Concord debuted with a unique approach to a multiplayer game by choosing not to follow the free-to-play trend. The game is Sony’s venture into the hero shooter genre alongside developer Firewalk Studios. However, its decision to launch with a $40 price tag may have led to an unexpectedly rocky start.
With launch numbers far below expectations and a crowded market filled with free alternatives, many are questioning whether the choice to charge upfront might have been a fatal misstep. The community is now left wondering whether it would’ve been better off free to play.
Concord’s Launch Has Been Underwhelming To Say The Least
Concord was expected to make a strong entry into the crowded shooter market, drawing on the experience of the devs at Firewalk, many of whom worked on Destiny. It features a roster of characters known as Freegunners, each with distinctive abilities that you’d expect from a hero shooter.
Comment
byu/Turbostrider27 from discussion
inGames
Despite this, the game’s player numbers have been dismal. Since launch, the game peaked at just 697 concurrent players on Steam. This is such a sharp contrast to the success of other shooters like Helldivers 2, which saw significantly higher engagement.
Helldivers 2 also launched at the $40 price point but managed to achieve a peak of nearly 500,000 players on Steam. The game has been one of the biggest hits of 2024, but its success was a bit of an outlier. The game also did not launch into an overcrowded market compared to Concord.
Would it Have Been Better Off Free To Play?
The decision not to go free-to-play could doom Concord’s future. Multiplayer games thrive on large, active communities, and with such a low player count at launch, it’s difficult to see how Concord will maintain its player base, let alone grow it.
Comment
byu/Turbostrider27 from discussion
inGames
Sony might have hoped to replicate Helldivers 2’s success but underestimated the impact of free-to-play models on player retention and community growth. The fact that it launched with such low numbers, despite a strong marketing push and the backing of a major publisher, is a clear indication that the game’s pricing model is a significant barrier to entry.
Man, not being free to play is going to kill this game.
— ANORA1 (@GundamJoe) August 24, 2024
I wonder if that was a bungie recommendation
But would the game really have benefitted from being free? It’s definitely possible if you look at Marvel Rivals for example.
NetEase’s entry into the same genre has seen great success in its beta. But it also has the backing of a powerful brand like Marvel behind it.
Concord’s gameplay, while solid, is not groundbreaking enough to justify its price tag. Reviews have been mixed, with some players praising the gunplay and map design, but others criticizing the game for being too similar to existing titles.
Transitioning to a free-to-play model could help attract more players and build a stronger community. Free-to-play games often rely on a small percentage of players making purchases to generate revenue, but they benefit from having a large player base.
What do you think about Concord? Let us know in the comments!
