For games of this style, the most important thing is to see how a larger player base stays interested. The initial try, especially as a GamePass/PS Plus game, has a low barrier to entry, but it’s more critical whether a significant portion of players wants to return to the game the next day and the day after that. Not everyone likes every game, there’s simply nothing you can do about that, but if a critical mass is reached and word-of-mouth spreads among friends that it’s fun, then you have something bigger on your hands.
An example of this is Helldivers 2, which came a bit out of nowhere and absolutely crushed it precisely because it hooked players and got them to recommend the game to friends. And even though the servers almost buckled under the load and there were technical issues at the start, the game was so good that players were able to overlook them and wait for things to start running reliably.
Based on previews and video clips, my feeling is “there’s potential, but we’ll see how it goes”. Especially since I might be a bit too old-fashioned to judge the gaming tastes of today’s youth…
That “I tried as a solo player and got absolutely clobbered” is a bit concerning; that aspect needs to be fixed for those “Different Youths” who don’t want to play as a team if it’s been promised that, in theory, one can also play alone.
As a point of comparison, again, Helldivers 2 is indeed genuinely playable solo, even though it requires a slightly different approach to missions and, in my opinion, isn’t quite as fun as playing in a group. But if you absolutely want to be an “I have no friends” player, that game allows it, and it would be good if the same applied to this one.
Pretty much on the same page as previous writers. Not an optimal situation, but as was in Puhan’s tweet shared by @Akee, the biggest problems have already been identified at this stage and there’s still a month until launch.
In these cases, you never know what difficulty levels etc. they’ve played on. https://www.youtube.com/live/0s2x2a35wP8?si=BhoyFdFzs4nx_5iU If you watch from the 20-minute mark when they play the game on the easiest level, and if you can’t manage against those alone, then at that point, in my opinion, it’s purely a skill issue and the game is simply not for that kind of player.
Yep, a lot depends on how much clip-worthy and meme material the game has. In that sense, it clearly has some, e.g., Sticky Ricky etc. It is concerning, however, that the problems brought up now are within the core gameplay loop itself, meaning that if these issues are not sufficiently fixed, no amount of meme or clip value will save the game much. Of course, at this stage, a complete flop doesn’t seem likely either.
Interesting comments. I would add that now that the genre involves multiplayer and first-person shooting, it’s more than guaranteed that there will be complaints.
It’s exciting to see if Remedy can/will react to these. My view from the preview materials is that the problems are fixable and not fundamental. For example, the blurriness of effects and the ineffectiveness of early weapons are likely fixable by launch, if there are no flaws in the game’s other fundamentals. Many previews mentioned that they only warmed up to the game in the latter half of their playtesting. This would still be an important thing to fix, of course. Modern gamers are so dopamine-addicted that there should be a dopamine storm from the very first minutes, which might not happen if the game is “too difficult” or slow at the beginning. The same problem existed with AW2 – it started far too slowly for modern gamers.
At this stage, there are comments from all sides. It’s good to critically examine both positive and negative feedback, and to look at the content, justifications, etc., of the feedback. Positive feedback can also be found, but these are just as unreliable as critical ones, as they might be written through the lens of Remedy fans.
(Since I’m not in the playtest myself, nothing stops me from sharing others’ NDA-breaking comments )
In my opinion, the entire investment case is based on getting rid of development fees specifically. From the 11/2024 Capital Markets Day slide, it’s clear that this is by far the biggest single factor improving the company’s profitability in the near future. The company’s operating profit (EBITDA) was roughly zero (€2.5M) last year, and net profit was negative, with the entire year practically based purely on development fees. This shouldn’t warm an investor’s heart.
Otherwise, I agree with you
Fundamentally, Control 2’s game development is likely already funded, unless some black swan event occurs, e.g., a write-down of a game project in production.
The company had €28M in cash/liquid investments from the last quarter. In reality, perhaps slightly more, as the cash flow in the last quarter was strongly negative due to timing-related issues with cash flows. Control 2 is fundamentally in production for a good 2 years, of which Annapurna is paying 50%. Based on information provided by Remedy, Control 2 has a game development budget of approx. €50M (not incl. marketing), of which perhaps €10-15M has already been developed. So, Remedy will have €17.5-20M to pay, which is already in the cash reserves.
The Max Payne game team will likely generate a small development margin, continuously making a profit, which might continue in the form of small royalties after release, even if the game team moves elsewhere. Firebreak’s game development is practically already paid for, perhaps roughly a good €5M still to be paid for year-end additional content and marketing. As you write, this will generate money from day 1, and B2B deals already bring in a pile of sure cash (Atte predicts €10M). Even in a complete flop, Firebreak, with its B2B deals, should roughly cover Remedy’s remaining self-financing share for Control 2. Outside of game projects, the current cash reserves should be sufficient to finance non-game development related expenses (Northlight, administrative and support functions, etc.).
If you are an Inderes Premium subscriber, you can also check Atte’s report for a model of cash sufficiency.
Yep. The fact that one in five players doesn’t like Helldivers 2 (77% positive review on Steam) hasn’t really prevented the game from succeeding. As you write, player retention is essential – and partly also whether those who write negative feedback continue playing despite complaining.
This old classic image is strongly related:
It’s good to remember, however, that under Sony’s muscles, Helldivers 2 has approximately two to three times the development budget, making it practically an AAA game. For Firebreak, it would be important to consider whether to simply remove the possibility of single-player (until they make AI bots, like in comparable games, if it’s deemed worth the investment after launch), or to leave it as is, even with the risk that the experience isn’t excellent.
I understand that an AI bot for solo players is not a priority with this game development budget. Firebreak is, however, practically an AA game compared to, for example, Helldivers 2. Thus, right from the start, the cards are stacked against it when considering the current state of the gaming industry. The essential thing is whether the game can be greater than the sum of its parts, e.g., due to a sensible business model, monetization strategy, and its own distinguishing/fun factor.
Exactly. Nothing left but to roll the dice. With another game release approaching, amidst all the noise and conflicting signals, I’ve been along for the ride long enough that, fortunately, I’m slowly starting to shift from the middle of the distribution below towards the left side, which significantly eases the psyche
Exactly, but I don’t personally believe that will happen before the release of Control 2. Until then, they would also need to finance games coming after that. So, I would hope that no one would need to share revenue from new, as yet unannounced games.
Hopefully, they will stay within budget. And this could be a hit, meaning they will likely invest heavily in marketing, €10-20M or even more.
Thanks to the active members of the thread, especially @Akee and analyst Atte.
My 2 cents:
I’ve watched a lot of the published preview materials. It’s still difficult to draw strong conclusions from them. Fingers crossed that the raised issues can still be fixed, including tuning the gunplay. My biggest concern is the already mentioned player retention – how many times will players bother to complete the same 5 missions? 3 kits bring some variety, but I’d hope for more of these too. How long will the same old sticky ricky remain fun?
Many good signals can certainly be found: a player & player’s time valuing approach, a good release window, a hungry player base might be found in the co-op niche, etc.
This is quite a gamer’s stock. Although the long-term stock drivers are elsewhere, in the short term, Firebreak can cause significant swings in both directions. Perhaps it will ultimately turn out according to original expectations, meaning the reception is lukewarm and the stock continues to languish at the same levels.
A long time, if the gameplay loop is solid, and surprisingly little time if it doesn’t appeal. In my opinion, in single-player games, you don’t want to do the same tasks many times, but something like Left 4 Dead 2 was grinded with friends an insane amount back in the day - those same maps.
Of course, new maps, game modes, and other additional content tend to drop into co-op games if there’s enough popularity and players.
Player-made mods also increase replayability, although these haven’t really been seen in Remedy’s games. Could their own Northlight engine be the reason?
It feels like the launch is incredibly important, especially for co-op games. There has to be a player base and friends to play with, or the game will quickly be quietly buried. Successful ones are then bought, played, and developed for years.
From this perspective, it’s a good thing that they organize these playtests early on and receive feedback on what works and what doesn’t. One is probably somewhat blind to their own creation if they’ve been working on the project for a year or two.
A game to be released in a month was tested with a months-old build? That’s quite peculiar – and peculiar that this is only announced after the testing period is over.
I wonder when these progression systems will be revealed more in marketing… At least for me, the game’s marketing has left this a bit vague, even though I’ve watched some recently released videos. The media got to play the game for such a short time, and Remedy itself hasn’t clarified these much.
That’s not actually special. Probably some of the content has been intentionally kept hidden due to potential leaks, and the old build might be in technically better condition than the build presented to the press in relatively controlled conditions.
As someone who participated in the test, I would say that it was quite well communicated in the game test invitation that the version was missing things that are already present in the actual game. The purpose of the testing was mainly crossplay matchmaking and other network features.
Below is a brief summary of currently known and speculated potentially relevant events and dates surrounding Remedy until the release of Firebreak. I only realized afterwards that I had written it in English, apologies It will be interesting to see if there will be any marketing before the release of Elden Ring Nightreign.
Date(s)
Event
Info/speculation
15.-19.5.2025
Closed Technical Test
Technical test focused on matchmaking. Different build compared to game media preview build (Thomas Puha on Twitter/Reddit).
29-30.5.2025
Elden Ring: Nightreign release date
Year’s biggest session-based co-op PvE (#2 in Steam Wishlists). Probably no Firebreak marketing right before and right after the release date, unless Sony’s Showcase coincides right next to release date.
“May/(June) 2025 (?)”
Sony State of Play/Showcase (?)
Only rumors e.g. Rumor: New PlayStation Showcase Could Be Happening Soon . Previous showcase was May 2023. I think there’s a high likelyhood of a State of Play/Showcase in May/June - otherwise Xbox and Nintendo dominate the discouurse. If there is a Sony event, high likelyhood of Firebreak trailer/marketing as Sony is incentived to market their currently only new PS+ Extra game for June 2025)
5.6.2025
Nintendo Switch 2 release date
6.6.2025
Summer Game Fest
Firebreak trailer/marketing? Sam Lake has announced he won’t take part in this event, so maybe no Max Payne announce here? Control 2 teaser may be possible, or then later during TGA 2025? Could also be that there is no Remedy presence/trailers this year in the event, if Firebreak marketing budget is small and focused on Xbox and Sony’s marketing, though it would make sense to also market for the PC audience here?
7-8.6.2025
IGN Live
Join us at IGN Live June 7 and 8 while we sit down with Mike Kayatta, Game Director of FBC: Firebreak to help us get ready to return to the Oldest House! IGN Live 2025
8.6.2025
Xbox Summer Showcase
Very likely Firebreak trailer/marketing (Xbox incentivized to market for Gamepass)
16.6.2025 (?)
FBC: Firebreak review embargo
Alan Wake 2 and Control review embargos were 1d before launch
17.6.2025
FBC: Firebreak release date
Time to clean house!
???
Nintendo Direct/Showcase
Nintendo suggested that more partner games would be showcased later. Maybe some time in June after Switch 2 launch or then later in autumn?
EDIT: Perhaps there won’t be a separate PlayStation event this summer after all
There has been quite a lot of discussion that Switch 2 dev kits have not been available to all developers. It would certainly be beneficial for Remedy to be able to release Control, Alan Wake 2, and FBC: Firebreak on the console early in the Switch 2’s lifecycle. However, there haven’t been any indications that Remedy has a team working on porting these games, have there? Of course, this could also be outsourced, as was done with AWR.
In a preview interview, Kayatta commented on Firebreak and Switch, stating that it wouldn’t be available at launch, at least, as optimizing it for current platforms is already a big task. However, he didn’t rule out the possibility of it coming later, saying “never say never” or something similar. They aim to get the game Steam Deck verified, so Switch 2 would be a logical continuation if Firebreak succeeds.
I recall it was towards the end of this interview where this was discussed.
Control at a reasonable price of €30-40 could be a good game move for Switch 2, which will likely have mostly very expensive game releases in the console’s early stages.
I wouldn’t expect to hear anything about Max Payne or Control 2 until September-October. Max Payne’s marketing is, of course, entirely Rockstar’s responsibility, but I believe Remedy wants to focus completely on promoting Firebreak in their own marketing to ensure the game gets the best possible start. And why couldn’t they also communicate this wish to Rockstar, though it’s another matter how well it gets through.
With the same idea, I believe that any announcements about Switch or other ports of older games would be made at the earliest in the autumn. In the Q1 report, Tero specifically mentioned that Remedy has a separate “portfolio management team” that supports the sales of older games. Quote from the report:
\u003e “The importance of long-term continuous sales in digital games continues to grow. For this purpose, we have our own team whose task is to ensure the longevity of our games in digital marketplaces…”
In my opinion, this can indeed be interpreted to mean that porting older games to new platforms is now being investigated more than ever. The moderate(?) sales and release of AWR on Switch, as well as the lessons learned from Control’s Mac port this year, have probably motivated them to explore other possibilities for additional ports…
There’s probably not much to get excited about with these, as the impact on revenue is probably not very significant. I see the growth of RCU games’ brand awareness as a more important matter.
Let’s be a bit negative. In my opinion, nothing really indicates that Firebreak would have special opportunities in the market.
Marketing
Very few viewers for trailers and previews. Very little discussion about the game even on game forums. The game doesn’t seem to interest anyone. It’s incredibly difficult to market a paid multiplayer game in a market where there’s an abundance of free and high-quality offerings.
Previews
Game media generally doesn’t react very negatively to games in previews. That’s fine, it’s a bit unfair to trash an unfinished game and a short test. However, in my opinion, there have been many worrying tones in the previews and comments. Some things can be improved for release, but not the core of the game.
Market
As mentioned, a paid multiplayer game in a market with abundant free offerings. Even Bungie’s similar upcoming game is being predicted to flop long before release. Time will tell how that goes, but how on earth could Remedy succeed in the same difficult market with limited merits? Remedy’s only FPS game so far has been bad, which certainly doesn’t improve the odds. Hope is placed on a sufficiently large audience finding the game. A game being “free” on services certainly gives it some chance. I personally can’t place very high hopes on that.
It’s somewhat amusing to see comments like “the game is aimed at an audience other than Remedy’s core audience”. If the game doesn’t even appeal to Remedy’s fans, then who is it for? Will Fortnite fans take over the game then?
Concluding remarks
Let’s guess that the game’s Metacritic score will be around 75. The game will be played on services for a while, but it won’t sell. Silently, the game will be buried at some point.
Let’s end on a positive note. Sony’s and Mikkis (Microsoft’s) guaranteed money is a great thing. It’s not a disaster, even if this turned out to be an exercise costing around -10 million euros. The costs have mostly already been incurred. Owners can enjoy the royalties visible on the lines, which this game will at least generate somewhat.
Everything written is speculation based on what has been seen. With game companies, everyone is wrong; it’s mostly about who gets closest to being right. I would gladly be wrong about Firebreak.
Bungie’s problems are elsewhere – their game looks ugly because their artists have eaten too many mushrooms. Too much of an art piece.
Unfortunately, it’s not yet possible to say for sure one way or another about FBC Firebreak. Players have become significantly more skeptical because game companies have pushed out absurd amounts of pure garbage in recent years. Hype trains can no longer really get going in any way, because players ignore content they can’t play yet and return to it once the game is out. Precisely because of this phenomenon, I hoped that marketing would be compressed into a very short burst around the release itself, instead of trying to fuel a hype train whose historical reason has been to generate (pre-order) sales of game boxes, as this is no longer a significant matter.
Of course, a certain level of problem is that when they step outside their normal comfort zone (single player story-driven experiences), some fans of the company’s products turn up their noses, saying this isn’t a Remedy-style game. Which is even a good thing in that sense, as it provides concrete feedback that perhaps it’s better to make things they are demonstrably good at, instead of trying to chase market trends. Still, there is still potential here, if only the word-of-mouth starts working once the game can actually be played.
Game Pass and PS Plus deals ensure that the downside is very limited. There’s potentially a lot of upside. You can be negative if you feel like it, but even in the completely impossible scenario where 1-month sales are 0 units, this game won’t bring down Remedy’s world, because presumably the revenue from those subscription service deals covers a significant portion of the game’s development budget.
Remedy is shedding some light on the current situation regarding the builds that have been in testing and what’s happening as they move towards launch.
Tässä nopea yhteenveto FBC Developer päivityksestä
Firebreak Update Summary
Gunplay and Combat:
Level one guns are being made significantly stronger after feedback that early gameplay felt underpowered. Ammo scarcity is also being addressed. The double-barreled shotgun is receiving improvements to better match its intended feel. Overall combat has been rebalanced, with changes to enemy types, wave patterns, and pacing to maintain a more consistent challenge.
Clarity:
New dynamic tutorials and HUD improvements are being added to make objectives clearer without removing the joy of discovery. Visual and auditory clarity are being improved by reducing visual effects and finalizing audio mixing, addressing previous issues like overwhelming on-screen chaos and low in-game volume.
UI Improvements:
The user interface has been updated based on player feedback. The Perk system now has clearer mechanics, where each level of a perk takes up a different number of slots. Changes are also coming to how Threat, Clearance, and Corruption Levels work, allowing players to fine-tune difficulty and game session parameters.
Technology and Multiplayer:
Performance optimization continues, with minimum and recommended PC specs to be shared soon. Multiplayer testing has led to numerous bug fixes, and work is ongoing to improve stability across platforms.
The team is confident about progress and is aiming for a great launch experience on June 17. Further updates will be shared leading up to release.
)
