I think you're confusing multiplayer games and GaaS.
No, I have been working for years on both single player and multiplayer GaaS for browser and mobile.
Our small studio was one of the early big top players on the area, a top AAA publisher bought us to learn from that experience and enter the mobile, F2P and GaaS markets.
GaaS refers to "game as a service" to differentiate to the previous "game as a product" paradigm, when we made games without postlaunch content, released them, forgot about them and moved to the next project.
Games as a service are designed to be instead under constant evolution after launch, with tweaks, fixes, internal server improvements/changes/optimizations and normally new content or features to improve it and keep it fresh.
They get supported as long as it keeps performing well enough (typically years) but also providr benefits such as being able to scale down development or shut them down if the game doesn't work well enough, having originally released only a MVP instead of having spent a full game budget on it.
Meaning, are released with only a portion of the planned content and features, and depending on performance its post launch support gets scaled up or down.
PS Home was pure live service, but it wasn't a major game.
PS Home got over 40M players, got post launch support for 7 years with a ton of new features and content and generated a lot of profit.
It was a huge and very successful project. But due to its casual nature people overlooks its complexity and the amount of work needed behind it.
Concord is a very different element in PlayStation's Studios live service agenda. It's not only their first internal major GaaS game, but the first from a company they bought in their string of studio acquisitions, which was the point of my comment, which I couldn't have made more clear.
Concord is the 6th GaaS of their "GaaS of 12 franchises" push after MLB, GT7, Destiny 2, Firewall Ultra, Helldivers 2. Which as I mentioned wasn't the first ones.
But yes, not counting Firesprite's Horizon CoM, Bluepoint's work in GoWR and Nixxe's PC port is the first game -and in particular, GaaS- a relatively recently acquired studio released.
There are absolutely people made at even live service Sony games being on PC. Many posters on this very forum have stated that all Sony games should be exclusive to PS4 and PS5. Some have given reasons such as the PS+ requirement and others are just mad at the general fact that these games are going to PC.
I don't care whether you prefer to play on console or PC.
Concord will likely fail, but what my point was that there are specific people with specific agendas for wanting the game to fail. What is actually interesting is whether these people can effectively drown out interest in the game if it is well-received. As I mentioned before, the game is definitely going to be review bombed. So it'll be interesting to see how much power these people actually have.
Other than the people who hate all Sony games because are Xbox/Nintendo/etc fanboys, there are a tiny portion of the PS fanbase who are Sony fanboys who hate GaaS/PC games.
But I don't think they'll be an issue because most of that same people claims that Sony games don't exist and that Sony has no games released or announced. So Concord doesn't exist for them.
TLOU2 had its woke controversy but got very successful. Helldivers 2 had its controversy but continue very successful. That Helldivers 2 controversy was supposedly going to affect GoT PC but it also got very successful. At some point Destiny 2 had multiple controversies, and kept being super successful. Typically these controversies are just a tiny vocal portion of the whole playerbase.
I assume that with Concord some people will complain, but the game will be successful or not for its own merits, separatedly from any possible controversy.
