Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Now granted, beauty is subjective, and I have to agree that about 60% of these characters either need complete redesigns, or have terrible color palettes. But ugliest game in recent memory? You must not play that many games if you look at the whole thing and call it ugly.
Edited to clarify that I am talking about the game as a whole and not simply the character design.
But the tides are turning - just let these woke pos flop and things will change.
So, whether they are or aren't "that ugly", it's already too much. They need to be SUPER appealing, not like "meh, it's ok I guess".
...UNLESS the owner of the company is down to lose millions just to be a bit eccentric... Like, yeah, sure, there are exceptions but ask whoever funded SSKTJL if they'd do it again. Not sure that everyone on the board would agree... I'd say it's the same for any type of art... Like, you'll have movie producers that KNOW and are prepared to lose a few millions just to make a movie that will be SUPER artistic or inclusive or abstract or whatever, and that movie will cost 20 millions to make and it's fine, but anyone who tries to pitch a movie to a studio while saying "oh, by the way, it will cost 200 millions to make and will never bring back more than 50 millions" will literally get hung in LA LOL...
Also, this is a wild guess but I think that a company would be ok with losing 5 millions to boost their ESG score a lot, but 150 millions = I have doubts and I think that the ESG score obsession will stop soon.
This is what I mean about hyperfixation, I was talking about the game graphically as a whole, not solely the character design. I'm reading OP's statement as a "Whole game is ugly" rather than "These character designs are bad" which, yeah, I don't think they're un-salvageable, but yes, they don't have the broad appeal they're looking for, and I think some major tweaks are in order. Please do not resort to the "cope" argument when someone has a different take on something you happen to not like, I've got no skin in this game, didn't even pre-order. I am here because I genuinely enjoy discussion, and considering these boards have become mostly the same few conversations circlejerking about DEI and wokeness, why not have some variety? I'm talking about technical "beauty" here. Like seriously, tell me some of these gun designs are awful, or the environments are ugly. Map design is a valid criticism, but the modeling team did a really good job rendering detail, even if that detail is towards a character design aesthetic that the general public would end up considering garish.
Concord is a AAA game as far as graphics go, as in the environments, the weapon designs and animations, as well as the technical details of the characters (Even if I find most of the character design itself heavily flawed) are all exceptionally well detailed. Though if I have to be honest, I'm of the mind that all of this detail is the main reason games can take up to the better part of a decade to develop now.
Since you asked about the gameplay, it's nothing to write home about, but still well built. Very solid movement and shooting mechanics, every character feels useful in their own way and the balance right now is pretty decent. On top of that, the skill system doesn't use ultimates, so I feel like there is a bit more skill required to get a satisfying team wipe.
The pronoun thing honestly depends on how uncomfortable the concept makes you. Like yeah some of those folk are the most insufferable self righteous a**holes I've ever met, but I know quite a few who are way more chill about being misgendered or just treat listing their preferred pronuouns as a time saving thing in online social spaces. Does it need to be on the character select screen at all times? No, I'd personally put it in a biography section, but it is a rather negligible design decision that doesn't effect the overall game.
And yeah, you are spot on about why some games take 10 years to develop. More and more games are being speedproduced these days it seems (not necessarily linked to DEI). Like, so many early releases, so many Vampire Survivors clones being rushed, so many souls like... Sometimes they success, sometimes they fail, but if you DO insert a lot of DEI, your chances of failing are like... 99999999x bigger. Flintlock has 129 players online right now lol.
I know that there are mentally sane trans people but the loud, insane, immature ones are literally SO F*CKING loud and insufferable, that it's bringing a TON of hate to ALL of them. They think that they're SO brilliant, innovative, etc. but they're basically exactly like "Just Stop Oil", it's an organisation of idiots vandalising stuff to promote the stop of using oil/fuel. I wish that we didn't use oil, I don't use oil, but because of how stupid they are, they make me want to poor gas over them and light a cigarette... It's exactly the same for DEI zealots. They're making LGBT + black people become more subject to hate because they are toxic little brats that think that they are above everything... It's disgusting.
I acknowledge that you did provide a real argument. Apologies if this was interpreted as being aggressively defensive, it is very hard to read intent through plain text. Can't say I disagree with your take. The worst of any group makes the whole movement take a hit, and its always sad to see decent ideas get hijacked by extremists. I appreciate the civility dude
the rest is just want to be hipsters or something is wrong with them
It is though. That's why we (we being the English language) have a term called "conventionally attractive." people can find beauty in the strangest things, trying to simplify beauty as "Objective" with a simple statement of "You're wrong" is a fairly infantile argument.
But that is ok, you are entitled to your opinion. Nobody here is telling you to like the game or it's designs.
Now, if #1 is Margot Robbie and #2 is Rihanna, it becomes hard, because BOTH are attractive but look very different; but that's not the point. Both are attractive; that's the point.
Last, #1 is Margot Robbie again and #2 is one of the female characters of concord. The guess is easy to take again, because you are intelligent enough to admit that if ANY of the viewers find #2 remotely cute, it certainly won't be the majority and that a good amount (possibly 90%) of the viewers are literally drooling over #1.
Orki is hyperfocusing on the character designs and disregarding the point I'm actually trying to make here, which is while the characters aren't commercially appealing, the environments, weapons, and animations are all extremely well done. That is the point I am trying to make but we keep doubling back to the character designs because that is all anyone seems to want to talk about.
I would argue that Heymar, Vale, and perhaps a younger version of Dutchess (She's a old woman, but one of those old women you can tell looked pretty good when they were young. Think Ana from Overwatch and her alt costume where she's 30 years younger.) EDIT: I'm going to include Teo in this even though I'm not into dudes, hes a fit white commando looking man with a bionic eye and I figure he fits the bill of "attractive". Would be considered fairly conventionally attractive strictly from the facial features and level of physical fitness they all have. Not going to include their outfits in that statement because I personally think most of the outfits the characters are wearing need serious work. Though Vale has a cool looking pair of bionic legs so I could see that not being an "attractive" trait.
I am not arguing that the entire cast of Concord are conventionally attractive, nor do they necessarily need to be, but as far as selling your game to the widest audience, it is a safe bet to try to make them so, yes. Overwatch excelled in that category so hard, it accidentally created a small porn industry. And while Concord doesn't need to swing that far in the other direction, They could at least try to make some of these characters look more "combat ready" or go for a more stylized look to make their characters pop more.
But again, the character design isn't what I'm arguing is beautiful here. Just look at something like Star Child's shotgun and tell me that thing wouldn't be right at home in Unreal Tournament. There are some solid graphical choices in the environments, weapons, and level of detail across the board. So while finding the characters ugly is a subjective choice I happen to mostly agree with with some caveats, I cannot say the same about the rest of the game.
And as I said in the original post, I'm talking about something more like ugliness of spirit than strict cosmetic appeal. I look at Scorn and I'm shocked and disgusted but I'm equally impressed. It's not for me, but I respect the work that clearly went into it. I look at this game and I want to forget it exists. I want to believe there's not tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars being dumped into this optical waterboarding that could've paid for a dozen or more actually good games to be made by people who aren't hatefully in love with ugliness.
The main problem is that the gameplay of Destiny PVP is way better.
So Concord already exists in a superior version, the character designs are fixated on, because gameplay isn't even worthy of discussion.
Furthermore the characters are the first link to a universe.