After making a disastrous debut earlier this year, it was difficult to stay positive about Concord’s potential for success.
In fact, this review was not ready last week. Because almost everyone who had already played the game couldn’t find a match in a round-based mode that would be unlocked beyond a certain player level. It’s how rough it is. But hey, the number of players aside Concorde In fact, is it fun and persuasive as a competitive online shooter? Well, a bit. And that’s the biggest problem. Sometimes everything becomes something that may click and have the juices needed to grow and evolve, but the real moments of joy are too rare.
Read Also:
Manage cookie preferences
First, talk to the elephant in your room. Concord reportedly took eight years to fully develop. Even at its best, the Concord is not that big, taking into account the lofty (and obviously unnecessary) production values on display. At launch it will have 16 characters, 12 maps and six modes (3 completely separate playlists). In addition to those, the “Solo” experience is limited to a range of practice, general tutorials, and five rather basic time trials, all built on the same assets you see in the main multiplayer experience.
That statement clashes with the game we got. This isn’t just a handful of F2P releases we’ve seen over the years in the same genre. There is also the issue of all the effort, time and money placed on embodying every character, lore and complexity in the Concord universe. There is an exquisitely well-known galaxy guide that updates regularly during play. It’s packed with walls of text and things that SF SICKOS would appreciate…if this is a single-player Odyssey (or at least an ambitious cooperative title). My personal theory? At one point, Concord was something completely different and it was eventually reduced to a numbered PVP shooter. The decisive plan to have a high quality cutscene every week only strengthens that idea.
Either way, Concord is well-capable as a hero shooter. I’m back in the beta era, so I’m not that high in that formula, but a lot of iterations and internal testing have been revealed in this game (8 years!) Each character is clearly defined at a playable level, and the notion of stacking passives across the team is an interesting twist that I want to play a bigger role in team building (Marvel Rivals has a similar idea).
But I also agree with the feeling that some characters who are meant to be more agile can often feel uncomfortable or heavy than necessary. This is a shame. I also feel that it is better to play games with a dual sense controller. PlayStation’s first-party PS5/PC releases are great at making the most of your hardware, and Concord is no exception. The tactile feedback is great, but it’s not overkill. I realized I was stuck with it rather than disabling it right away like in the recent Call of Duty entries.
The decision to completely remove the ultimate ability from the equation is bold and adds a tactical sense of “working as a team” to the game, but also creates the problem that the snowballs are too strong unless the enemy team starts moving on its own. It’s especially bad in modes like TDM. Some characters are blatantly bad picks, and even solid team builds feel that bounce is nearly impossible without early match performance.
The map is visually stunning in most cases, but it is also a mixed bag. Some feel it’s just right for a 5v5 size fight, while others come across an arena-like layout that works well, but others come across the remains of the old co-op maps being remade into a PVP scenario that leads to wandering, whether too large, stray allies or enemies. Given the development time, I feel that Concord is falling apart despite all Poland.
Perhaps the actual killing blow comes from the characters themselves, and while it plays well, it’s not visually appealing in most cases. This is a big problem if you are trying to sell hero shooting games in 2024 (it is a difficult job in itself). This has nothing to do with what the worst people we know are spitting out. 90% of the (obviously colorful) cast lacks a distinctive visual design, making the game feel like the result of too many game tests. Ultimately, most freegunners look like aliens and humans who wander into cheap space thrift shops and come out wearing anything. Certainly, the background information for their galaxy guides is cool and all, but most people don’t care.
When you’re in the middle of a match, that mo-cap money and realistic lighting are all not important. You will never notice them either. However, you will notice bland character designs. A lot of work and care was clearly in them, but based on the last related information, like 2019, the whole feels steamed by external inputs and market research.
The PS5 performance and graphics are also head scratcher. The 4k/60 looks like the only target, but this is a strange decision given the competitive nature of the shooter. 2k targeting 120 fps (or 1080p with upscaling) seemed like a logical option to include, but for now I’ve tried too hard to make online games look more realistic than smooth (FPS drops happen in certain situations). In addition to switching to a free-to-play model, we are totally hoping for a performance mode soon.
All of these small flaws stack up the more you play Concord. There are good games under all the tile rubs and bewildering business decisions (such as not offering it on PS Plus extras), but why should you put up with all these frustration when the game doesn’t have a clear identity and there are better alternatives available for free right now?
Certainly, Concord’s premium models around a nightmare FPS filled with passes and paid skins sounded fantastic on paper, but the packaging should be attractive enough to guarantee a purchase. Some of me want to find an audience and improve it, but this looks like another suicide squad situation.
Concord is currently available on PS5 and PC. This review was written in code provided by the publisher of the PS5 version of the game.