Why the DLC Backlash/Hate?


#1

Maybe I’m just confused on what has been said.

My understanding is this.
Future maps/modes will be free DLC for everybody.
If you pre-order, you get 1 extra monster free. All future monsters will be paid DLC.
BUT you can still play in lobbies with people that do/do not have the DLC, so the player pool won’t be segmented.

Is that correct? If so, what’s the problem? You get free maps/modes, and the option to buy extra monsters if you want but don’t have to and still get to play without being segmented.

Is it a pricing thing? I’m just confused on the hate I’ve been seeing.

My personal opinion, if the monster costs too much, I won’t buy it. Not going to stop me from enjoying the rest of the game.

Thoughts?


#2

Because people LOVE free stuff.


#3

It’s mostly over the fact that the monster will be $15 and each hunter would be around $7-$8.
But I am thankful for the free maps, no doubt.
TRS has no say in the pricing, so…


#4

I know right? It makes no sense, it’s like going to an ice cream shop and buying ice cream without any toppings on it and then getting angry at people who do decide to get more toppings. (Toppings being DlC)


#5

. To answer your question , monsters are going to be prized at 14.99$ and hunters at 7.50$ each . I cant understand the peoples , who just want everything for free. Maybe they are just trolls or just too dumb to realize that this stuff costs lot of ressources and effort to create and ship .


#6

So far, it looks like I understand it correctly. People are mad at the specific price, AND mad that they will have the otpion to pay for optional content. Makes sense.


#7

Because people have a sense of entitlement and a touch of paranoia that the devastating have everything already completed and held some stuff back for dlc later… But I still don’t get the objection because news flash dlc is nothing new and it keeps the game alive longer. If you have an issue with the price point, that’s one argument (but let’s go back to supply and demand… We all would love to buy a summer home in Fort Lauderdale for $50 however that’s not going to happen).


#8

In addition people really think that the tier 4 monster and hunters are part of the main game but the devs said pretty early that the game is going to ship with 12 hunters and 3 monsters … .


#9

Getting flamed on twitter because the morons are saying “The devs said free content and now are saying we have to pay for it” Waaaahh!!

Content = Free maps/ modes and who knows what else we might get for free.

And yeah, apparently they think the monsters they are buying are already on the disk and pissed about it. Even thought he devs said they weren’t done yet.


#10

It is more of disappointment. They are already selling content that has not been created and I find the price points too high.


#11

Selling dlc packs at launch is, again, nothing new. CoD comes to mind as having done the same thing. I can understand how some people might have an issue with the price point for one reason or another. To flip the coin, I’ve found no issue in any of this so far, the game is hella fun and I will pay the dlc prices to have all the new and shiny stuff.


#12

There’s nothing new with selling something that’s not out yet. I just bought a $1300 monitor before it came out, as long as it’s what you paid for, why does it matter? If you don’t like the price point, you suffer literally no disadvantages whatsoever for not buying it.


#13

As I’m sure you have read already, there is simply a price difference between monsters ($15) and hunters ($7-$8) which I guess people who will prefer to play as monsters rather than hunters could get upset over this, but as far as I’m concerned it makes complete sense to me as I feel making Monster being power, unique, but also balanced is a lot more work than other hunters. Just a thought.


#14

I had not even considered that either, I guess I was thinking the hunters were the ones getting the disadvantage of having to spend 25 on a new “team” while the monster pays $15 and he/she is good to go. I think I’ll still be buying it all even though I prefer monster


#15

Hopefully, they’ll have bundles and things as options to buy. Instead of $7.99 for 1 player, maybe get 4 for $20. Things like that.


#16

Also, I see people responding to Jess and Evolve twitter accounts pissed off like they were lied to, yet it’s 2K and Steam that is doing the pricing, not the devs.


#17

I think the price is right… The game is awesome and I hope the other mode is fun it will be worth it.


#18

No one is under any obligation to buy it.


#19

Exactly. Everyone would but it in that pricing if they were to make a game like this so what’s they’re problem? They’re acting like the dlc’s are limited time only.


#20

Alright, just to clarify I will attempt to explain what the masses think.

People are generally fed up with how AAA pricing is currently being handled. Especially when games actually charge $60+ JUST for DLC. The people who think that the DLC is overpriced are not dumb, they have very legitimate reasons to be concerned.

TR has made an interesting decision to make sure the community is never split by making the maps free but charging for additional hunters/monsters. This keeps the community together, but it also presents another problem. People who do not buy the DLC will be playing along side others who do. This is a good thing AND a bad thing in several ways. You will be able to play with everyone no problem, that’s great! But now the person who has bought the DLC has more options to pick from than the person who did not buy it. This means the ‘pay to win’ argument is valid.

And TR has stated several times that they will balance the new monsters and hunters with the old ones. But we all know that balancing is never perfect, it’s going to take time to get it right. Until they do tweak it to get it too an appropriate spot, people will be throwing around ‘pay to win’. This is not the image they want to portray I’m sure.

A disclaimer, I have bought the ‘PC Monster Race’ package. I love Evolve and only wish for its success. But the way they are going about marketing the game is risky. I also don’t think the game will be pay to win and I’m sure the balancing will be figured out. But that doesn’t mean the public will think the same.

Do not exaggerate the ‘well those entitled people just want everything for free’. Seriously, you guys only make the community here look worse. Of course they don’t want everything for free, they just want it to be reasonable, to which I do sympathize with.