Hacker News Reader

Comment by PaulHoule | Hacker News Reader

I don’t think developing a new PvP shooter is a viable business, particularly if you take 8 years to do it. And if you expect people to shell out a lot of cash up front when the successful competitors are mostly free.

A single player game can succeed if you do something remarkable in terms of graphics, story, gameplay, etc. Not necessarily all of them but some of them. A PvP game has fewer factors you control (less story) but requires absolutely that you create a two-sided market of players —- it’s like saying you’re going to make Facebook in 2024. Even if the base game was better than Overwatch 2 or Fortnite it would a struggle, but the fact that they wanted to make another hero shooter proves they don’t have the vision or creativity to make something better. Is that toxic positivity?

View on HN

> I don’t think developing a new PvP shooter is a viable business

Valve is currently working on Deadlock and seems to have no issues getting players despite its still unfinished state.

Indeed, but Valve has already other viable business and a lot of fans that will be more easily convinced to try the game. It's not the same situation.

Sony also has other viable business and a lot of fans that will be more easily convinced to try the game. Concord isn't some random game, it's a massive bet by Sony, a giant in the gaming industry.

The development of the game was started 7 years before Sony bought the studio. I agree Sony is in similar position than Valve, but the studio was lucky to find Sony to back them IMHO.

And Sony doesn't ?

Fully prepared to eat these words, but what live service games does Sony have that are in the same realm as Counter-Strike, DOTA, and TF2?

That's why Valve fans will need less convincing than Sony.

> particularly if you take 8 years to do it. And if you expect people to shell out a lot of cash up

The time and cash is key here. Time in that if you are just doing what your competitors are doing with nothing new to show for it AND to expect people to pay for it. Deadlock is neither

If nobody listens to well-founded criticism like yours and just says "nah, people will love it" -- yes that would be a good example of toxic positivity.

> I don’t think developing a new PvP shooter is a viable business, particularly if you take 8 years to do it.

Funnily enough Overwatch 1 came out just over 8 years ago, so Concord was probably pitched as a "me too" clone of that from its inception.

Maybe Overwatch seems to exist solely for Blizzard/Microsoft to screw up, but it seems odd that they seem to be constantly on the verge of shutting down OWL, despite it being a top 20 Twitch game. They got so much right while creating a completely new set of characters, and then constantly leave players with the uncertainty of whether they care about the game at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com