Love how all the comments are still people just shitting on the game even with the information given about why most of the decisions were what they were :smh:
There’s exactly the same thing on Jeuvideo.com, the comments are filled with blind hate, and trying to reason those people is useless since they’re mega stubborn.
At this stage the people that are still commenting negatively are just trolls and orchestrated groups of people that are looking to continue their vendetta against games that dare to challenge their own view on what games should provide vs what they should cost. It’s time to just move on and ignore the trolls, it’s pathetic that this long after both the release and the (defacto) cancellation of the game that they still feel the need to put energy into their pointless negative sniping.
I highly recommend ignoring this article and going to the reddit thread they link with Matthew’s actual commentary. It’s hugely insightful and an excellent read! And as has come to be expected, gaming journalists can’t stop recontextualizing Evolve related quotes just to make it sound bad. The article is garbage, but Matthew’s actual commentary is excellent.
Here’s a link for those who don’t wanna dig for it:
It’s no surprise that the comments section on pc gamer is full of misinformation and hate. I agree with @Takran, go check out @Matthew 's actual post. The comments there are much better too. Thanks for sharing Matt.
Well, after reading the actual Reddit thread that Matt posted in I can say that it was all incredibly enlightening. Though, I have to ask, was the stipulation of one update every 3 months down to the Sony/MS certification process or 2k not wanting to pump money into the game to support it?
Probably some combination. Either way, in the typical pipeline, that’s ultimately publisher’s call.
I’d say the article itself wasn’t that biased for once. It was a much needed article and it gave a lot of “official” information that was sorely needed to clarify a lot of the misinformation that was going around. But people are still skeptical about the whole thing and don’t know how the industry works.
Not that I’m an expert, but spending a bit of time in these forums has taught me a thing or two about the whole thing.
Same to me, I learned what’s a publisher and a development team (it looks stupid like this, I know) and what’s the difference between both.
A dev team is a studio that develop games and the publisher is the company that advertise the game and who has the rights. But on exceptional cases, it can be 2-in-1, a development studio that is able to publish its own games (which is, sadly, not entirely the case for TRS).
And that’s why I never read the comments section on the internet.
Thanks for that insightful commentary. I was pondering how to go about fixing some of the issues with Evolve. I think I have an idea how to address some of the issues that had the ball in TRS’ court, mainly the asymmetry and the fundamental aspect of building a 4v1 game. I’ll just have to plug & play to see how it works once I get into it.
In the meantime, there have been a few 4v1 games since Evolves launch… You could study those to help understand possible gameplay mechanics in the future. (think of the other games as your library of research.)
Bit off topic, but god do I hate that channel. It’s like buzzfeed, but for ‘gamers’ instead of ‘feminists’. Clickbait and fallacy-filled videos gallore
Yeah, but It gives just a little insight into it… But the channel is nothing but a fear doom and gloom type.
I didnt care for it… I even corrected the channel on their facts about the shut down… but this kinda sorta does fall into place for the thread.
Better than the horribly misinformed Evolve Didn’t Die it was Murdered video…
It’s very interesting hearing Matt’s thoughts on this.
Personally there’s three things I strongly think would’ve helped evolve from the launch:
1- A more highlighted players vs computer mode(s).
Playing against players is stressful for a lot of gamers. A more in your face casual mode I think would’ve appealed to a lot of people who aren’t interested in the pressures of PvP.
2- Case by case character balancing.
Quite often characters were too strong or weak again one thing- but would then be buffed or nerfed because they were too weak for strong against another.
While this could definitely be true for monsters, I feel this was even more so for the hunters.
For example, tuning Hyde’s flame thrower damage against specific monsters individually? Doing a set value to Goliath, but a different value to behemoth- or kraken, etc- I believe would’ve gone a long way towards helping balance the game.
Yes there would’ve been a lot to tune, but I strongly feel this could’ve been a great tool to tune the game.
I also know there was some intentional strength / weakness for match ups by the developers originally- buuuut. I don’t think it planned out well. Players don’t like feeling like they’ve lost by simply seeing the character picks at the start up screen. And it was obvious balance was an issue.
Which brings us to three
3- above anything and everything. I STRONGLY feel Evolve would’ve benefited from some type of in game system that dynamically balanced the game as it went on, to make the games APPEAR close, without interfering (or as much as possible) with who “should have won anyways”.
This could’ve been disguised as an in game mechanic- similar to behemoths dynamic armor, but more direct. “When feeling overly thesterend monsters respond to the pressure with more Adrenalin in their system! Making them Morena formidable foes!”
“Bucket were really getting our asses kicked, spare some juice from the ship and give us some shields!”
Obviously just colloquial ideas off the top of my head- but they could’ve been presented with a “story reason” that I feel most casual gamers would’ve accepted
But this was always the bignpeoblem for Evolve I believe. Players saying one thing or another about balance. Everyone had their own ideas. This was op. No it was UP. No it’s just fine git gud!
It wasn’t the balance (most never approach the skill necessary to observe it)-
it was the PERCEPTION of balance
I really feel helping games appear close would’ve helped with a lot of this.
And I’d also have proposed that this be a system that could either be shut off on custom games, or was only on in “quick play”, and off by default in competitive.
Which brownie point- should’ve been there at launch too
But ah well. Way too late now. But maybe evolves shortcomings can be used as a learning experience for future endeavors should anyone ever approach the idea again.
Spelling be damned right now I’m on a cellphone.
I’ll miss you Evolve.
Elemental paper rock scissors would work pretty well.
But personally, I am a believer in Release game now, ask for add on money later on like a few months down the road and so on.
I actually enjoy some of his other videos but that one really agitated me. So horribly misinformed.