be sold as "Brought to you by the studio that brought you Halo and Destiny (even tho Bungie was already a shell of their former selves even by the time D1 even released)". Its an uphill battle that was hard enough to deal with because of the genre, but now they are dealing with the sentiment of their handling with Destiny over the past 10 years.
Yep... 😂 It has to be different and engaging... If it just regular game set in different futuristic setting, it won't work for $40, maybe for free+microtransaction...
More times than this, apparently, because this isn't even close to being a full list: Redfall Anthem Skull and Bones Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League Marvel's Avengers Hyperspace Evolve Foamstars Radical Heights Paragon Red Dead Online Battlefield 2042 Crucible Concord XDefiant Lawbreakers
I've been saying since it was revealed, Sony was making 12 live service games...NONE of these games are going to be free to play, not a single one they're all going cost money... sony sees everything they shit out as a premium product regardless of reality and are charging for it
^^ These two must be in the market for yet another $40 live service game already. One example's success doesn't negate anything. These live service games are tired.
@@MrLabraiki Helldivers 2 was a novel experience and above all else a PVE-only coop game you could play solo (which a lot of people actually did). So essentially all it needed to take off was one player with enough reach having fun. A competitive multiplayer-only game has much higher hurdles to clear to build the necessary community needed to sustain itself.
@@dr.rooney7653 It allows them to change direction with little to no friction from others on the board/shareholders. Yes they want at least one or two successful live service games but they would much prefer things to go back to live service or multiplayer games not being the main focus of the company over single player story drivin games.
Concord was in development for 8 years. The landscape was so much different back then, and just because it's Live-service, doesn't mean it'll be successful, weather free or paid. More Live-service titles fail than succeed. @@dr.rooney7653
Something I’ve noticed about live-service games is they expect you to pay forever but they won’t solve the hacker issues or properly pair certain skill levels with each other. Every one I’ve tried and played has terrible hacking culture and/or terrible skill based matchmaking. I can feel that I’m playing in a lobby with try hard or faster internet connections or have different controller methods than me. It’s been like this forever in every single game with an online component that I avoid live service or online multiplayer like a plague. Not to mention every single game needs to be a live service shooter, I wouldn’t be surprised if Nintendo comes out with a Mario shooter in the next 3-5 years.
Im not gonna pay 40 bucks for a game by a studio who has no idea how to make a pvp game. Bungie is dead. The people who made halo are gone. Now we have these worthless losses who couldn't program a bucket, let alone a quality pvp game.
I just don't play pvp games anymore period 😂. I can't believe they are really considering going for a Concord 2.0 and competing with fairgames for trying to top how badly it will flop. Sony's commitment to live service was a dire mistake
@@siren_atlantica Dude is implying that studios need successful live service games in order to fund the development of single-player games. Pretty brain-dead take.
Concord didn't fail because it was $40. It failed because it was hot garbage. Battlefield 2042 didn't fail because it was $60. It failed because it was hot, broken garbage. Marathon will fail or succeed *entirely* based on how fun and engaging the game is. That's it.
Concord's price tag was one of the many reasons it failed, but nonetheless adding a price tag on these types of games is 1 one wall stopping people from playing it. If Bungie has a live demonstration showing them the consequences of doing this and they still go with it, then they have nobody but themselves to blame. Period.
@@Bro-dot- not really. they usually last 1-2 years before imploding. making more then enough money to warrant more dog shit. not were seeing games take Huge Ls before they even have a release date. this is the first time ive seen gamers have this much momentum for change
@@fr0ck360 Clearly they’re not genuinely bad though, comparing games like that to games like concord, gollum and etc is beyond a stretch. They both still have the skeleton of their predecessors (OW 2 is just OW 1 anyway), people can still have fun in them even if plenty of the audience have conflicting views on the game. Plenty people had fun with Diablo 4 and many of my friends/ pros still play OW. They are only perceived bad because they could be much much better and there is bias when looking at anything blizzard but they are not “bad products” in the same sense.
Imo, 40 isn't too much if the game is good. Looking at it from a marketing standpoint you might be right. I'm ngl, sometimes I hate the gaming community because it is often so volatile. I wouldn't mind a cheaper price though. If we could get the game around 20, I think it wouldn't be bad. Or you could do f2p with limitations and 15 gets you full access depending on the mechanics. Maybe priority matchmaking and maybe an option to play with only people who have bought the game. Might help against hackers since hackers would likely just use the f2p version. I think the concept could be successful, but we will see.
you know these ultra corporate live service game publishers/massive western development studios don't have the capacity to do anything of the common sense things you said lol... and that's really the issue to me
@scarlett8782 yeah. As weird as it sounds, the concept derived from Siege, at least if we are talking about the game that made me think this way. I don't think they did a perfect example of it, but i did love the cheap entry for trialing the game. In a market where more and more games are F2P, premium games need to find a way to compete in accessibility. I don't want to see a tarkov payment experience, but a 20-40 price tag on a premium game, especially if we have cheaper alternatives in packages for the game, seems fair and almost desirable. There has to be a reason that people buy the game though, so the free version would need to feel more like a trial/demo as opposed to the full game. It can definitely be done, but would a studio be willing to take the loss in the short term for a higher probability of success in the long term? Hmmmmmm....
I know gamers have a memory worse then goldfish, but way back in 2022 when we first heard about Marathon, and was the last time Bungie gave in anything about the game, it was clear to anyone that has so much heard about Destiny that Marathon was a monetization scheme with a game on the side.
it seems Sony didn't learn their lesson from Concord. the reason it worked for helldivers was because it was a coop horde shooter in a market that was starved for it the only good game in the genre was left4dead and that is an over 10 year old game.
I'll just call it now...Marathon, Fairgame$ and any other live service slop that comes out in the coming months is going to fail about as hard as Concocrd. Especially when these companies continue to try and charge $40+ for these games with little to no substance.
I hear what you're saying, and yes, the only reason this has a chance is because the specific style of live service isnt F2P; however, I still think this game will hinge on mtx. If I were Sony, I'd really dial back the mtx out the gate. Put in a lot of content for the money, build up some good will like Warframe did in several years ago.
The 40$ price tag wasn't the complete problem per se, people just saw the 40$ price when the free open beta barely got 2k players and that made it look like straight up cockiness on Sony's side. Now that 40$ price point is a stigma for them going forward. Ultimately, it might not be that unfair of a price, but people see it as them double dipping due to greed and that is the problem. It's going to affect Marathon, its going to affect any game they sell going forward, all because of Concord.
It's sad that this is seen as a positive. Go back a few years and every game had cosmetics for free. Look at old cods, every skin, banner, pfp and attachment earn able through gameplay. Now you pay a premium for a non premium product
@@siren_atlantica There is also skins you can earn for free, but the truth is that you have to have some cash income to keep the servers up and running and people at work making content.
I don’t often comment when it’s a good video, and I agree with you. I just smash like. Just felt compelled to let you know, like 98% of the time, informational and good points. Thanks everyone who helps make these. Much love ❤
If it good its good. Money well spend. If its sux its wasted money. Asking money for a product is just normal. People being outraged for them asking for money is just crazy. People being customed to have everything for free. Is so entitled. Concord wasn't a good game. If it was a 9/10 game people would pay for it. Its that simple.
Not to be a doom and gloom chronic online guy I totally understood Luke’s point but it’s interesting how many gaming UA-camrs, people that usually never mention anything about politics or society trends have increasingly unintentionally been mentioning politics in their videos, idk it gives me an uneasy feeling, like things are going so crazy so fast that it’s getting hard to not notice it even in a like Stephen’s live video :/
Free to play and service games really destroyed how to sell games. I payed like 140$ (in todays money)f or games like Final Fantasy or Chrono Trigger back in the day and it was ok. Now you have absolutl gems of games on your smartphone but noone is willing to pay 4.99 because everything is supposed to be free.
Next year would be an interesting year for extraction shooters. Not talking in terms of gameplay, but how the games are perceived since there’s another 40 dollar extraction shooter game coming out in the form of Arc Raiders, also coming out in 2025.
Why are so many UA-camrs/streamers not believing the fact that concord had no players because of the terrible characters and art style 😂 if the game was attractive and had great gameplay with a competent game mode it 100% would have had success but if you’re game isn’t appealing enough to draw interest or worse repulsive nobody is going to even try it.
Price wasn't the primary reason concord failed. Space Marine 2 came out and demonstrated it's not about price. Black Myth Wukong did the same. This is a cope defense.
The shills are running over time to act like concord didn't get killed by the same "its" that killed saints row and a shit ton of other great franchises and made trash like dustborn
It’s because they don’t want to mention that the game failed because it’s bad to hurt their friends feelings that worked on the game. It also can’t be that people weren’t interested in trying the game because the characters were so ugly and off-putting… 😂
As much as I do think F2P is where online shooters should live, it’s kinda lame that the current state of gaming pushes publishers to do it or fail, even if it doesn’t make sense. I’d much rather have a €40 2018 Overwatch experience than a F2P 2024 Overwatch 2, but if they came out with the prior now it would fail before it would even be remembered.
So tell good sir how many hour of marathon do you have put into it, also how does the shooting mechanics feel seeing how you know so much about this soullllllllllllllll less game
@@kevinconley7429 marathon was actually really good and played like doom with a story that was similar to halo but both are extremely based on the book called Ringworld.
$40 for Helldivers worked because it was a sequel to an indie game that was $20/30 at launch (9 years ago). I love both Divers, but they are AA at best.
I think the moment Sony priced its PS5 pro it lost an enormous chunk of goodwill from gamers that it's not going to get back before a long time. In that atmosphere, pricing Marathon at 40$ sounds like a suicide for that game to me.
Not really.. its a premium console at a premium price... what a bigger joke is the xbox midgen refresh 2tb all digital system for $600 or the series x galaxy 2tb for $600 for $100 more you can get a much better system. And try building a pc with equivalent specs to the pro.. my 4070 cost me £525 Which is said to be the same power as the pro..
@@tristman8413 for that comparison to be fair you will have to compare unreleased hardware with unreleased GPUs because both the PS5 Pro is coming soon but so are Nvidia's and AMDs GPUs and in raster performance the 7700xt is the equivalent right now which may have the disadvantage in rt and temporarily in ai upscaling (until FSR 4 releases which was already announced even though you can technically use XeSS on AMD GPUs which is AI Upscaling) but it has the advantage of Frame Gen which makes it achieve higher frame rates in any game it wants thanks to FSR3 or AFMF2 with the added advantage of being paired with a potentially better CPU. Now you can get a 7700xt for around 400 and a 7600 for around 200 and you will still be below the price of the ps5 pro with better hardware and if you want to get a stand and a disc drive it gets very close to a decent full build of a "equivalent PC". I know that DF said the 4070 is the equivalent right now but that is only if you ignore the full feature set of PCs and that would be a unfair disadvantage when PC simply has more ways to improve performance especially if a feature that's ignored almost doubles frame rates.
@@tristman8413well, with the Pro staying at a Zen 2 processor, it’s not gonna do much more than the base PS5 except look a little nicer. You might as well just buy a PC at that point. I built mine around $750 two years ago (Ryzen 7 5800x and RX 6700XT).
I’m gonna let you in on a secret… you don’t have to buy it. You can keep your PS5 if you already have it or get a PS5 if you don’t want the pro version. They didn’t take away the PS5 dumbass.
Co-op PvE market is an obvious one to make games for. The current games of that genre are DRG, Helldivers 2, L4D2, Killing Floor 2, Darktide and Vermintide 2 and some minor ones that aren't fully just PvE like Sea of Thieves. A lot of these games are pretty old and the ones at the top like DRG aren't even that big and that high budget. Imagine combination of DRG's cave networks and destructible terrain with the more advanced gameplay systems and control of Helldivers 2 all while being a one time payment game that is supported by cosmetic skins and a free battle pass like DRG does it It's very much an untapped market. When the king of PvE Co-op horde shooter is a game from 2009, it's time to try something and find success there rather then slamming your head againts a wall in a saturated market
Correlation is not causation. Concord has free weekend where nobody plays. If price is the main issue, it should have more people trying it out. The final price tag of the release game didnt help that much is for sure.
Meanwhile another upcoming extraction shooter, Forever Winter, announced going early access awhile ago and are pricing it under 30$, it's very telling when a large company like Sony doesn't see how they keep tripping over themselves.
I was laughing to myself when Concord was $40 and there were people saying "I'd rather pay the money and get the complete experience." Even though they said no to battle passes, there were multiple indications that there was going to be plenty of MTX's still, especially considering what the game was wanting to do. I'm not sure why some people were thinking that was going to be a complete experience.
Think now that the drama of Concord, most consumer/gamers are on guard. So even if the game is good and 40 bucks most will be on the fence and unsure. Sure some will try, but most won't. And Sony has fostered to much single player experiences so the expectations are in that direction. Sure Sony also needs some multiplayer games but it all seems to high brow. Which also doesn't make it look accessible. Kinda miss the PS3 and early PS4 era where you had allot of fun games with some small multiplayer component or a small multiplayer game to begin with something for everything. And now it feels like Sony doesn't have that. ( Even if they have it) for PS5.
The problem with pricing Marathon at 40 dollars is the first thing you think of is Concord, and the last thing you want is for people to think of a failed game when trying to push your new one.
50/50? The only one that had success was helldivers 2. Playstation all-stars, Concord that splatoony rip-off all flopped.. I love Playstation and hope they stop making them
@@tristman8413 50/50 as helldivers was a huge success while but concord was a huge fail those have been the only 2 games that have been part of Sonys “plan” that I was talking about.
"We asked the guys who think its reasonable to charge $35 for a poorly made tshirt no one in their right mind would wear outside and they said $40 was good"
I think it boils down to one thing. If Sony release a F2P game then you don't need to pay for PS+ to play it. They should though if they actually want to compete with all the other free live service games that are successful. I'd have given Concord a shot if it was free, especially after all the negative press just to see if it was actually that bad. Gameplay might have hooked me even if I didn't like the character designs. wasn't going to try it for $40 though.
Sony: Lets release multiple games in an overloaded genre that missed the boat all at once! Everyone knows that competing with yourself is clearly the best strategy.
obviously don't pre-order, don't hype it up, but if reviews say it's good i'm more likely to buy this than concord. i am far, far more amped up to see Forever Winter tho also Luke - "you can't assume nowadays that a AAA title will be good when it comes out" - we were never able to assume this? when was this an assumption everyone made? It's just that our tolerance for bugs has decreased bc of Steam. There has never been an era when people assumed that every AAA title that came out was going to be good. There were just so few releases 20-15 years ago compared to now that even if it was hot garbage, people were probably still going to play it because well, what else were we gonna do?
i am so tired of hearing about this mystical magical period when any game you could pick up off the shelf at gamestop would be good because that time *NEVER EXISTED*
I didn't know what Fairgame$ was, so i decided to look up the trailer after finishing this video. Not only have I previously watched the trailer, but i watched your video about it. That's a bad sign when a game is so uninteresting that i completely forgot it existed.
The best marketing is honestly no marketing. When people underestimate a game an its good it will spread via word of mouth and social media like helldivers did.
40 dollar launch price, announcement of a new Destiny for mobile- they are out of their damn minds. Bungie will run it like a live service game with all the in-game shop crap we've all come to loathe and despise. This is definitely a "controlled leak". Marathon sounds exactly like it's a rip off of The Finals. I'll play it if it's ftp. I won't risk 40 bucks of my hard-earned money to pay for it though. I say what happened with Concord, and I know how Bungie works. I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
this can go in two ways. If the game is fun people will pay like Helldivers 2 or if the game sucks it will end up like Concord. One advantage this game has Bungie making it but they are not the same Bungie in the past so it can go either way
Sure they can charge you $40 dollars because they made the budget absurd. It doesn't they are entitled to your money. It's not the customers fault that the budget might so high that millions of copies need to be sold to even break even. It's also not the customers fault that Sony will force people to use playstation accounts to play the game which means that they have already lost a chunk of the market because there's a crap ton of countries that the service isn't available in. That's money left on the table because Sony want's to force non Playstation users into their ecosystem.
If you're expecting it for free are you even a customer? And I had to create accounts to play it takes 2, diablo 4 ect. Even had to create a Microsoft account to play sea of thieves.. nobody moaned then..
The good news is that its still early on enough they can start the switch from paid to free to play business model, if it is true they were going to charge $40
Free to Play success because normie, like me, try game for fun and got hooked- I started playing game and my first game was Team Fortress 2 in 2018.. I spend 1k hours... I bought a ton of hats & war paint from the market, buy the premium to play competitive, heck even bought all valve game at full price because I don't know steam sale is a thing... and here I am, in gaming sphere bcus of free 2 play
'Rather buy skins' skins are the most stupid micro transaction ever! It literally doesn't alter the game mechanics at all... the day I buy a battle pass or a skin is the day I retire from gaming.
The price is completely fine if the game is close to peak Bungie, but I don't rate the chances of that happening very highly. They need to make this free on Playstation's premium game sub service, if not the regular PS plus membership, so this game has hopefully has some free reach at launch. There is definitely room for an extraction shooter to take off console, much more so than another hero shooter.
For me, paying money upfront for a multiplayer game isn't bad at all AS LONG as there are no microtransactions and there is NO real store in the game with any real money. I actually prefer to just pay upfront for a full featured game. Also, that's not why I didn't buy Concord. I didn't buy Concord because of the ideological messaging which I do not support. In addition, I think paying the MONTHLY PSN Fee is the dumbest thing, and makes the 40 dollar "premium" price really cheap in comparison. For me, the biggest detractor to online games are all consoles charging 7-10 dollars a month for playing online.
I’m just one guy but I’m sure others would relate. We don’t have time for so many live service games. I’ve been enjoyed valorant. You’d have to come REALLY good to make me play some other live service.
I saw Marathon in the title and thought to myself, "Didn't this game already get shut down? Oh right, that was Concord." 😂 These games are all so similar in almost every way, that I can't even keep up anymore. Nor do I care to. I'll continue to play my massive backlog of physical games that I actually own, that can be played offline, thanks.
I'm with you my friend lol. I avoid pvp like the plague nowadays anyway so I'm just sitting back and watching all these failure fireworks and it's pretty entertaining 😂. I feel bad for the wasted time and effort on some devs end, that does suck since it's mostly thanks to the higher ups commitment to being greedy blind assholes, but yeah.
Concord: *DIES IN A FIRE SCREAMING*
Bungie: Hey that looks fun!
🤣 Funny!.... But keep in mind the difference between Bungie and Firewalk is night and day and let's not forget how much Bungie changed the gaming world forever with Halo..
@@BlueBARv5 Let's also keep in mind that both these studios are still companies and the mass majority of OG halo developers aren't in Bungie anymore. So naw, I'll compare them.
Let's not overdramatize.
Concord was shot point blank while still in the womb and then delivered straight into a woodchipper.
@@dudebruh8534 Believe me, bungie know exactly how to make a very profitable live service games, look destiny 1 and destiny 2
@@dudebruh8534 Well Time will Tell?.. But I will admit if rumors are true that Bungie and Sony are fighting behind the scenes then I see the game launching in a bad state, But we will see if sony has a second Concord or a Hell Divers 2 scenario?
Did Sony really think that everyone was going to just dedicate all their time to all these live service games all at once? It’s hard enough to stay up to date in even one of them these days
no they just wanted to target several markets at once and the ones that were hits would get full support while ones that die are closed and studio refocused
No. They were gonna throw as many darts at the board and see what sticks like Fortnite levels. All it takes is a single SUCCESSFUL Fortnite killer to make them infinite money. They want the peak of Battle Royales Hype to return but for their own game. Fortnite has generated like $25 BILLION last I checked. That makes the failures like Concord mean absolutely nothing. You could have 10 failed Concords and still be winning if you can create the next Fortnite.
@@zaster101 Get out of my head and stealing my thoughts.
I dont even bother. Havent for years, i hear about games on youtube and sometimes check them out but usually not.
@@zaster101 There’s no way that would have been a viable tactic even with the infinite cash at their disposal. If that’s the case then hot damn these people are ignorant
Helldivers was a PVE game in a market starved for good PVE games
And in a unique setting with nothing really like it
If they didn't fck Helldivers, game could've been their main service like csgo for steam, Fortnite for Epic game and Helldiver for playstation. They really fck it up with PSN account and Fcking REGION LOCK !!!!! for over 180+ countries !!!! wtffff.
They have a bunch of LIve service upcoming, TBH the Helldiver was good enough and allocate their budget on Helldivers then focus on making single player games, when it comes to single player experience ,playstation is GOD tier.
A market that is still starved for good PVE games, so we have to settle for Helldivers 2 the bargain knock of of Left 4 Dead
@@carlosianaasis7345if you bother paying any attention at all, Helldivers 2 crash was going on long before Sony enforced the terms of service no one bother to read. Arrowhead the independent studio of their own free will almost brought Helldivers to the brink of collapse.
And im 100% checked out.
$40 with tons of micros. Just like Destiny 2 before f2p.
tbf, concord was a 40 dollar game WITHOUT a bunch of micros. at all.
@@lionzcrown1702 tbf I'm talking about Bungie. Concord wasn't made by Bungie. Destiny and Marathon are made by them.
@TheChrisLouis yeah but this is a Sony game bro. If it's 40 again, it will be 40 without a bunch of Micros. And gamers wills till not buy it lol
Hear me out:
- It's a Games as a Service game
- It's a hero based shooter
- It's from PlayStation
- It's from an empty shell with a Bungie logo on it
- It'll be late
- That'll be $40 please
“It’s a games as a service game” and I’m out. No need to the read the rest. The game is not for me.
@@dannysmi7162so you’re opposed to games getting free DLC? noted
@@samhyatt4863 Pretty sure he's simply opposed to most live service games being cheap cash grabs. I'd rather pay full price (which is what I do unless there's a sale) and get quality content. Most free DLC's are mediocre at best and a way to keep you playing hoping you'll spend money on mtx's. There are exceptions ofc.
@@constantinesoldatos i agree, so tell that to everyone else commenting on this video that the $40 price point sucks “because concord”
@@samhyatt4863 What free DLC. You still gonna have to pay battle pass or season pass…
They're not getting anymore money from me. Pissed away D2 to incubate 5 products nobody asked for.
From the outside looking in, It was funny looking at the D2 community saying the last Xpac was Peak.
The Witness doesn't look cool or threatening, He looks Pixar Cute with the big round eyes he was given.
I always thought Oryx was the most Destiny looking BBEG.
D2 wasn't doing to hot to begin with unfortunately I pissed away $400 year one for very little content.
@@kellywilson137 Listen, man, I get what you're trying to say here. But you describing the Witness as non-threatening is literally the point of his design. Cool is subjective, you can say it isn't, I can say it is, we'll be here all night and nothing will change. But non-threatening? Yes. That was literally the point. That's their character. Their whole fucking thing is that they will calmly, level-headedly explain to you why you and the entire universe should die, and still seem like such a calm and reasonable person that you're almost inclined to agree with them.
Also, if the design of a single character is your metric of a game being fun then I think you really need reevaluate your priorities.
There are SO many things to roast Destiny for. This isn't one of them.
The biggest problem with Marathon is going to be the high expectations. It doesn't matter if the game comes out at $40, free, good, or bad it's still going to be sold as "Brought to you by the studio that brought you Halo and Destiny (even tho Bungie was already a shell of their former selves even by the time D1 even released)". Its an uphill battle that was hard enough to deal with because of the genre, but now they are dealing with the sentiment of their handling with Destiny over the past 10 years.
Yep... 😂
It has to be different and engaging... If it just regular game set in different futuristic setting, it won't work for $40, maybe for free+microtransaction...
The name doesn't do it any favors
"How many times do we have to teach you this lesson, old man?"
I love young people
@@IamL3gionI hope you don't upload Minecraft videos.
More times than this, apparently, because this isn't even close to being a full list:
Redfall
Anthem
Skull and Bones
Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League
Marvel's Avengers
Hyperspace
Evolve
Foamstars
Radical Heights
Paragon
Red Dead Online
Battlefield 2042
Crucible
Concord
XDefiant
Lawbreakers
@@AlphaMachina Halo Infinite
Gotham knights@@AlphaMachina
I've been saying since it was revealed, Sony was making 12 live service games...NONE of these games are going to be free to play, not a single one they're all going cost money... sony sees everything they shit out as a premium product regardless of reality and are charging for it
Oh god if you see a $40 online live service game run the other way
Nah Helldivers is fun and the community engagement was awesome
Helldivers 2?
^^ These two must be in the market for yet another $40 live service game already. One example's success doesn't negate anything. These live service games are tired.
40 dollars in AAA produced live service game, doesn't this reminds you of certain game not too long ago?
Not sure which game you might be referring to, but did it concord by any chance? 🤣
@@TheCasualSubculturist
Well Helldivers was also at the same price and you know how that took off !
Price is not the issue if the game is good / fun
The thing is, it was Helldiver 2 (TWO), the 2nd one... Ppl knew what this game was about. New IPs dont have that luxury
@@MrLabraiki Helldivers 2 was a novel experience and above all else a PVE-only coop game you could play solo (which a lot of people actually did). So essentially all it needed to take off was one player with enough reach having fun. A competitive multiplayer-only game has much higher hurdles to clear to build the necessary community needed to sustain itself.
Helldivers 2?
I'm convinced since the new leadership, they're just wanting these Live service games to fizzle. Remember it was Jim Ryan who pushed for Live service.
Why would that make any sense?Successful live service games make the most money out of any games being released.
@@dr.rooney7653 but if they flop, then you're out hundreds of millions of dollars. That's not sustainable for a business
@@dr.rooney7653 It allows them to change direction with little to no friction from others on the board/shareholders. Yes they want at least one or two successful live service games but they would much prefer things to go back to live service or multiplayer games not being the main focus of the company over single player story drivin games.
@@NostalgiaNet8 i thought this was obvious and already confirmed around late last year
Concord was in development for 8 years. The landscape was so much different back then, and just because it's Live-service, doesn't mean it'll be successful, weather free or paid. More Live-service titles fail than succeed. @@dr.rooney7653
Competing with fairgame$ to be the next concord.
Anyone who has played destiny 2 knows exactly where this is going. Soon, bungie, too, will be sunset.
Destiny 2 sold over 38m copies and generated 200m a year... not quite a flop
@@tristman8413 it is 2024 and the game is doing so well that bungie is doing massive layoffs…
CONCORD 2: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO
Something I’ve noticed about live-service games is they expect you to pay forever but they won’t solve the hacker issues or properly pair certain skill levels with each other. Every one I’ve tried and played has terrible hacking culture and/or terrible skill based matchmaking. I can feel that I’m playing in a lobby with try hard or faster internet connections or have different controller methods than me. It’s been like this forever in every single game with an online component that I avoid live service or online multiplayer like a plague.
Not to mention every single game needs to be a live service shooter, I wouldn’t be surprised if Nintendo comes out with a Mario shooter in the next 3-5 years.
Im not gonna pay 40 bucks for a game by a studio who has no idea how to make a pvp game. Bungie is dead. The people who made halo are gone. Now we have these worthless losses who couldn't program a bucket, let alone a quality pvp game.
I just don't play pvp games anymore period 😂. I can't believe they are really considering going for a Concord 2.0 and competing with fairgames for trying to top how badly it will flop. Sony's commitment to live service was a dire mistake
Bungie is making the sequel to brink
Why have one catastrophic failure when you can have two
face it without live service , single player games do not exist(tencent own wukong)
@@johansvensson833 what does this even mean
@@johansvensson833 what is this retarded logic?
@@siren_atlantica Dude is implying that studios need successful live service games in order to fund the development of single-player games. Pretty brain-dead take.
Concord didn't fail because it was $40. It failed because it was hot garbage. Battlefield 2042 didn't fail because it was $60. It failed because it was hot, broken garbage. Marathon will fail or succeed *entirely* based on how fun and engaging the game is. That's it.
And yet, there is a market for Battlefield.
Concord's price tag was one of the many reasons it failed, but nonetheless adding a price tag on these types of games is 1 one wall stopping people from playing it. If Bungie has a live demonstration showing them the consequences of doing this and they still go with it, then they have nobody but themselves to blame. Period.
Wonderful statement, finally a pragmatic comment that is not fueled with self-absorption
It was not garbage. I played the beta and alpha. It was a great time.
Thank you
Im genuinely happy that bad products are failing over and over again.
As genuinely bad products always really do.
@@Bro-dot- not really. they usually last 1-2 years before imploding. making more then enough money to warrant more dog shit. not were seeing games take Huge Ls before they even have a release date. this is the first time ive seen gamers have this much momentum for change
@@Bro-dot- Tell that to Overwatch 2 and Diablo 4
Which is why "free" Diablo Immortal has has made over two billion dollars in "micro"-transactions since release.
@@fr0ck360 Clearly they’re not genuinely bad though, comparing games like that to games like concord, gollum and etc is beyond a stretch. They both still have the skeleton of their predecessors (OW 2 is just OW 1 anyway), people can still have fun in them even if plenty of the audience have conflicting views on the game.
Plenty people had fun with Diablo 4 and many of my friends/ pros still play OW. They are only perceived bad because they could be much much better and there is bias when looking at anything blizzard but they are not “bad products” in the same sense.
Well there is still room in the grave next to Concord..
Well concord was so young it didn't have time to grow into it.
there's no grave cos it got cremated from all the internet roasting.
Lawbreakers right from it like: "Your first time?"
😂😂😂
Isn't that for Fairgame$?
It’s not the price that usually matters it’s the quality and value of the game. Elden ring was charged at 60 and won game of the year
Whether it is $40 or not it’s going to be a live service filled with microtransactions and expiring battle passes so I would rather have it be F2p
Just so sony can charge there userbase another $80 a year just play it online for there console.
@@krazyd0nut404live service games are free to play online..
Remember I called it first in one of your previous videos
Marathon is Concord 3.0
fr
2.0 fairgames?
@@archersterling6726ofc 😂
Except it will probably do better because the character design and gameplay will be better. The two things that drug down Concord.
@@archersterling6726*fairgame$ 😂😂😂
Imo, 40 isn't too much if the game is good. Looking at it from a marketing standpoint you might be right. I'm ngl, sometimes I hate the gaming community because it is often so volatile. I wouldn't mind a cheaper price though. If we could get the game around 20, I think it wouldn't be bad. Or you could do f2p with limitations and 15 gets you full access depending on the mechanics. Maybe priority matchmaking and maybe an option to play with only people who have bought the game. Might help against hackers since hackers would likely just use the f2p version. I think the concept could be successful, but we will see.
you know these ultra corporate live service game publishers/massive western development studios don't have the capacity to do anything of the common sense things you said lol... and that's really the issue to me
@scarlett8782 yeah. As weird as it sounds, the concept derived from Siege, at least if we are talking about the game that made me think this way. I don't think they did a perfect example of it, but i did love the cheap entry for trialing the game. In a market where more and more games are F2P, premium games need to find a way to compete in accessibility. I don't want to see a tarkov payment experience, but a 20-40 price tag on a premium game, especially if we have cheaper alternatives in packages for the game, seems fair and almost desirable. There has to be a reason that people buy the game though, so the free version would need to feel more like a trial/demo as opposed to the full game. It can definitely be done, but would a studio be willing to take the loss in the short term for a higher probability of success in the long term? Hmmmmmm....
I know gamers have a memory worse then goldfish, but way back in 2022 when we first heard about Marathon, and was the last time Bungie gave in anything about the game, it was clear to anyone that has so much heard about Destiny that Marathon was a monetization scheme with a game on the side.
Hunts DLC is just cosmetics, like hunter skins and weapon skins is something that should be stated so ppl dont get the wrong idea about the game
it seems Sony didn't learn their lesson from Concord. the reason it worked for helldivers was because it was a coop horde shooter in a market that was starved for it the only good game in the genre was left4dead and that is an over 10 year old game.
yes they did trye and try again until we have one that works
Oh shit here we go again
I have heard from my best friend whose sibling works at Arrowhead that Helldivers 2 sold 50x more than Sony expected in the first month.
Sony needs a set at the Apollo because the comedy writes itself
Game company charges for game it spent years developing... 🤔
I'll just call it now...Marathon, Fairgame$ and any other live service slop that comes out in the coming months is going to fail about as hard as Concocrd. Especially when these companies continue to try and charge $40+ for these games with little to no substance.
Im gonna have a BLAST watching this Concord 2.0 fail even harder lmfao good times
They killed Destiny for this shit 😢
Destiny is far gone bro I don’t wanna spend 400 dollars to play the dam games dlc for the story
Destiny died all on its own merits, bungie admitted as much.
Who even asked bungie for an extraction shooter
Bungie did...
Just like bungie gay dlc story no one ask for.
All the streams and content creators crying that extraction shooter we’re gonna be the next big thing and take over from BR. Which hasn’t happened.
Sony, I dare you to release Marathon at $40.
They've charged 40 bucks for most of their gaas games...
I hear what you're saying, and yes, the only reason this has a chance is because the specific style of live service isnt F2P; however, I still think this game will hinge on mtx.
If I were Sony, I'd really dial back the mtx out the gate. Put in a lot of content for the money, build up some good will like Warframe did in several years ago.
The 40$ price tag wasn't the complete problem per se, people just saw the 40$ price when the free open beta barely got 2k players and that made it look like straight up cockiness on Sony's side. Now that 40$ price point is a stigma for them going forward. Ultimately, it might not be that unfair of a price, but people see it as them double dipping due to greed and that is the problem. It's going to affect Marathon, its going to affect any game they sell going forward, all because of Concord.
Hunt is ONLY cosmetics dlc. All playable content is with game purchase
It's sad that this is seen as a positive. Go back a few years and every game had cosmetics for free. Look at old cods, every skin, banner, pfp and attachment earn able through gameplay. Now you pay a premium for a non premium product
@@siren_atlantica There is also skins you can earn for free, but the truth is that you have to have some cash income to keep the servers up and running and people at work making content.
They could get away with 40 bucks... But the game have to look really really cool and fun.
I just watched a video about Fairgame$ last night and I already forgot what it was when you mentioned it again today.
I don’t often comment when it’s a good video, and I agree with you. I just smash like. Just felt compelled to let you know, like 98% of the time, informational and good points. Thanks everyone who helps make these. Much love ❤
If it good its good. Money well spend. If its sux its wasted money.
Asking money for a product is just normal. People being outraged for them asking for money is just crazy.
People being customed to have everything for free. Is so entitled.
Concord wasn't a good game. If it was a 9/10 game people would pay for it.
Its that simple.
youre saying the truth no one wants to hear lol
💯
These people assuming everything should be free because they want it to be free is more annoying.
Not to be a doom and gloom chronic online guy I totally understood Luke’s point but it’s interesting how many gaming UA-camrs, people that usually never mention anything about politics or society trends have increasingly unintentionally been mentioning politics in their videos, idk it gives me an uneasy feeling, like things are going so crazy so fast that it’s getting hard to not notice it even in a like Stephen’s live video :/
Free to play and service games really destroyed how to sell games.
I payed like 140$ (in todays money)f or games like Final Fantasy or Chrono Trigger back in the day and it was ok. Now you have absolutl gems of games on your smartphone but noone is willing to pay 4.99 because everything is supposed to be free.
What gems are on mobile?
Next year would be an interesting year for extraction shooters. Not talking in terms of gameplay, but how the games are perceived since there’s another 40 dollar extraction shooter game coming out in the form of Arc Raiders, also coming out in 2025.
Why are so many UA-camrs/streamers not believing the fact that concord had no players because of the terrible characters and art style 😂 if the game was attractive and had great gameplay with a competent game mode it 100% would have had success but if you’re game isn’t appealing enough to draw interest or worse repulsive nobody is going to even try it.
Price wasn't the primary reason concord failed. Space Marine 2 came out and demonstrated it's not about price. Black Myth Wukong did the same. This is a cope defense.
The shills are running over time to act like concord didn't get killed by the same "its" that killed saints row and a shit ton of other great franchises and made trash like dustborn
It’s because they don’t want to mention that the game failed because it’s bad to hurt their friends feelings that worked on the game. It also can’t be that people weren’t interested in trying the game because the characters were so ugly and off-putting… 😂
As much as I do think F2P is where online shooters should live, it’s kinda lame that the current state of gaming pushes publishers to do it or fail, even if it doesn’t make sense. I’d much rather have a €40 2018 Overwatch experience than a F2P 2024 Overwatch 2, but if they came out with the prior now it would fail before it would even be remembered.
i smell another concord
$40 for a live service entry of a game that doesn't have the SOULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of a game franchise that was built on old Macintosh's
So tell good sir how many hour of marathon do you have put into it, also how does the shooting mechanics feel seeing how you know so much about this soullllllllllllllll less game
@@kevinconley7429It is just what people expect from Bungie as of late. They have fallen far from grace.
@@kevinconley7429 marathon was actually really good and played like doom with a story that was similar to halo but both are extremely based on the book called Ringworld.
@@kevinconley7429 live service games are souless. The entire point of the business model is to siphon as much money out of players as possible.
Marathon 2 was my second fps shooter I had a Mac. Other than the name this game has nothing resembling it.
$40 for Helldivers worked because it was a sequel to an indie game that was $20/30 at launch (9 years ago). I love both Divers, but they are AA at best.
It's going to be sad seeing bungie get shut down after this game flops.
I think the moment Sony priced its PS5 pro it lost an enormous chunk of goodwill from gamers that it's not going to get back before a long time. In that atmosphere, pricing Marathon at 40$ sounds like a suicide for that game to me.
Not really.. its a premium console at a premium price... what a bigger joke is the xbox midgen refresh 2tb all digital system for $600 or the series x galaxy 2tb for $600 for $100 more you can get a much better system. And try building a pc with equivalent specs to the pro.. my 4070 cost me £525 Which is said to be the same power as the pro..
@@tristman8413 for that comparison to be fair you will have to compare unreleased hardware with unreleased GPUs because both the PS5 Pro is coming soon but so are Nvidia's and AMDs GPUs and in raster performance the 7700xt is the equivalent right now which may have the disadvantage in rt and temporarily in ai upscaling (until FSR 4 releases which was already announced even though you can technically use XeSS on AMD GPUs which is AI Upscaling) but it has the advantage of Frame Gen which makes it achieve higher frame rates in any game it wants thanks to FSR3 or AFMF2 with the added advantage of being paired with a potentially better CPU. Now you can get a 7700xt for around 400 and a 7600 for around 200 and you will still be below the price of the ps5 pro with better hardware and if you want to get a stand and a disc drive it gets very close to a decent full build of a "equivalent PC".
I know that DF said the 4070 is the equivalent right now but that is only if you ignore the full feature set of PCs and that would be a unfair disadvantage when PC simply has more ways to improve performance especially if a feature that's ignored almost doubles frame rates.
@@tristman8413well, with the Pro staying at a Zen 2 processor, it’s not gonna do much more than the base PS5 except look a little nicer. You might as well just buy a PC at that point. I built mine around $750 two years ago (Ryzen 7 5800x and RX 6700XT).
I’m gonna let you in on a secret… you don’t have to buy it. You can keep your PS5 if you already have it or get a PS5 if you don’t want the pro version. They didn’t take away the PS5 dumbass.
Co-op PvE market is an obvious one to make games for. The current games of that genre are DRG, Helldivers 2, L4D2, Killing Floor 2, Darktide and Vermintide 2 and some minor ones that aren't fully just PvE like Sea of Thieves. A lot of these games are pretty old and the ones at the top like DRG aren't even that big and that high budget.
Imagine combination of DRG's cave networks and destructible terrain with the more advanced gameplay systems and control of Helldivers 2 all while being a one time payment game that is supported by cosmetic skins and a free battle pass like DRG does it
It's very much an untapped market. When the king of PvE Co-op horde shooter is a game from 2009, it's time to try something and find success there rather then slamming your head againts a wall in a saturated market
by the end of next year the gaming landscape will look a lot different lmaoo
Is this going to be a ps exclusive or on all platforms
Correlation is not causation. Concord has free weekend where nobody plays. If price is the main issue, it should have more people trying it out.
The final price tag of the release game didnt help that much is for sure.
Marathon needs to take a risk. If they play it safe, it will flop. We need something new and exciting.
At the very least, the art style looks quite interesting.
The difference for me with this and other extractions is that what am I extracting towards or not that but "is it fun to keep playing even if I lose".
I see they nailed character design again! 👌
Meanwhile another upcoming extraction shooter, Forever Winter, announced going early access awhile ago and are pricing it under 30$, it's very telling when a large company like Sony doesn't see how they keep tripping over themselves.
Praying this one is good
"Marathon" is a pretty good title for game running head first into an open grave
I was laughing to myself when Concord was $40 and there were people saying "I'd rather pay the money and get the complete experience." Even though they said no to battle passes, there were multiple indications that there was going to be plenty of MTX's still, especially considering what the game was wanting to do. I'm not sure why some people were thinking that was going to be a complete experience.
Fitting that Sony thinks they are apple now and they are banking on an old Mac game.
I'm so glad that helldivers 2 is buffing everything tomorrow 😂
not a sony IP
@@johansvensson833helldivers is a Sony ip... based off of starship troopers which is also a Sony ip
Think now that the drama of Concord, most consumer/gamers are on guard. So even if the game is good and 40 bucks most will be on the fence and unsure. Sure some will try, but most won't. And Sony has fostered to much single player experiences so the expectations are in that direction. Sure Sony also needs some multiplayer games but it all seems to high brow. Which also doesn't make it look accessible.
Kinda miss the PS3 and early PS4 era where you had allot of fun games with some small multiplayer component or a small multiplayer game to begin with something for everything. And now it feels like Sony doesn't have that. ( Even if they have it) for PS5.
The problem with pricing Marathon at 40 dollars is the first thing you think of is Concord, and the last thing you want is for people to think of a failed game when trying to push your new one.
To be fair Sonys plan to “throw random shit at a wall and see what sticks” with these $40 live service games has been a 50/50 success rate lol
50/50? The only one that had success was helldivers 2.
Playstation all-stars, Concord that splatoony rip-off all flopped.. I love Playstation and hope they stop making them
@@tristman8413 50/50 as helldivers was a huge success while but concord was a huge fail those have been the only 2 games that have been part of Sonys “plan” that I was talking about.
"We asked the guys who think its reasonable to charge $35 for a poorly made tshirt no one in their right mind would wear outside and they said $40 was good"
And don't forget, their region lock shenanigans is still in effect to 180 countries so it's not a surprise when the player count is low on launch.
I think it boils down to one thing. If Sony release a F2P game then you don't need to pay for PS+ to play it.
They should though if they actually want to compete with all the other free live service games that are successful. I'd have given Concord a shot if it was free, especially after all the negative press just to see if it was actually that bad. Gameplay might have hooked me even if I didn't like the character designs. wasn't going to try it for $40 though.
Sony: Lets release multiple games in an overloaded genre that missed the boat all at once!
Everyone knows that competing with yourself is clearly the best strategy.
obviously don't pre-order, don't hype it up, but if reviews say it's good i'm more likely to buy this than concord. i am far, far more amped up to see Forever Winter tho
also Luke - "you can't assume nowadays that a AAA title will be good when it comes out" - we were never able to assume this? when was this an assumption everyone made? It's just that our tolerance for bugs has decreased bc of Steam. There has never been an era when people assumed that every AAA title that came out was going to be good. There were just so few releases 20-15 years ago compared to now that even if it was hot garbage, people were probably still going to play it because well, what else were we gonna do?
i am so tired of hearing about this mystical magical period when any game you could pick up off the shelf at gamestop would be good because that time *NEVER EXISTED*
I didn't know what Fairgame$ was, so i decided to look up the trailer after finishing this video. Not only have I previously watched the trailer, but i watched your video about it. That's a bad sign when a game is so uninteresting that i completely forgot it existed.
The best marketing is honestly no marketing. When people underestimate a game an its good it will spread via word of mouth and social media like helldivers did.
form the picture leak is not hero based shooter, but is lock like warlock titan hunter in destiny 2,
I would love to see a marathon of failed companies making fail services.
I’m honestly fine with the price tag, it just has to be fun, distinguishable, and worth it
Yesss, do it Sony!! Release it at $40!! MAKE IT $50, I PROMISE I'LL BUY TEN COPIES! 😆
40$ is fine as long as it stands out and looks incredible. They need to show gameplay asap though
40 dollar launch price, announcement of a new Destiny for mobile- they are out of their damn minds. Bungie will run it like a live service game with all the in-game shop crap we've all come to loathe and despise. This is definitely a "controlled leak". Marathon sounds exactly like it's a rip off of The Finals. I'll play it if it's ftp. I won't risk 40 bucks of my hard-earned money to pay for it though. I say what happened with Concord, and I know how Bungie works. I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
this can go in two ways. If the game is fun people will pay like Helldivers 2 or if the game sucks it will end up like Concord. One advantage this game has Bungie making it but they are not the same Bungie in the past so it can go either way
Sure they can charge you $40 dollars because they made the budget absurd. It doesn't they are entitled to your money. It's not the customers fault that the budget might so high that millions of copies need to be sold to even break even. It's also not the customers fault that Sony will force people to use playstation accounts to play the game which means that they have already lost a chunk of the market because there's a crap ton of countries that the service isn't available in. That's money left on the table because Sony want's to force non Playstation users into their ecosystem.
If it’s a good game, the price tag won’t matter. Helldivers 2 was $40 and sold extremely well.
@@ApsmneShsbshu I don't disagree with that. I guess we'll see what happens when the game comes out.
If you're expecting it for free are you even a customer? And I had to create accounts to play it takes 2, diablo 4 ect. Even had to create a Microsoft account to play sea of thieves.. nobody moaned then..
Hunt Showdown DLCs are all skins so theyre completely optional
The maps ARE the game. Bungie has struggled to make pvp maps for years and $40 for two maps won't get picked up by anyone
The good news is that its still early on enough they can start the switch from paid to free to play business model, if it is true they were going to charge $40
$40? yup you already lost 90% of asian player-
no one want to pay for access here, would rather buy skins
Free to Play success because normie, like me, try game for fun and got hooked-
I started playing game and my first game was Team Fortress 2 in 2018.. I spend 1k hours...
I bought a ton of hats & war paint from the market, buy the premium to play competitive, heck even bought all valve game at full price because I don't know steam sale is a thing... and here I am, in gaming sphere bcus of free 2 play
Back then it hit me like a truck knowing valve don't update any of their game anymore..
nope china spend billions on microtransactions
'Rather buy skins' skins are the most stupid micro transaction ever! It literally doesn't alter the game mechanics at all... the day I buy a battle pass or a skin is the day I retire from gaming.
@tristman8413 He did specifically state the asian market. They treat alot of games like they're all in the mobile gaming market lol
Ubisoft: Speedruning banckruptcie with their bad greedy decisions
Sony: Aint no way im letting them win this marathon
The price is completely fine if the game is close to peak Bungie, but I don't rate the chances of that happening very highly.
They need to make this free on Playstation's premium game sub service, if not the regular PS plus membership, so this game has hopefully has some free reach at launch.
There is definitely room for an extraction shooter to take off console, much more so than another hero shooter.
I don't know a single person who plays Tarkov or other extraction shooters
If the price point was the primary reason, the free beta would have peaked at 500k players.
This lines up with the other recent leaks saying they didn't know how to monetize the game
For me, paying money upfront for a multiplayer game isn't bad at all AS LONG as there are no microtransactions and there is NO real store in the game with any real money. I actually prefer to just pay upfront for a full featured game. Also, that's not why I didn't buy Concord. I didn't buy Concord because of the ideological messaging which I do not support. In addition, I think paying the MONTHLY PSN Fee is the dumbest thing, and makes the 40 dollar "premium" price really cheap in comparison. For me, the biggest detractor to online games are all consoles charging 7-10 dollars a month for playing online.
Splatoon did it perfectly.
Another Sony DOA
How can you be sure about that? U don't even saw single gameplay from it :D
After Concord, expect it to be DOA, Bungie lost its touch.
Bungie made it and were making it before Sony bought them.. That's like saying starfield flopped because of xbox
can we get a gameplay trailer already?
I'm excited to see more info on the game. If the game looks fun and with Bungie puts it's usual beautiful flare in it I would pay $40.
I’m just one guy but I’m sure others would relate. We don’t have time for so many live service games. I’ve been enjoyed valorant. You’d have to come REALLY good to make me play some other live service.
I saw Marathon in the title and thought to myself, "Didn't this game already get shut down? Oh right, that was Concord." 😂
These games are all so similar in almost every way, that I can't even keep up anymore. Nor do I care to. I'll continue to play my massive backlog of physical games that I actually own, that can be played offline, thanks.
I'm with you my friend lol. I avoid pvp like the plague nowadays anyway so I'm just sitting back and watching all these failure fireworks and it's pretty entertaining 😂. I feel bad for the wasted time and effort on some devs end, that does suck since it's mostly thanks to the higher ups commitment to being greedy blind assholes, but yeah.