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

[Pyrian]

...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.

And what is why? The 'why' in this context is 'shady dev practices', which per my post, is not happening. What I'm saying is that, if your why is instead "not enough monsters included in base game" for example, that is completely fine. Nothing wrong with not finding a game worthwhile due to insufficient content. Voice it that way, but there's nothing 'shady' about it so long as they're not hiding the facts.

This is a pure "move the goalposts" reply. I don't particularly object (nor subscribe) to your claim that it's not shady - I object to your statement that we're not supposed to talk about it.

 

[JLF]

"We have to be able to pay the bills..." yeah that understandable. But if paying the bills means anti-consumer practices then you should change jobs. The logic that people should accept lousy products because the producer can't pay their bills is really a ridiculous argument. If your product is lousy and disrespectful you then it should fail. That is how a capitalistic system "should" work.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Woah there, news delivery person! This seems a lot like negativity towards the game industry, and we can't have that here on the new Escapist!

Anywho, as others have said, the issue isn't necessarily the DLC itself, it's the packaging and pricing of the game as a whole. This really is basically a free to play delivery style tacked onto a full priced game. I'm not saying they should be putting the base game out for free but they shouldn't be charging full retail price for it given how much any extended enjoyment of the game is likely to almost require buying DLC. Oh, and the pre-order to skip the grind BS is just, well, BS and has no place at all.

 

[Zato-1]

"I don't like people thinking we're doing underhanded, dirty shit,"

All we know about Evolve comes from trailers, ads and interviews with the people making it. Right now, you're selling us a promise- literally. You're asking us to give you our money on good faith and pre-order your product, before we can have any independent reviews on whether it'll be any good or not. So far, so bad- but since the industry has made a habit of it, that's not reason enough to spark an outrage.

The problem is that, of the (very little) information we DO have about the game (all of which comes from the developers making it), one part stands out: there will be lots and lots of DLC for it. So no longer are you asking us to buy your game on good faith (which may end up being awful), you're also letting us know that we won't be able to have the complete experience unless we also buy a load of DLC, ideally buying the Season Pass right away so we can have access to DLC that doesn't exist on a game which hasn't released and which may well end up being shite. That right there? THAT is being anti-consumer.

But there's also a measure of tone-deafness. There's nothing inherently wrong with a game being made so that DLC can easily be added to it. But by giving so much attention to all your plans for DLC before the game is even out, you make it sound like you're chopping your game up into pieces, selling an incomplete game for the full cost of a AAA title, and then selling all the missing bits separately as Day 1 DLC to assemble a full game. If you heard yourselves, it sure SOUNDS like you're doing underhanded, dirty shit. So, shut up about your DLC. Tell us about the base game, the one we're actually considering buying. If we like what you say, and we like what the reviews say, we might buy it. If we buy it and we like your game, and it feels like a full game by itself, THEN you can start talking to us about DLC. But not before that.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Then stop doing things to making that makes people think your doing shady, underhanded shit?

I'm not against DLC, I'm not against a game being designed to be expandable ether. The problem here is they spend, and spent WAY to much time talking about all the DLC the game is gonna have and not nearly half as much on why I should buy the game to begin with.


Give the people to buy the game and more importantly, enjoy the game, the DLC will sell it self. Not the other way around.

 

[RealRT]

However, Robb did say that he didn't "quite understand the knee-jerk negative reaction to DLC. Because I know for me, as a gamer, when I have a game 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.

Because when I buy a fucking game, I want to have a complete fucking game. I want to pay once and get the full experience. I don't want to pay extra to make the game complete. And when you plan ahead to have DLC up the ass it means that the released game is not complete.

Then again, to me if there's a DLC for the game, then the version without it is incomplete, regardless of what kind of DLC it is.

 

[gamegod25]

I don't find it dirty or underhanded. I think the automatic hysteria over DLC is a bit dumb.

People have been burned by terrible companies doing terribly unethical things with DLC just to make a buck. I understand that, but to automatically try to shove anybody who produces DLC into that box makes you just as terrible as those terrible companies. Even if a game is designed for DLC that doesn't make it bad or the company bad.

I've looked over what the DLC polices are for Evolve and find nothing wrong with them in the slightest and the people blindly jumping on the bandwagon that there is something wrong with it I only have one thing to say: You are what's wrong with gamers today. You ARE the problem.

Hey I like DLC (in general) and I'm not condemning them simply for having it. It's the way they are handling it that makes me angry. When you are pushing the DLC harder than the game itself, announcing pre-orders before people get a chance to see the game, and still selling that extra content even before it's done....THAT is the problem.

And no, I would say that designing a game for DLC is a bad thing and anti-consumer. Because then you aren't selling a game and then offering some extra bits later, you are just selling a platform for the real content. It's not hard to feel ripped off or like you aren't getting the full experience when you are greeted with a wall of DLC before the game is even out yet. Okay some of the extra content isn't "done yet"...well then wait till it is before you try selling it. Simple, no?

 

[Amir Kondori]

Aren't these guys selling character classes and playable monsters as DLC? Aren't they going to sell access to the "Behemoth" playable monster for like $15, just for that one monster?

I have to say it sounds pretty underhanded to me, and like they are trying to get away with charging way more than $60 for their game. Once you start selling a bunch of playable character classes as DLC, and the dollars are adding up quickly if you are buying all of them, that starts to sound pretty shitty to me.

 

[Nurb]

Their greedy, dirty DLC plans, their grind to make you want to spend money, the pre-order SCAM to allow you to skip the grind (skip gameplay) are all reasons I lost interest in this trash.

I wouldn't touch it if it were free to play, and the youtube critics that got into beta are already bored

 

[Creedsareevil]

If you make it convoluted it always stinks.

Its as if the game has already started fucking with me before i even bought it.
I do not need this in my life. Go fck yourself you whining cnt. And take that game of yours with you and stuff it up your fecal release hole...





If you havee to ask the question "How do i deal with the backlash?" DO NOT FCKN DO TH THING THAT PROMPTED THAT QUESTION YOU STUPID FCK!"

 

[witmanfade]

I miss the days where a Dev would release a fully finished, polished game. And if the people wanted more, then, and only then, did they start working on the expansion pack(s) and/or sequels. Now, I can understand DLC and being today's version of an expansion pack, and I'm cool with that, but if you build a game with the intention of selling DLC and release tons and tons of DLC in close succession to the release date, before anyone has had much time to play the game, I feel that is where the problem lies.

The whole process make the game feel like a "Pay to Pay" system, especially if you release the game at full price, and then tack on tons of not free DLC.

It feels like, say, you bought a car at full price. You can sit in the car just fine, but you need to buy the steering wheel if you want it to turn, and you need to buy the windshield if you don't want bugs in your teeth. Oh, and god forbid if you you didn't buy the pedal season pass, because then you are missing out on the sensation of what the car feels like when its moving/stopping.

 

[AstaresPanda]

Oh so he is saying they are doing us a fucking favour by building the game in such a way that you can add content.......erm FUCKING EXPANSION PACKS. Your doing dirty shit and you are found out simple as, dont know why he is crying like a ***** now, should give Turtle Rock a shuffle they digging deeper and deeper.

 

[marioandsonic]

Then don't do dirty, underhanded shit, and stop doing any dirty, underhanded shit that you've already done.

Would that be so hard?

 

[Lightspeaker]

Side-Side note: If your game has gone gold, then people playing before launch is not a "beta". I'm pretty sure Destiny pulled this shit. It's called a "multiplayer demo". Unless the rules of software development changed while I was distracted.

In fairness in both Evolve's case and in the case of Destiny there IS still justification for having a beta even if the game is gold. Specifically: server testing. I wasn't in either but its my understanding with Evolve at least that they've been doing very short beta test periods recently. This lines up with the idea of them testing the servers to see how they handle increased loads over and above their internal testing. Which is perfectly understandable.


In any case...I'm totally turned off Evolve at this point. I'll probably buy it down the line if:
1. It turns out to be good and is still alive down the line
and
2. There's a version of the game including EVERYTHING for a sane price.

Its simple for me. If I buy a game I want the content for that game. There are cases (like Elder Scrolls games DLCs) where the DLC effectively are more traditional expansion-type things and none of the launch packages include the content which is fair enough. But if you're talking about individual characters or one extra mission or whatever and your launch packages include them then there should be a package including ALL of those "little pieces". I don't want to have to run around looking at fifteen different packages to work out what version includes everything I'm after. Offer a version of the game with everything and stick a price on it. Then I'll decide if its worth what you're asking.

And frankly when you're starting to use the same horrendous business model that League of Legends uses IN A PAY TO PLAY GAME then of course people are going to get irritated.

Ultimately its your own damn fault for driving customers away. Stop trying to blame customers for saying "screw that, don't like it".

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Well, the thing that's got me looking a little askance at the game is that the DLC is just about all I've heard about it. To me, that says bad things about the focus of the developers. Are you making a game, or do you expect me to pay full price for what's essentially a DLC platform?

 

[Kajin]

I doubt people would be complaining nearly so much if the devs just didn't talk about their plans for DLC.

I can understand the idea of planning your game around the eventuality of having DLC. I mean, there's only so much time and money in the world. Eventually you're gonna run out of one or both and you'll have to release what you have, complete or not. DLC is merely a way for a company to extend the development cycle post launch. Help keep the employees... well, employed. Still, though, they really need to shut up about the DLC because a lot of gamers either don't know how a business works (hint, it needs money to function) or they've been burned in the past by companies that handled DLC poorly or treated it as a cash grab and as such the very idea of it leaves a bad taste in their mouth.

All that said, though, if the devs treat the DLC like they say they're gonna treat it then I think it won't actually be that big a deal. If I don't buy a monster I can still fight against it. If I don't buy a hunter I can still fight alongside them. The maps and game modes will all come free so I won't be segregated for not having them. Yeah, overall I think this will be really fair.

 

[syaoran728]

While they are two different games, I would like to draw a comparison.

Evolve(PS4/XBOne):
12 playable hunters with 4 different classes
3 different monsters to hunt/play as(with an additional one for pre-orders)

Monster Hunter 4 Demo(3DS):
12 different weapon types each with their own style
3 different monsters to hunt

While they are quite different games in both game play and budget, when I go hunting for monsters this February I know where I'm gonna get the most content.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I have no problem with DLC as a concept, but when I'm being intentionally sold an incomplete game for full price and then have to buy the rest of it as DLC, that's when I have a problem. Which incidentally is exactly what you're doing Mr. Robb.

 

[Fox12]

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 agree with this sentiment. I usually have two responses to DLC. Either it's released months after the game ships, in which case I've most likely beaten the game and moved on with my life, or it's released on day one, in which case I refuse to buy it on principle, since it should have been included free of charge.

There's nothing wrong with DLC, really, but I rarely buy it myself. My only issue is when it warps the standard game. When a title is "built around DLC" I get worried, since the game, by its very nature, probably won't have a meaningful ending, and may not feel like a complete package. I prefer a complete package purchased once to a conga line of additional content. I'll probably have moved onto to Bloodborne or Persona 5 by then.

 

[Proverbial Jon]

So Evolve is being built from the ground up to support DLC. We already know that in game design DLC is planned ahead of time, it's not left to the last minute when everyone is twiddling their fingers and saying, "Now what?"

"There are way too many ideas we cannot fit into the box, Budget-wise, time-wise, there's too much cool shit for us to leave it laying there and never do anything with it. But we wanted to be good about it as consumers,"

So why make it seem like the DLC is stuff that we'd be missing out on because the devs didn't have enough time or budget to include it in the game? More straight up lies! If DLC is planned from the beginning of the game's design then these elements we'll be paying extra for were not leftovers - they are, at the very best, elements designed to be DLC - at the very worst, they're elements taken away from the game.

There's simply no getting around it.