Just when you thought everyone was done talking about Concord now that Sony has officially pulled the plug on the game, someone had to go ahead and dig even deeper into the mess that it already was.
According to industry insider Colin Moriarty, who spoke extensively with a former Concord developer, the project’s total cost reached a staggering $400 million. This figure dwarfs the budgets of Sony’s most successful first-party titles, including the award-winning titles Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 ($315 million), The Last of Us Part 2 ($220 million+), and God of War Ragnarok ($200 million), among several others.
To further put this into perspective, the budget for Concord could have funded the development of multiple AAA titles, or numerous smaller, potentially more fruitful if innovative projects, or helped keep Japan Studio operational—it’s become somewhat of a running joke that Sony chose to invest its money in Concord instead of keeping the lights on over at the Tokyo-based first-party developer before its members were merged into Team Asobi, the studio responsible for Astro Bot, this year’s leading Game of the Year candidate.
The story of Concord’s development is one of ambition meeting reality. Initially it was greenlit in 2016, with the goal of capitalizing on the popularity of hero shooters like Overwatch and the cultural zeitgeist surrounding properties like Guardians of the Galaxy. However, the extended development cycle, which isn’t uncommon in the video game industry, meant that what seemed fresh and exciting in 2016 had become stale by the time of Concord’s release.
But what really stood out from the reports is the culture of “toxic positivity” that’s permeating the studio. This mindset, which discouraged negative feedback and promoted an unwavering belief in the project’s success, created an echo chamber that prevented critical evaluation and course correction. The development team’s “head in the sand” mentality convinced them that their collective talent, drawing their roots from Bungie, would ensure the game’s eventual success, and it didn’t.
This belief in “studio magic” is not unique to Concord’s developers. Many successful studios have relied on last-minute pushes to bring their projects together, leading to a dangerous overconfidence in their ability to overcome any obstacle. Games such as World of Warcraft, The Last of Us Remastered, and God of War benefited from this approach in the past. However, as the scale and complexity of AAA game development have increased, this reliance on “magic” has become increasingly risky.
What’s even more surprising is Sony’s ambitious plans for Concord. The company’s multimedia approach included plans to release Overwatch-style cutscenes every week to advance the game’s story. This strategy, while innovative, likely contributed significantly to the project’s ballooning budget. Producing high-quality cinematics on a regular schedule could easily account for millions in additional expenses.
The failure of Concord raises legitimate doubts about Sony’s project management and decision-making processes. Its willingness to invest such a massive sum in an unproven studio and concept is baffling, to say the least. This decision becomes even more perplexing when considering the potential return on investment for smaller, less risky projects.
The financial impact of Concord’s failure on Sony is likely to be significant. With the game only available for two weeks before being pulled and refunds issued, it lost a substantial portion of its investment. This situation will undoubtedly be a topic of discussion in Sony’s next investor meeting, potentially leading to major changes in how the company approaches game development and studio management if it already hasn’t.
Concord’s technical achievements make its failure all the more tragic. Unlike other high-profile disappointments such as Mass Effect: Andromeda or Cyberpunk 2077, which were plagued by bugs and technical issues at launch, Concord was a well-polished product. However, the game’s fundamental lack of engaging gameplay and its $40 price tag in a market dominated by free-to-play alternatives proved insurmountable.
Concord’s development and subsequent failure are numerous. First and foremost, it highlights the importance of maintaining a balanced portfolio of projects. Relying solely on AAA titles without the safety net of smaller, more experimental titles leaves companies vulnerable to catastrophic losses. Additionally, the dangers of trend-chasing in an industry with such long development cycles are clearly illustrated by Concord’s outdated concept at launch.
Furthermore, it’s proof that the days of relying on “studio magic” to pull together a project at the eleventh hour are long gone. As games become more complex and expensive to produce, a more structured and accountable approach to development becomes crucial.
It’s been a roller coaster past couple of months for Sony, which finds itself the talk of the industry for all the wrong and right reasons. From Black Myth: Wukong and its unreported exclusivity deal to the PlayStation 5 Pro and its steep pricing and the 30th anniversary bundle, everyone can’t seem to stop talking about PlayStation.
By the looks of it, Sony could end the year still being talked about by the entire internet.
