Do the DEI developers of games such as concord and veilguard still have an audience?

[sick duck]

Concord is an infamous failure, and veilguard didn't do badly but it was very far away from breaking any sales records. I look at social media groups that built up 10+ million subscribers like IGN and ther videos today have hardly any attention. Kotaku was a titan of games media too, and barely anyone looks at anymore.

The only reason I am asking about this is that modern year games aren't my main focus for gaming anymore. None of my past 5 games were developed in the 2020s. I am not opposed to DEI in principle, and I recognize that as filled to the brim as veilguard was with the stuff, I probably would have disliked it for a whole lot of reasons related to gameplay and the lack of continuity it had with the dragon age series from an artistic and lore point of view.

[Nx Machina]

引用自 Tito Shivan：

No it didn't. It's the regular post hoc discourse applied to everything that fails.

Exactly. My toaster failed this morning therefore i won't be buying again from that "woke company" lol.

Clickbait and ragebait. YouTubers do love views because they equal income with the viewers believing the YouTuber gives a damn about them.

[Crazy Tiger]

I like how Marvel rivals suddenly isn't woke anymore. Absolutely not related to it being succesful.

It was named woke a lot before.

[D. Flame]

引用自 D. Flame：

引用自 Tito Shivan：

No it didn't. It's the regular post hoc discourse applied to everything that fails.

Yet, you can never defend that position, and every time I provide a well-reason, well-supported, and factually cited counter argument, you suddenly run away, ghost the thread, only to start repeat the same exact debunked arguments the second you think it has blown over.

And people were already pointing out that concord had been stripped of all personality thanks to modern woke ideology, even before the game released, so it can't be post hoc.

Marvel Rivals is full of personality because it completely ignores the agenda being pushed onto Western Devs. Concord had nothing but bland characters and designs because no one is allowed to be attractive or unique, since it might offend someone, according to these agendas.

I mean it is pretty telling when Games like Tomb Raider 1-3 is getting remastered and they are putting a disclaimer on it, or how the Legacy of Kain remaster is going in an censoring statues of all things.

引用自 The nameless Gamer：

It's a MARVEL game. That alone would've made sure it sold. Do you think Arc System Works' Dragon Ball FighterZ would've sold as well as it did if it wasn't a famous IP? People still buy brands, even when they're not necessarily associated with quality any more.

Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy had an all time peak of 9826 players.

MvCI had an all time peak of 3592.

Etc.

The IP is not enough to carry the game by itself.

And yes, FighterZ would have sold well. ArcSys is one of the most well respected devs for fighting games, and even Guilty Gear Strive has similar numbers to FighterZ.

FighterZ all time peak: 44,234
Strive all time peak: 30,939

Concord all time Peak: 660
Marvel Rival's all time peak: 642,333
Concord's free beta all time peak: 2,388 (so it was a flop even when it was free)

[wesnef]

引用自 D. Flame：

引用自 wesnef：

Just a side note - a big part of Kotaku going down the tubes the last few years is that the entire Gawker/Gizmodo media group got bought&sold several times, finally ending up with one of those awful "private equity" finance firms, which have been sabotaging & selling off pieces of the group whenever they could. Most/all of the original writers are gone, the editors quit in protest due to dictates handed down from the idiot owners (like "you must write/publish X 'guide' articles every day"), the comments section was turned off (which removes any community engagement), etc. . .

Most of the content these days is churned-out "How to do X in Game Y" 'guides', and even on the more useful articles there's no talking about what you read with other readers/seeing other people's thoughts on it. It's a hollow shell of what it was, and it's all down to the private equity vampires who own them.

Kotaku was in the toilet before any of that happened. They had been in decline for a decade, and even Nintendo and Ubosoft blacklisted them.

They got blacklisted for printing leaked info that Nin/Ubi didn't like getting out. That's the kind of thing you "the evil devs are scheming against us" types should like.

[D. Flame]

引用自 wesnef：

引用自 D. Flame：

Kotaku was in the toilet before any of that happened. They had been in decline for a decade, and even Nintendo and Ubosoft blacklisted them.

They got blacklisted for printing leaked info that Nin/Ubi didn't like getting out. That's the kind of thing you "the evil devs are scheming against us" types should like.

They got black listed because they lacked journalistic standards.

[wesnef]

Ah, good. . . we haven't had the "ethics in game journalism" Gamergate stupidity in a while. That's where they practiced all their "how to manufacture outrage in the social media era" techniques, before unleashing them on politics.

[The nameless Gamer]

引用自 D. Flame：

引用自 The nameless Gamer：

It's a MARVEL game. That alone would've made sure it sold. Do you think Arc System Works' Dragon Ball FighterZ would've sold as well as it did if it wasn't a famous IP? People still buy brands, even when they're not necessarily associated with quality any more.

Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy had an all time peak of 9826 players.

MvCI had an all time peak of 3592.

Etc.

The IP is not enough to carry the game by itself.

And yes, FighterZ would have sold well. ArcSys is one of the most well respected devs for fighting games, and even Guilty Gear Strive has similar numbers to FighterZ.

FighterZ all time peak: 44,234
Strive all time peak: 30,939

Concord all time Peak: 660
Marvel Rival's all time peak: 642,333
Concord's free beta all time peak: 2,388 (so it was a flop even when it was free)

FighterZ still has a higher peak than Strive, showing that the IP DOES matter. And that's compared to Strive. Please compare FighterZ to previous Arc System Works titles like Xrd SIGN, Revelator and the Blazblue games. People. Buy. Brands. Only dedicated fighting game fans even knew who Arc System Works are. MvC Infinite failed because it lost the competition with itself, namely the previous installments, MvC II and III more specifically. It lost the competition due to losing half its roster AND the poor visual design. You tend to omit rather crucial details almost as a habit.

[D. Flame]

引用自 wesnef：

-snip-

Hey, let's keep it civil, I would rather be able to reply than have to report.

[D. Flame]

引用自 The nameless Gamer：

引用自 D. Flame：

Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy had an all time peak of 9826 players.

MvCI had an all time peak of 3592.

Etc.

The IP is not enough to carry the game by itself.

And yes, FighterZ would have sold well. ArcSys is one of the most well respected devs for fighting games, and even Guilty Gear Strive has similar numbers to FighterZ.

FighterZ all time peak: 44,234
Strive all time peak: 30,939

Concord all time Peak: 660
Marvel Rival's all time peak: 642,333
Concord's free beta all time peak: 2,388 (so it was a flop even when it was free)

FighterZ still has a higher peak than Strive, showing that the IP DOES matter.

The percentage change from FighterZ to Strive is around -30%

The percentage change from Marvel Rivals to Concord is around -99.9%

[Tito Shivan]

引用自 Crazy Tiger：

I like how Marvel rivals suddenly isn't woke anymore. Absolutely not related to it being succesful.

Because as I said it's all post-hoc dicourse. To use a gross word it's all bullshitting.

And bullshitting has the benefit of not having to be consistent.

引用自 wesnef：

Ah, good. . . we haven't had the "ethics in game journalism" Gamergate stupidity in a while. That's where they practiced all their "how to manufacture outrage in the social media era" techniques, before unleashing them on politics.

It also was the crack from which all kinds of bigotries got their entry into the discourse.

[Piston Smashed™]

引用自 D. Flame：

Concord failed because of modern woke ideology.

引用自 D. Flame：

You can't play it. It was so bad that its all time peak players was only 697, and the game got shutdown, and as I recall, the studio that made it got shuttered.

Are all bad games now classes as woke?

[The nameless Gamer]

引用自 D. Flame：

引用自 The nameless Gamer：

FighterZ still has a higher peak than Strive, showing that the IP DOES matter.

The percentage change from FighterZ to Strive is around -30%

The percentage change from Marvel Rivals to Concord is around -99.9%

But you are AGAIN leaving out an important difference:
Both Strive and DBFZ had heavy marketing behind them. Concord did NOT.
And one more: Strive has very little competition and is NOT competing against a free to play game. Concord was competing against free to play games which were already popular BEFORE Marvel Rivals came out. There was no way that a hero shooter with a price tag and without marketing could win a crowd over from Overwatch 1 and 2, Valorant and even Paladins.
Meanwhile, people were STARVED for a good Dragon Ball fighting game. Before FighterZ, all they got were the bad kind of "kusoge".

[Crazy Tiger]

引用自 Piston Smashed™：

引用自 D. Flame：

Concord failed because of modern woke ideology.

引用自 D. Flame：

You can't play it. It was so bad that its all time peak players was only 697, and the game got shutdown, and as I recall, the studio that made it got shuttered.

Are all bad games now classes as woke?

Well, d'oh. woke just means "stuff I don't like", remember?

Hence why the succesful games suddenly turn into "not woke", no matter the rhetoric before.

[Crystal Sharrd]

引用自 Start_Running：

They do.
Concord didn't fail because of DEI.
It failed because it was a lacklustre game released into an oversaturated genre with many established titles.

Dragon Age Veilguard.
Can't speak to that. Never really bothered with the franchise

The prerelease information alone was what concerned me as a Dragon Age fan.
1. Just like Mass Effect, a big part of Dragon Age's identity is that your decisions matter. They transferred across most DLC expansions in Origins (with Darkspawn Chronicles and Leliana's Song being notable exceptions, as an AU and prequel, respectively), and across games throughout Origins, II, and Inquisition. However, Veilguard threw that all away. All it cares about in regards to past decisions are four things from Inquisition: Who your Inquisitor was, who they romanced, their relationship with Solas, and what they did with the Inquisition after Trespasser.
2. Gameplay. Prerelease information it's even worse than Inquisition was. Instead of having access to all abilities, you only select a few to use on missions.

[Bishop]

They never had an audience in the first place. They are games made by activists, funded by anti-Whites, and purchased by normies. The only reason they sell any copies at all is because normies buy anything regardless of quality.