Concord is an Overwatch clone that, according to developers, has been in development for 8 years. And these long time frames are something we hear about a lot in video games, and is usually the go-to excuse for why trend chasing doesn't work. Games take so long to develop that if you start making a game to chase a trend today, there will be a new trend by the time your game is ready for launch. If this is true then the people behind Concord, saw Overwatch pretty much right when it came out, and said "Let's copy that", the fast forward to today and the game is now out but the Overwatch craze is mostly gone, and the game is a failure.
However the excuse that says games take too long to make is total bullshit. They take too long to make when management doesn't know what the fuck they're doing, or when the game design just isn't coming together properly in which case the better choice would be to scrap the game and start something else. There are games that go through development hell, where they take a long time to develop due to impossible goals. Cyberpunk 2077 is a good example of this which combines bad management and non-stop feature creep into the game design that yields a game that not only took forever but also came out way too early and had to be fixed over the course of a couple of years.
I want to contrast this with some examples of games, BIG games, that come out quickly and showcase that when a team knows what they're doing, games do not take that long to make.
The first examples are games you see every year. The Call of Duty games. Now each CoD takes 3 years to make roughly, not long at all and if they didn't have three different studios making these games in a rotation, I dont think anyone would have a problem with only getting a new CoD every 3 years. Those games are perfectly reasonable and while they aren't always great due to certain features or ideas, most CoD's do at least try to experiment with the formula and provide a new campaign every year (which a couple exceptions). This happens because the developers are consistent with what they are making, meaning making a realistic FPS. They know the development tools, and it's very clear what the game is trying to be every time. Which makes the assembly of CoD's very easy and smooth.
The other example I want to highlight is Final Fantasy 7 Remake/Rebirth. Try to contain your shock as I once again talk about these games. FF7 was announced in 2015, being developed by CyberConnect 2. However in 2017 Square announced that they pulled the project in house and were "starting from scratch". Now that's not entirely true because since this was a Remake, a lot of preplanning stuff didn't have to be done, like character concept and world concept art, etc. However the team had to write an entirely new story, even if it's the same story it's told differently so that's a brand new script entirely, all the models, assets, levels, soundtrack, combat systems, mechanics, all of that had to be built from scratch. Then the game launched in 2020, okay 3 years development on the final project. Also polished and fairly bug free
1 year later the game comes to PC and PS5, with a new DLC featuring new characters, new mechanics, and a new mini game.
Then 3 years later Rebirth, which does continue on from Remake's development using the same tools, engine, and character assets. Except they built an entire world 51 mini games, tons of new characters, a giant story script, alternative costumes, the works. 3 years though.
Concord, has a couple of game modes, and took 8 years supposedly? Where they drunk? What is realistically the excuse for needing that long to develop a game with minimal content. Even Ubisoft shits out new open world games in reasonable time frames.
I don't but into the excuse of games taking too long to make. I think a bad idea is bad and management needs to be more on top of projects that aren't coming together in a reasonable timeframe to cancel and avoid wasting money and time on trash game ideas. The dev time is a lie and an excuse for why a game launches badly.
However the excuse that says games take too long to make is total bullshit. They take too long to make when management doesn't know what the fuck they're doing, or when the game design just isn't coming together properly in which case the better choice would be to scrap the game and start something else. There are games that go through development hell, where they take a long time to develop due to impossible goals. Cyberpunk 2077 is a good example of this which combines bad management and non-stop feature creep into the game design that yields a game that not only took forever but also came out way too early and had to be fixed over the course of a couple of years.
I want to contrast this with some examples of games, BIG games, that come out quickly and showcase that when a team knows what they're doing, games do not take that long to make.
The first examples are games you see every year. The Call of Duty games. Now each CoD takes 3 years to make roughly, not long at all and if they didn't have three different studios making these games in a rotation, I dont think anyone would have a problem with only getting a new CoD every 3 years. Those games are perfectly reasonable and while they aren't always great due to certain features or ideas, most CoD's do at least try to experiment with the formula and provide a new campaign every year (which a couple exceptions). This happens because the developers are consistent with what they are making, meaning making a realistic FPS. They know the development tools, and it's very clear what the game is trying to be every time. Which makes the assembly of CoD's very easy and smooth.
The other example I want to highlight is Final Fantasy 7 Remake/Rebirth. Try to contain your shock as I once again talk about these games. FF7 was announced in 2015, being developed by CyberConnect 2. However in 2017 Square announced that they pulled the project in house and were "starting from scratch". Now that's not entirely true because since this was a Remake, a lot of preplanning stuff didn't have to be done, like character concept and world concept art, etc. However the team had to write an entirely new story, even if it's the same story it's told differently so that's a brand new script entirely, all the models, assets, levels, soundtrack, combat systems, mechanics, all of that had to be built from scratch. Then the game launched in 2020, okay 3 years development on the final project. Also polished and fairly bug free
1 year later the game comes to PC and PS5, with a new DLC featuring new characters, new mechanics, and a new mini game.
Then 3 years later Rebirth, which does continue on from Remake's development using the same tools, engine, and character assets. Except they built an entire world 51 mini games, tons of new characters, a giant story script, alternative costumes, the works. 3 years though.
Concord, has a couple of game modes, and took 8 years supposedly? Where they drunk? What is realistically the excuse for needing that long to develop a game with minimal content. Even Ubisoft shits out new open world games in reasonable time frames.
I don't but into the excuse of games taking too long to make. I think a bad idea is bad and management needs to be more on top of projects that aren't coming together in a reasonable timeframe to cancel and avoid wasting money and time on trash game ideas. The dev time is a lie and an excuse for why a game launches badly.
