Concord - robots with pronouns

Other character with (night vision) googles on it's design that actually uses them is Sam Fisher, and you can see when he pulls them on and off during gameplay.
Snake since MGS1 can put thermal/night vision googles and he seems fine with it.
Hell, even CJ from GTA San Andreas can use both googles.
 
Reading the first page again now is pretty funny.. A lot of comments that turned out to be right on the money, even more so than the posters imagined likely. The pic of YT reactions now looks like something posted in the last few days. So many called it.


I've been thinking about this. In addition to hopefully teaching devs/pubs another lesson about games as a service and shoving in woke shit. I hope this is taken as a lesson that yes, style, "cool" and sexy appeal DO matter. Nobody wants to play as fat, ugly, dull or retarded looking characters. The masses may have ignored it mostly till now, but the sheer overload of this crap lately is beginning to take its toll. Plus, it only has a chance of working in the first place when it's a game people actually want to play and the game is good. As we've seen once again, this kind of shit will not sell with a turd. As the tiny group of people who's sensibilities it caters to, don't buy or play games regardless.
 
I hope this is taken as a lesson that yes, style, "cool" and sexy appeal DO matter. Nobody wants to play as fat, ugly, dull or retarded looking characters.
They'll double down. They always double down. Those are Tumblr's children getting jobs in the cultural market, when you think the freak show couldn't be more clownish, those crazy bastards shove uglyness on their works that you never thought it was possible before.

And frankly, it's fucking hilarious.

Snake since MGS1 can put thermal/night vision googles and he seems fine with it.
Hell, even CJ from GTA San Andreas can use both googles.
*snorts* ackshully, thermal goggles appeared first in Metal Gear for the MSX in 1987. You would know if you were a REAL fan like me. *tips fedora*
 
Last edited:
Characters can be uncool, or ugly, or mechanically uninspired.

But the more of these traits a game has, the more likely it will flop.

Borderlands 1 only had one hot girl, but it worked since the rest were memorable, interesting, funny or cool in other departments.

Overwatch did fine, the space Harambe added flavour.

Concord was one flavour of lame hipster woke. The most appealing character is the flat woman with a bodyglove and a helmet, who looks like a generic background npc from any other game.
 
I SWEAR TO FUCKIN GOD... Till yesterday... I thought the one with the blue jacket (number4), is a woman! Im not just trying to be funny, I saw a video yesterday where it was said its a guy. I didnt know.
You're not the only one. He's so fuckin' dumpy yet baby faced, most people who are introduced to him without any context just assume it's a woman in a shitty cosplay. But really, it's a college junior in a shitty cosplay.
 
I SWEAR TO FUCKIN GOD... Till yesterday... I thought the one with the blue jacket (number4), is a woman! Im not just trying to be funny, I saw a video yesterday where it was said its a guy. I didnt know.

It's amazing how much better the AI siluettes, colors and general design competency is. You almost don't realize how absolutely talentless the Concord concept artists are until you see it side by side like this. Especially when it's not about sex/aesthetics and just simple composition, look at teal nigga, same character just done by a robot instead of a retard. Imagine being the 3D guy tasked with rendering this trash.
 
Concord was one flavour of lame hipster woke. The most appealing character is the flat woman with a bodyglove and a helmet, who looks like a generic background npc from any other game.
Reminds me of how Starfield had all it's companions have the exact same personality and morality, making each an obnoxious, whiny urbanite that hit you over the head with a newspaper over every single little thing you did. Meanwhile, less than a decade ago, Fallout 4 had a rich variety of characters that each had their own thing going on, had an entire spectrum of morality and some even aligned with certain factions, making them your enemies in some situations. Fallout 4 was not a well written game mind you, but it's scary we've regressed so much since then. This Overwatch comparison is the exact same thing: OW has a whole slew of different characters(before Blizzard started ruining them), while Concord has the same spectrum of retard helmet wearing fat mutts with the only variation between them being their pronouns. The cast of Concord was the background cast of freaks from a cyberpunk media of your choice, "Quarantine" or Judge Dredd come to mind.
 
I'm pretty sure I already said this but it's baffling they chose this route. For a hero shooter in the year of our lord 2024 to be a $40 buy to play title, but also be a live service... you'd have to give players a reason to jump ship from Overwatch.
This is exactly it. The FPS hero shooter game is not exactly dying, but it's massively oversaturated. There may be millions of people who play games like this daily, but they've already settled on something, whether it's Overwatch, TF2, or whatever.

The gameplay looks totally generic and other than the 5v5 thing, which isn't terribly common, what does it have to offer that would make anyone switch? Repulsively ugly characters? Pronouns? The DEI shit didn't make it a complete catastrophe by itself, but how do you spend $200 million to offer absolutely nothing new except that shit?
 
For shits and giggles decided to see which overwatch characters felt the most equivalent design-wise to the concord slop

ovrwrtch2.jpg
ovwerwatch1.png

Even when missing some of the most popular characters, the overwatch cast still looks significantly cooler and more fun than concords, and their outfits are way better and know how to utilise colour in a way that isnt overwhelming.

And as far as the 'wokeness' of the characters goes, there's still significantly more to enjoy for the average gamer.

1. Since most gamers are white men, 4 cool and interesting white male characters. (Edit: i accidentally assumed the blue guy was comically tiny in game, can replace with Doomfist for diversity)
doomfist-featured.jpg.jpg
2. 3 skinny and attractive white/east asian girls and 1 chubby but still cute east asian girl
3. 3 girls with dark skin and 1 girl with blue skin who are also skinny and attractive.
4. 2 token cool older ladies for whoevers into that
5. Humanoid robot and unique looking robot

Could of course still use some major adjustments like evening out the gender ratio, but this makes me have even less sympathy for whoever designed these things. I really dont think corporate suits can be blamed for everything that makes them ugly.
 
Last edited:
For shits and giggles decided to see which overwatch characters felt the most equivalent design-wise to the concord slop

View attachment 6391539
View attachment 6391540

Even when missing some of the most popular characters, the overwatch cast still look significantly cooler and more fun than concords, and their outfits are way better and know how to utilise colour in a way that isnt overwhelming.

And as far as the 'wokeness' of the characters goes, there's still significantly more to enjoy for the average gamer.

1. Since most gamers are white men, 4 cool and interesting white male characters.
2. 3 skinny and attractive white/east asian girls and 1 chubby but still cute east asian girl
3. 3 girls with dark skin and 1 girl with blue skin who are also skinny and attractive.
4. 2 token cool older ladies for whoevers into that
5. Humanoid robot and unique looking robot

Could of course still use some major adjustments like evening out the gender ratio, but this makes me have even less sympathy for whoever designed these things. I really dont think corporate suits cant be blamed for everything that makes them ugly.
I had said so on another post, but something else that makes the OW cast likeable is that they're actually characters with something to offer. But besides that OW nails what somebody would find fundamentally appealing about a character. Cowboys with ridiculous big irons are cool, flying mech suits with rocket launchers are cool, being a grapple-hooking wall-hacking sniper is cool. You could go even further and talk mechanics; Tracer appeals because of how much she demands from your mechanics and situational awareness to flank, dive in, try and get a pick, all while you're playing a paper-thin glass cannon on the knife's edge zooming around in the middle of a fight. In a word it's exciting, and that appeals. All the DEI shit with Overwatch is just an afterthought, a byproduct of the setting; they're meant to be a global task force tapping the best of the best from every corner of the world whose unique approaches to problems can offer something to the operation (which isn't unprecedented, see Rainbow Six, even before Siege).

I'll add that the fact that they are from such diverse backgrounds has sometimes driven the characters into conflict with one another, which from a narrative standpoint is interesting; the globohomo approach that the team was designed around naturally introduces clashing perspectives and experiences, and conflict in your story is interesting. Overwatch in execution (within the world of Overwatch) didn't pan out to be as idyllic as its founders had envisioned. From the outset of the game's launch it's established that you're getting the band back together after they had a huge falling out and splintering. If you just make it all sunshine and rainbows and everybody got along happily ever after then what is there to be intrigued by?

Of course, and I think it goes without saying, but in general Overwatch has the sex appeal, and the fact of the matter is that it in no small part sells. OW characters simply look good, Concord's characters look like ugly real-life people, and why would you want to play as that?
 
Last edited:
It looks like Concord is getting a sequel:
Boy are people excited for it
1725747651715.png


1725746786549.png


How many times has this happened so far?
Lawbreakers by Bosskey Productions (headed by CliffyB) which died pretty quickly after it came out. It was released in August 2017 and went offline permanently in September 2018.
1725747145454.png


There was Crucible from Amazon back in early 2020 that was aborted before it was released out of open beta
1725746944263.png


Hyenas by Sega - closed beta in 2022 and it too was aborted later that year before it came out.
1725747513617.png
 
It looks like Concord is getting a sequel:
Boy are people excited for it
View attachment 6391839

View attachment 6391786

How many times has this happened so far?
Lawbreakers by Bosskey Productions (headed by CliffyB) which died pretty quickly after it came out. It was released in August 2017 and went offline permanently in September 2018.
View attachment 6391802

There was Crucible from Amazon back in early 2020 that was aborted before it was released out of open beta
View attachment 6391791

Hyenas by Sega - closed beta in 2022 and it too was aborted later that year before it came out.
View attachment 6391831
Perhaps there's an autistic in the high elite circles who's obsessed in funding the same game over and over? Copypasting and recoloring the characters like your typical and good old Deviantart sperg? Hell, there's even a Sonic character, the evidences were under our noses all this time.

Think about it, they all have the same edgy "I hate my rich dad" vibe.
 
Perhaps there's an autistic in the high elite circles who's obsessed in funding the same game over and over? Copypasting and recoloring the characters like your typical and good old Deviantart sperg? Hell, there's even a Sonic character, the evidences were under our noses all this time.

Think about it, they all have the same edgy "I hate my rich dad" vibe.

Social Justice Devs making a game about black thieves. Hilarious.

https://x.com/KahliefAdams/status/1831079714934706582?ref_url=

Did anybody see this moron's Tweet after the Concord debacle? Yes, I am sure the first thing investors want to hear is that there is a strong possibility they won't see a return on their investment.
 
Back