Evolve Dev: "I Don't Like People Thinking We're Doing Dirty, Underhanded S***"

Zydrate

New member
Apr 1, 2009
1,914
0
0
Robb did say that he didn't "quite understand the knee-jerk negative reaction to DLC.
Has he paid attention to the news lately? With all the industry flubs, people are a bit wary.
Evolve Devs: Go look up Ubisoft and Unity real quick. We'll wait.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Zhukov said:
But I just wish they'd include an Absolutely Everything Pack. They can price it at whatever they think it's worth.
They won't do that, and even if they wanted to, corporate wouldn't let them.
Why?
Because then they lose out on all of that extra nickle and diming cash.

DLC works because like any financial transaction, it's easier or SEEMS cheaper (in the moment) to buy little bits piecemeal, even if it turns out to be some absurd sum in the end.

If you were to show people the true full price of most of these new games, I'd wager they would shy away entirely.

Jadak said:
Honestly, people are too whiny.
Irony.

*snip*

If that is not happening, then shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.If that is not happening, then shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.
While I agree that "vote with your wallet" must come first, consumer feedback is useful for other consumers; yet, nobody is forcing you to read them nor do you need to read them to vote with your wallet.

So rather than whining about the "whining" and demanding everyone with a dissenting opinion to "shut the fuck up", maybe you should just, I dunno, not bother with the forums or comments sections?

Just a thought.
 

Pyrian

Hat Man
Legacy
Apr 21, 2020
1,399
8
13
San Diego, CA
Country
US
Gender
Male
Jadak said:
...Don't like the value for the price? Don't fucking buy it.
...shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.
This is a place where we talk about what's good and bad about games. We are perfectly capable of both not buying a game and communicating why. And there's nothing wrong with that.
 

P-89 Scorpion

New member
Sep 25, 2014
466
0
0
You don't want to be seen as doing underhanded shit? then maybe don't announce pre-order DLC over a year before the game's released.
 

JayRPG

New member
Oct 25, 2012
585
0
0
Yeah, I'm sorry, but... He is trying to make out DLC is a good thing (and it can be) while simultaneously doing everything that is wrong with DLC.

Season pass? Check
Pre-order DLC? Check
Multiple editions all with different DLC? Check

Not to mention it is a full price game at launch but built like a free-to-play game.

In Australia the base game costs $99.95, then there are 2 day-one editions (1 for xbone, 1 for ps4) with different DLC on each for $109.95, then there is the special edition for $169.95. There are also 2 different digital versions which have different offerings.

We can already sell codes for the season pass at work and the fucking game isn't even out yet, this is the first time I have ever seen this. It's an active season pass code (not a pre-order), an active code, for a game that is not even out yet.
 

sXeth

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
2,636
114
68
This seems like a no-brainer that maybe they shouldn't have had Season Passes/Preorder bonuses, or announced their DLC before the game was out then. I kind of have a hard time buying that Behemoth isn't finished when they've released gameplay footage of it that seemed functional. I wouldn't care, because you could have made it in the natural cycle after the main game, but I do when you try and say its not and lie to me.
 

Hairless Mammoth

New member
Jan 23, 2013
1,595
0
0
Sorry, buddy, but we're tired of publishers and devs doing dirty underhanded shit. With all the DLC you've announced before the press even gets their review copies, it's hard to trust you either. It also didn't help you last week, when we heard about a preorder bonus that let's us skip grinding in your game.

That being said, Turtle Rock did say from the get-go that DLC was going to be a major part of Evolve. We've already seen what positive and negative affects DLC can have on a game and its community for years before Evolve was announced. So, if anyone preordered Evolve, they either knew what they were getting themselves into or do not follow gaming news and probably isn't one of the people thinking TR is doing dirty underhanded shit.
 

Ishal

New member
Oct 30, 2012
1,177
0
0
Atmos Duality said:
Zhukov said:
But I just wish they'd include an Absolutely Everything Pack. They can price it at whatever they think it's worth.
They won't do that, and even if they wanted to, corporate wouldn't let them.
Why?
Because then they lose out on all of that extra nickle and diming cash.

DLC works because like any financial transaction, it's easier or SEEMS cheaper (in the moment) to buy little bits piecemeal, even if it turns out to be some absurd sum in the end.

If you were to show people the true full price of most of these new games, I'd wager they would shy away entirely.
Too true. But there's also something else to consider, that being the "Tone at the Top" of these companies and shareholders.

There are people who work in marketing for these big publishers who's sole job is to make hype, and sustain it. They live and breathe pre-order culture. They have insane bonuses when a game makes money from pre-orders and breaks a certain number of day one sales. How do they achieve this? They want their game to be the next big hit. For whatever genre they are developing, they want their game to be the next big one. For MMO's it's WoW, for FPS it's CoD, etc etc.

They don't want this to be a successful game. They don't want this to be a game that makes net money for a return. They don't want this to be a game that has lasting impact and will be played ten years from now. They want a game that is the #1 best seller so they can slap that on the box and add to the hype. This is Watch Dogs. This is Destiny. This is what these people sell to their shareholders at meetings. This why there is already a Destiny 2 in the works. This has a large effect on the game development because at these big publishers, these individuals are positioned at a place in corporate hierarchy where they can dictate policy.

These are the people who see DLC and breaking apart their games as another way to further that agenda. The people calling the shots only care about their salary.
 

VanQ

Casual Plebeian
Oct 23, 2009
2,729
0
0
Steven Bogos said:
Zhukov said:
I don't find it dirty or underhanded. I think the automatic hysteria over DLC is a bit dumb.

I do however find it rather tiresome. I don't want to have to look at a fucking flowchart when buying a game.

Just give me everything and put a fucking price tag on it. I shall then decide whether or not I want to pay that price. Bam. Done. Sold. Simple.
I completely agree. I just want to pay for a game ONCE and get all of its content. You know, back in the good old days where you bought a game, and any future content was free, released in patches, or bundled with a major, MAJOR amount of content in an expansion pack.

I would have said Blizzard is one of the last devs to still do this, but the pricing structure for Heroes of the Storm is fucking awful.
To be fair, everything worth getting in HotS can be obtained by playing the game. If one does their dailies fairly diligently, you can unlock all characters and even a bunch of bonus skins and mounts. Unless you really MUST have Blood Elf Tyrande, then you never have to drop a cent into that game to get all of the content.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Ishal said:
Too true. But there's also something else to consider, that being the "Tone at the Top" of these companies and shareholders.
I'm quite aware of that.
In fact, I usually link to a particular video that explains it (in plain English) better than myself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6TmTv6deTI

He describes the relationship between EA and Bioware, and how Tone at the Top applies.

There are people who work in marketing for these big publishers who's sole job is to make hype, and sustain it. They live and breathe pre-order culture. They have insane bonuses when a game makes money from pre-orders and breaks a certain number of day one sales. How do they achieve this? They want their game to be the next big hit. For whatever genre they are developing, they want their game to be the next big one. For MMO's it's WoW, for FPS it's CoD, etc etc.
Yeah, the business culture is extremely "hit-based" now.
It's why niche gaming was dying for a good long while (and still is for certain genres).
Or put more accurately: "Niche became more niche; popular and generic became more popular and generic"

They don't want this to be a successful game. They don't want this to be a game that makes net money for a return. They don't want this to be a game that has lasting impact and will be played ten years from now. They want a game that is the #1 best seller so they can slap that on the box and add to the hype. This is Watch Dogs. This is Destiny. This is what these people sell to their shareholders at meetings. This why there is already a Destiny 2 in the works. This has a large effect on the game development because at these big publishers, these individuals are positioned at a place in corporate hierarchy where they can dictate policy.
First, I MOSTLY agree with your points, and definitely agree with the general attitude or "take".

However, I see a couple of points differently.

They don't want this to be a successful game. They don't want this to be a game that makes net money for a return. They don't want this to be a game that has lasting impact and will be played ten years from now. They want a game that is the #1 best seller so they can slap that on the box and add to the hype.
While there is certainly no shortage of short-sighted idiocy in game design these days, I think these companies DO want a successful game that has lasting impact, but a different sort of impact from the kind we want. Mainly, because I think they're defining "success" differently than we do and to show why, we need to look at the most "successful" games on the market.

First, every super-popular and successful game is iterative and milkable. Every. Damn. Last. ONE.
Incidentally, they take very little creative effort to maintain once established because brand power.

What are WoW expansion packs but excuses to raise the level cap so everyone has to grind new raid gear and levels? (and thus pay for more subscription time)
What is Madden and FIFA but an effortless annual roster update?
What is Call of Duty but the same goddamn game every year? (plus or minus hilarious game-breaking bugs)

Those aren't just the flagship games of their respective companies; they're Golden Geese shitting out Golden Eggs annually, without fail as evidenced by how all three BY THEMSELVES have sustained their companies despite years of bumbling and bullshit.

If a franchise can sustain you and your profit margin despite your own idiocy, well, it's not hard to see why AAA uses that to measure "true success" now. Sure enough, that's what the business execs are trying to emulate: Games that are profitable because of long-term milkability, ideally based more on addiction than quality content.

So the new paradigm: Instead of making and selling quality games, the biggest producers are either selling facsimiles of quality games (SimCity, Aliens: Colonial Marines) or the PROMISE of quality games (Destiny, Watch Dogs; Evolve will most likely fall into this category too).

In either case, that's also part of why feature-complete games had to die (so spoke Ubisoft): they don't fit into the ideal business model because a feature-complete game has closure, and while closure is satisfying, a satisfied customer is ready to move on. Possibly to something else.

And why do that when you can lead them by the nose for a while longer, hitting their wallet every step of the way?

They're all just trying to get on the Golden Goose gravy train.
Pre-order culture is powerful and a part of that goal, but games need some longevity to act sustainable platforms for DLC sequel hooks, or (in WoW's case) subscription/service persistent revenue streams.

While that's not an inherently bad thing, it can be easily contorted into consumer arm-twisting* and the VERY evident slippery-slope of selling "quality" before we even know what it is. And that is REALLY what the marketers are there for.

(*As far as I'm concerned, the last actual product Blizzard released was The Frozen Throne expansion for Warcraft 3, because WoW's success not only sustained the INSANELY long development time and huge budget of both Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, but it redefined the entire culture of the company.

It's a success that I loathe and despise, because it told Blizzard to STOP selling the awesome feature complete games I loved and lauded, and to start yanking me (and others) around for more concessions, like this Always Online bullshit that didn't feel the need to invade their previous works.

This kind of success is poisonous, and it's a big part of why I stopped buying virtually any AAA games about 5 years ago.)
 

ISeeColours

New member
Oct 17, 2011
9
0
0
If they pre-plan DLC that's fine by me because it's extremely rare I buy any DLC.

But having the brass neck to ask me for my money in advance for content that doesn't even exist then bark at me like i'm a bad parson?

fuck off.
 

The White Hunter

Basment Abomination
Oct 19, 2011
3,888
0
0
AntiChri5 said:
Then stop doing dirty, underhanded shit.
You filthy sneaky ninja you, I came here to say that!

OT: Stop doing dirty, underhanded shit.

From the evry day of announcement Evolve has been marketed as bugger all but a massive DLC delivery system anyway.
 

Riotguards

New member
Feb 1, 2013
219
0
0
simple DLC practice, day one DLC SHOULD be included with the game, anything after that is fair game
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
1. I agree that people's reaction to the DLC plans have been hyperbolic. He is completely right in being annoyed by peoples reactions.
2. He should let it go. The majority of people complaining will still run out and buy it day one.

Captcha: Feeding Frenzy. That sounds about right.
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
Okay, let's consider something. 2K Games made a big investment in this game, as in, they literally bought it from the stable of IP's and properties from THQ for quite a lot of money, so pretty much Turtle Rock had to retool the entire game's monetization structure to pay the debt they have with 2K Games, not to mention the hundreds of families the devs need to feed.

I somewhat liked the game when I played it's latest beta, but I'm definitely not buying it at full price.

Just like many of you, I don't agree with this game's DLC scheme, I agree there are better ways for doing this DLC scheme without getting accused of "doing dirty underhanded shit" (look at Valve) and I'm not defending it in any shape of form, just understand why they're doing what they're doing.
 

HerraMetsoila

New member
Oct 13, 2009
4
0
0
For me the fact that evolve is going to have DLC is actually a positive factor. We are talking about multiplayer game and as long as the maps and game modes are going to be free, I'm fine with them milking the shit out with additional skins and monsters.

In my point of view without the DLC this game would die or wither in around six months, no publisher or dev will pour its money to finished and shipped product without any chance of making buck out of it. Because of the genre I see no problem with the DLC. As long as it means the game will actually be supported after launch instead of dev leaving the game on its own, it's all fine by me.

Pre-order DLC or on-disc DLC that is actual content for the game, now that's when I light my torch and pick up my pitchfork. Games that rely on multiplayer should follow evolves line more often, let everyone play everything with everyone. All added bells and whistles can be priced to oblivion as long as community is not divided with season passes and other similar shit payment schemes, that make AAA games triple their prices, CoD and BF and their 140 euros for full game prices are my examples of doing DLC wrong. Single player DLC, if done well and not priced awfully, can actually add value, Borderlands 2 falls into this category in my mind.

Sorry for possible typos and other errors in grammar. Haven't really written anything in English for couple of years.

To sum it up: I don't support content locked behind paywalls if it actually qualifies as content. DLC is not the Son of Satan digitally reincarnated if done right and Evolve in my humble opinion does it right(They might still seem like huge flaming dicks about it on their announcements).
 

RandV80

New member
Oct 1, 2009
1,507
0
0
Kind of feels like the average gamer is overlooking a lead designers problem of wanting to add more to a game but needing to stick to budget, while he with the job as a lead designer willing with an attitude of "I really love and I play it for a while and I want more, I want more. I'll pay for it. I don't mind" is a out of touch with a lot of us more budget minded gamers.

For me it's rather simple though, as long as the game is open to mods then DLC doesn't really matter. I could be off here but I'm thinking if you're making a game from the ground up to 'support DLC', then you should have pretty much everything in place to open it up for modding.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Make the game worth it, then I won't care. I would recommend not talking about DLC before putting the game out besides the standard DLC subscription companies are offering now.