this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
9 points (65.5% liked)

Games

44994 readers
232 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

looks too much like apex legends imo

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zecg@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Requires both Secure Boot & TPM 2.0

Fuck right off

[–] aksdb@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t get what makes this game so special that Geoff Keighley hyped it so much. That this thing was the big surprise that ended the game awards show was completely underwhelming. Out of the show, Highguard was the most generic game presentation. There was absolutely nothing about this game that seemed new or even interesting. Just the next hero shooter with comic look.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Tbf, I don't think Apex Legends was completely new either. It refined and combined a lot of good ideas in other games into a battle royale. I think they're trying to do that with this type of hero shooter vibe, having taken some ideas from Rainbow 6 Siege and a few other games. Doesn't seem to have worked as well this time.

[–] TalkingFlower@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

People are complaining about the map size and its 3 vs 3 format, mostly negative on steam, not sure if they are going to come back from this.

[–] lath@piefed.social 28 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

"smart"boot and tpm required. It's dead to me.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

I just watched 3 friends play it, and they were miserable.

[–] hal_5700X@sh.itjust.works 8 points 15 hours ago

It's a generic shooter, does nothing new or different.

[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 4 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Does anyone know if it is working on Linux (or Steam Deck)?

[–] ormith@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nope, blocked by the anti-cheat.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Looks like nothing of value was lost, I am kinda curious why are so many people playing it with how terrible it is rated

[–] Ok_imagination@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

I doubt it with the kernel layer anti cheat but haven't confirmed

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

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 15 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

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

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

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 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

What advertising though? They didn't have to pay for The Game Awards spot, Jeff just gave it to them for free. I haven't seen any commercials or ads outside of that either. I think Concord had more advertising than Highguard, with Concord getting multiple devlogs and previews across a few Sony hosted events, IIRC.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 8 hours ago

My bad, I meant marketing strategy not advertising budget. Concord definitely had a bigger budget considering they got a Secret level episode deal before the game was even launched. But the budget and bits of marketing don't matter when it doesn't gain any traction and whatever their strategy was it gained no traction what so ever.

As for highguard, they did pay for the TGA spot. They didn't pay extra to be the premier trailer, that Jeff gave them for free. And they did had a weird strategy of going completely radio silent after TGA. But despite that people at launch knew this game existed and has already beaten Concord numbers (at least on Steam) by hundredfold and I don't think that's solely because this game is F2P.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Concord didn't have any advertising because the data was showing them beyond a shadow of a doubt that it would have been throwing good money after bad.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

So they knew it was going to be a complete failure before they even released it?

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

But after they revealed it? Yes. From their reveal to their beta test, it seemed clear the game was not going to find an audience; definitely not enough to recoup $200M-$400M.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

If it seemed so clear I'm sure you'll have no problem backing that up with some actual sources.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

You can dig through This Week in Video Games episodes on SkillUp's YouTube channel from back just before the game released. That's where I got it from. Live service games are looking for the hockey stick shaped graph in order to take off, and it was quite clear that even when the game was free, it didn't have the juice to make that happen. And even the lower bound of $200M is a tough bar to clear, but Concord was funded at a time when borrowing money was cheap and every asshole with a war chest thought they'd make a fortune by following the same formula; the problem with that is that everyone else thought they could do that too. And that's not even to say Concord was the worst game ever made or anything. It was just a game that cost way more to make than it was ever, ever going to make back.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 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.

I guess we just have to wait and see if the server is shut down in two weeks. In reality, I don't think we will ever see as monumental a train wreck as Concord was. Probably ever.