looks too much like apex legends imo

  • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Well its not Concord 2.0. Already has WAY more players than Concord ever did, almost 100k peak players on Steam alone, currently 67k in-game as of the time I am posting this.

    I can’t say that 3v3 is the right fit for the game, the maps are rather large for it. But I think with a bit more work in a few updates, it has far more staying power than Concord ever had.

    • VivianRixia@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Its free unlike Concord, so having a large number of launch players is not surprising. Keeping them is the real challenge.

      • Goodeye8@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 minutes ago

        I’m 100% of the opinion that the main reason Concord failed is because it didn’t get any advertising. The first time I heard about Concord was the news that it completely flopped at launch and I wasn’t the only one. When that’s the first thing people hear about the game they’re not even going to bother to get interested in what the game is about. To this day I don’t even know if Concord had any redeeming qualities because I haven’t even seen any gameplay outside of 5 second no-context clips. Even bad games receive better numbers than Concord.

        Highguard is going to have more staying power than Concord solely on the fact that it actually had an advertising budget.

      • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Even still, its got more legs to stand on than Concord had, which was zero.

        I think its serviceable unlike Concord, which required too many changes.