Evolve 2 seems much more reasonable now


#1

Last time I made a thread about Evolve 2 there was quite a few people just immediately dismissing the idea, and the main point they had was that a sequel would be exactly the same, and i was thinking that could happen too.

Now though, another game thats getting a sequel is Titanfall. To me, Titanfall and Evolve are very similar. They both are completely multiplayer games that people complained about for a lack of content when they first released, most importantly, a lack of campaign. For these reasons, i thought neither of these games would really get a sequel, or at least a successful one since i was assuming the new games would get hated just because the first ones dodnt get too much praise.

Now that Titanfall is getting a sequel, my mind is changed a bit. Titanfall 2 is getting a surprising amount of praise from the community even though the first game had these problems. This is because the game is getting much more content put into it at launch, and it has its own campaign.

This proves to me that an Evolve 2 would be possible. If much more is added to the game at launch, like a campaign and more features, i think it would definately do as well as Titanfall 2 is now. Im not saying that we need an Evolve 2 soon, but i could see it happening down the line.

And for those saying that it would be better to keep adding DLC to the current game, thats frankly not an option anymore. Once all the adaptations are out, even if they last a while i doubt there will be any new tiers after that.


#2

The only way I would want an Evolve 2 is if the 2nd is only campaign-story mode, with maybe a coop feature.

Evolve was set in a bad light as a running simulator, so if Evolve 2 is like Evolve’s 4v1 mechanic then reviews will crap all over it, saying its another money grab after the first game failed.

Evolve 2 needs to be nothing like Evolve, so making it story driven is the only way to make it different.

Evolve 2 also needs to come years down the road, not within the next 2-4 years.


#3

An online 4 player campaign mode vs monster players would be awesome, annnnnnd a single player so that it’s not a constant online feel to it.

I for one never minded the no campaign, but I get why people would be upset.

2K has said that this will be an ongoin IP a little after launch. There’s also been tons of players who said they’d buy a #2

It’s more than likely to happen, but it won’t be for a long while I’d imagine.


#4

I agree with the timing, i dont think it should come out for quite a few years. While i do want there to be a big campaign, i dont want it to be a completely story based game. They could simply try and get rid of the aspects of gameplay that people didnt like, as they have been doing slowly over time since the game came out. Given some time, they can definately get rid of the running simulator problem that some people have.


#5

If Evolve 2 comes out ever, TRS can go ahead an count on having my money for the game and any and all dlc upfront, preordered, an the best available copy of the game (ultimate edition or collectors edition etc etc) ready to ship to my local gamestop.

Edit: Idk why it this responded to Jayrob…lolz my bad dawg.


#6

Another thing that they would have to do though is change the dlc policy. While many of us on the forums may be fine with it, it was a big turn off for a lot of people.


#7

I think that was just the masses allowing themselves to be sheep an listening to reveiws and taking those reveiws to heart because they are feeble minded.
No one had an issue with the DLC of other games. People were just mad that their was DLC available immediately when the game came out an instead of looking at that DLC as a choice they all screamed it was pay to win (because thats what people do when they get beaten by something they dont own themselves) when instead they shld have either A) bought the DLC ao that then they too cld see it wasnt pay to win. Or B) shldnt have cried like a bunch of children an researched the fact that all hunters and monsters have pros and cons for each and every one of them.
People are too soft and opinionated without being educated these days.


#8

If the Freequel lives up the the hype it would prevent the need for a sequel for a while.

If they are basically re-inventing the game isn’t it a sequel in spirit?


#9

Honestly, I’ve seen a big trend Denice Evolve and Battlefront were both skewered for DLC.

Evolve didn’t deserve it, battlefront is bullshit imo.

Look at both Overwatch and Battleborn, one being a 2k game. All new heroes and maps will be free.

Developers are seeing that if you want to retain the player base, you can’t come off as pay us more.

Small sample size, but they’re recent and big multiplayer launch names. Just a thought is all.


#10

Either way, if it were to stay the same people would continue to hate on it. The sequel would end up getting underappreciated for the same reasons.


#11

Sure, the update will change and help the game a lot, but eventually a sequel would be a great idea.


#12

Yeah maybe a graphics update and a real story mode for the people asking for it.

However its not impossible to add that stuff through DLC rather than make a full new game!


#13

The reason why I say campaign-story only, is because current Evolve is based around multiplayer and online. You go from map to map, doing the same stuff differently. This game tried to make a storymode out of evac, but it didn’t go into detail about the lore, only hunter dialogue describes the lore.

As for taking aspects out of the current game is for TU9. TU9 is a major rework of the core game and so most problems players are having will be fixed.

Even if Evolve 2 was fixes of the current game, it would still feel like the original. This would make people not want to buy Evolve 2, when they could just get Evolve for a cheaper price for the same experience. The story-campaign will make 2 diverse from Evolve.

If they make it story-campaign based, skins and DLC hunters won’t have to be a part of the DLC. TRS can make extra story DLCs, for example Torvalds’s story on the Ajax, or the mutagen wars with Slim, Hyde, and Laz, How Maggie survived for a year alone on Factor, etc. People will eat this DLC up without it looking like a “money grab”.


#14

How would a campaign even work? If you were fighting off hordes of monsters or something it would be vastly different and moving over to the multiplayer who be a huge change in mechanics.

But a campaign focused on killing one monster like we do now, I just can’t see working right.


#15

That’s a very arrogant thing to say, people don’t agree with you so they don’t know what they’re talking about, right…
I love Evolve and i’ve bought all dlc but i actually agree with most of the reviews out there. The game flopped because of two reasons 1 it had very little content at day one 2 2k preannounced tons of dlc that should’ve been free and available at release because the game had no content.
Evolve didn’t deserve dlcs also 2k should’ve hired a better balancing team because Evolve was also very unbalanced at day one. Another reason for the failure of the game could be exactly that, people saw all those competitive tournaments at e3 and stuff but the game turned out to be very unbalanced and not competitive at all.
Also the evacuation mode was supposed to be the campaign mode of Evolve and it was terrible.

The game had huge problems at day one, the reason Evolve failed is surely not a mistery. Only good things about the game were the combat and the character design.


#16

For the monster portion of the campaign, I think it would be similar to the tutorial we have now, where you would fight many regular soldiers, but there would also be a mix of new wildlife to fight, and thats if the game would even have a monster portion of the campaign. As for the hunters, you would probably fighting wildlife, monsters, and maybe some smaller creatures that came from the monster’s world.


#17

Haha it’s a pipe dream of mine, but I thought of Evolve 2 being like monster hunter.

So, there’s a planet map that honters and munsters are fighting for control (could be a monthly or bi-monthly reset) so the more one side wins the more people are either killed or evacuated (Evan evolved ;). )

On this planet are different map areas with different zones, the honters drop into these zones and fight larger wildlife all while hunting the Munster. The Munster is doing the same, all while trying to complete some objectives I.e destroy a town/generator/relay) staging up etc.

The more wildlife and objectives destroyed by the munster the more energy to stage up (a lot more energy is needed) and if the honters haven’t caught the monster or won before stage 3, the final objective appears in the middle, which is a small zone, where the honters and munster would go forcing a final fight in which neither team can run away.

ITS A PIPE DREAM BUT ITS MY PIPE DREAM!!!

Doubt this will happen, and it may not sound awesome to others like me, but I wish we had a PS4 monster hunter, so I wish this was it :slight_smile:

HAVE A GREAT DAY!!!


#18

One day, the time will come for a sequel. When the anti-Evolve sentiments have died down, then it will be time to strike. This, however, will take years. It’s probably going to happen eventually, but not within the near future. If nothing else, Valve will buy it and make a sequel everyone gushes over and leave the franchise to rot after that. Until they decide to make a third installment decades later, that is.


#19

They’re be more to figure out for single player campaign and such, possibly having it be counted, but seperately from the online results so as not to skewer the numbers.

For campaign these missions or objectives the munster has to take care of could be story based.

You’d even having changing things, like instead of rescue and nest be seperate game modes, work them into the matches.
EG. Honters need to go rescue 3 civilians, Munster needs to kill them- force engagement)


#20

No no no…you arent grasping the full picture of what i meant. (and its arrogent of you to call me arrogant when you just dont understand my meaning :wink: )
It has nothing to do with wether they agree with ME or not. Thats not why i said that.
What i meant is, people are quick to take sides and opinions on matters based after the opinions and views of others (this is the part about being over-opinionated) an then sharing their opinions with others they meet, without ever trying or actually participating in the matter to gain their own opinion off of it based of their OWN experiances. (this is the uneducated part).
It has no matter to me if someone has a differing opinion then myself, thats good, people need to think for themselves an not be sheep.
But when they read negative reviews or even hear biased reports on the news an then they take those things to heart an make that there own opinions on those matters they are being uninformed, over opinionated, and uneducated sheep. :sheep: :sheep: :sheep:
And that, my friend, i cannot stand.
I cannot tell you how many times im recommended evolve to someone, just to be shot down because they “heard it was bad”, “Did you try ot for yourself?”
"No…"
Sheep.