Fans attempt to resurrect Sony's shooter Concord, but lawyers are already shooting off takedowns

Alfonso Maruccia

Posts: 2,511   +934
Staff
In context: Sony shut down its multiplayer shooter Concord after just two weeks, citing minimal player interest despite a $400 million development budget. Three programmers skilled in reverse engineering are attempting to revive the game, but copyright hurdles could end the restoration effort before it begins.

Concord sold roughly 25,000 copies and received bad to average reviews, prompting Sony to shut it down and giving the game one of the shortest lifespans in recent memory. Three developers – known online as "real," "Red," and "gwog" – are creating custom server code and reportedly took on the project for the technical challenge.

Gwog told tech blog Aftermath that he enjoys taking things apart and putting them back together, while Red focuses on reviving defunct online games. Red previously worked on custom server code for the mega-flop LawBreakers and now calls Concord the most complex project he has tackled so far.

Concord used an anti-tamper system meant to block cheaters, which gave the revival team significant headaches. Red noted that the technology is essentially impossible to crack, so they had to find an exploit to decrypt the game's code. Once they cleared that hurdle, the programmers focused on restoring gameplay and building new custom servers to support it.

Real is responsible for recreating Concord's backend API, which manages the game's progression systems, including character level, XP, inventory, and other mechanics. Red is passionate about game preservation and initiatives such as the Stop Killing Games petition, so much so that he developed a platform specifically designed to run multiple "dead" games smoothly and reliably.

Over the past few days, the Concord restoration team shared demo footage showing the game running on new custom servers. The project is still a work in progress despite already being "functional," the developers cautioned. Unsurprisingly, Sony lawyers were monitoring closely and moved quickly.

Eurogamer reports that Sony filed a copyright infringement complaint to remove the demo videos from YouTube and other platforms. Facing this legal threat, the programmers have paused new beta invites and are continuing the project behind closed doors.

Earlier this year, the Japanese corporation confirmed plans to develop new live-service games despite Concord's failure. Sony contends that people are still interested in these kinds of experiences, but believes the free-to-play model is on the way out.

Permalink to story:

 
Why would Sony give a crap about hobbyists trying to preserve an IP they spent $200 million developing, where maybe 400 people actually played it, upon release? If anything, they should feel honored that somebody still cares.

On the other hand, Sony is a Japanese company like Nintendo, so I shouldn't be surprised they'd be litigious even of properties that didn't sell.
 
I wish copyright law required that the copyright holder prove standing to get their takedown approved. Not just "oh they are using our material", but how that fundamentally harms sales of specific products and what have you. A lot more hobbyist work would survive in that landscape.

In the words of the U.S. constitution, the purpose of copyright is: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." Hobby projects, when those projects are not directly competing, are indeed promoting the progress of the useful Arts. But, the courts have barely ever considered the purpose of the clause when evaluating IP law.
 
Why would Sony give a crap about hobbyists trying to preserve an IP they spent $200 million developing, where maybe 400 people actually played it, upon release? If anything, they should feel honored that somebody still cares.

On the other hand, Sony is a Japanese company like Nintendo, so I shouldn't be surprised they'd be litigious even of properties that didn't sell.
Because can you imagine if a free hobbyist project managed to gain a larger playerbase then they did with a $200m purchase price+ ANOTHER $200 million in additional dev costs with full refunds for every buyer managed? The embarrassment would be strong enough to generate electricity.
 
Because can you imagine if a free hobbyist project managed to gain a larger playerbase then they did with a $200m purchase price+ ANOTHER $200 million in additional dev costs with full refunds for every buyer managed? The embarrassment would be strong enough to generate electricity.
According to That Park Place, it's max player count during the Early Access Beta was 1,124...and that was free. Those are the kinds of numbers that long-dead-but-well-worn MMORPGs exhibit, not soon-to-be-released hero shooters that cost $200+ million. A hobbyist garnering a larger playerbase than when Sony did it would actually be to Sony's advantage, because it means they were onto something, if only it had enough time in the oven.

The real embarrassment for Sony would be if a hobbyist recreates the project, gives it to the community, and it still ends up with no audience. For a not-for-profit endeavor to get similar results could only mean Sony's upper management had completely lost the plot. But, who knows? Maybe I'm the one who "doesn't get it".
 
I stopped considering SONY products for purchase MANY years ago. I was a Memory Stick victim but my annoyance with the company definitely didn't end there.
In any case, this was obviously the right thing to do seeing they haven't improved their cringe-inducing greedy attitude at all.
Amusingly the amplifier in my living room is a... SONY but hey I swear it was a gift from a dear friend & colleague and I could not refuse it!
 
Back