Evolve and repetition

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

So, reading through this weeks Extra Punctuation made me stumble over the most common criticism of Evolve: That it quickly turns into doing the same thing over and over, in this case hunting the monster/being hunted until the monster evolves and chooses to fight. You do this on the same 8 or so maps and the additional criticism is that the formula doesn't change much, no matter which monster or group of hunters is chosen. To obfuscate this, another criticism says, the developers added a tacked on progression system.

Now, I like Evolve. I like it a lot. I find the gameplay to be a good example of easy to learn, hard to master and most matches I lose tend to have some form of learning experience in them. To me, the thing with Evolve is not that it contains a campaign or very diverse gameplay. No, the thing with Evolve is that it mimics another part of society, a part that gamers are supposedly allergic to:

Evolve is similar to hobby sports. Playing Evolve is similar to playing any recreational sport really. The rules are clearly defined and mostly easy to get and the joy is found in the activity itself and improving ones skill in performing it. This is why I don't get the repetitive criticism, because we wouldn't criticize a game of friendly street basket because it is always the same ball, court and rules. You play Evolve and street basket to pass time, either with friends or with whatever people are around and want to play.

Anybody else had this idea? Am I missing something? Do you disagree?

 

[Maximum Bert]

Havent played Evolve for me whats there isnt worth the asking price but as for the criticism I feel its valid, content and how much you pay for a game and at what point it provides value for money is different for everybody.

I think its a bit off comparing it to hobby sports for a start people online are anonymous so that automatically allows erratic behaviour with very little repercussion but if I went out and saw these people face to face it would be a lot harder to ignore them. Basically your trying to get a group of people who are an equal skill level (which is hard enough) and then you are trying to get these complete strangers to communicate to be effective (unless they are the monster) which is gonna be a real struggle especially with the clash of personalities and styles of play and yet its a fundamental part of the game.

With friends this obviously doesnt apply and im sure you can have amazing fun but then again pretty much every game is fun with friends I know I have played absolutely trash games simply because it allowed me to have fun with friends. I feel that when someone says the formula doesnt change much they are not so much criticisng the general rules merely the feeling that the flow of the game rarely alters and they feel that the rules and/or framework of the game doesnt allow enough give to entertain for long a bit like you might be able to play chess for a long time and not get bored but with draughts it would be different.

 

[Zhukov]

I like the game well enough, but I agree with the repetitive criticism nonetheless.

The problem is that there isn't really any room for improvisation or variation in strategy.

Hunters stick together, or maybe go in pairs (because of all the one-shot wildlife), trapper locates monster, hunters chase monster, drop dome then engage by the numbers. Assaults assaults, trapper traps, medic medicates and support supports. If you do anything else at all then you die.

The class roles are so defined that you are utterly dependent on all of your teammates knowing their shit. If your trapper isn't on the ball with the domes then you'll never catch the monster until level 3 and you're fucked. If your medic and support aren't on the ball with their abilities then you won't be able to sustain through the fight and you're fucked. If your assault is some nine year old who goes charging off and gets eaten by carnivourous plants then you've lost most of your damage and you're fucked.

On the monster side, you run, you eat, you fight them at level 2, you run and eat some more, you kill them at level 3.

So yeah, every match plays awfully similar to the last.

The way that the game rewards the monster to avoid any and all confrontation before level 2, if not 3, is questionable. It's not hard to avoid the hunters, you just need to make heavy use of the sneak button and clear out whenever you attract vultures. This means that for the hunters many games will consist of 90% Running Simulator 2015, which is not remotely fun.

 

[Dansen]

So, reading through this weeks Extra Punctuation made me stumble over the most common criticism of Evolve: That it quickly turns into doing the same thing over and over, in this case hunting the monster/being hunted until the monster evolves and chooses to fight. You do this on the same 8 or so maps and the additional criticism is that the formula doesn't change much, no matter which monster or group of hunters is chosen. To obfuscate this, another criticism says, the developers added a tacked on progression system.

Now, I like Evolve. I like it a lot. I find the gameplay to be a good example of easy to learn, hard to master and most matches I lose tend to have some form of learning experience in them. To me, the thing with Evolve is not that it contains a campaign or very diverse gameplay. No, the thing with Evolve is that it mimics another part of society, a part that gamers are supposedly allergic to:

Evolve is similar to hobby sports. Playing Evolve is similar to playing any recreational sport really. The rules are clearly defined and mostly easy to get and the joy is found in the activity itself and improving ones skill in performing it. This is why I don't get the repetitive criticism, because we wouldn't criticize a game of friendly street basket because it is always the same ball, court and rules. You play Evolve and street basket to pass time, either with friends or with whatever people are around and want to play.

Anybody else had this idea? Am I missing something? Do you disagree?

Not buying your argument considering that LoL, DotA and fighting games are insanely popular. MOBAs and fighting games are rather repetitive but people keep coming back because they are entertained. A big problem with Evolve s that the Hunters have nothing productive to do outside of following the trapper, so naturally it starts to get to players when they spend large protons of the game doing nothing. Its a glaring oversight in an otherwise solid foundation. There is also a lack of diverse strategies since there are only four highly specialized roles, at least at this point in the game.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Not buying your argument considering that LoL, DotA and fighting games are insanely popular. MOBAs and fighting games are rather repetitive but people keep coming back because they are entertained. A big problem with Evolve s that the Hunters have nothing productive to do outside of following the trapper, so naturally it starts to get to players when they spend large protons of the game doing nothing. Its a glaring oversight in an otherwise solid foundation. There is also a lack of diverse strategies since there are only four highly specialized roles, at least at this point in the game.

I can kind of see it, but at the same time I don't. The main problem with the game is really that there's a very definite threshold for Hunter skill before the game really opens up to being more than what Zhukov refers to as Running Simulator 2015. Before that threshold hunters are likely to choose Maggie and just run after Daisy or take another trapper and then run in circles waiting for the monster to make a mistake. After that threshold is when at least some members of the team start to get pro-active, trying to corner the monster, predicting its' movements to intercept it etc.. At that point the game is rarely repetitive, as it will become a sort of deadly cat and mouse when both the hunters and the monster tries to get the other to engage in an area where they benefit.

If the game turns into Running Simulator you are either dealing with inexperienced hunters or an extremely boring and abusive Wraith player (though the "Running Wraith" is due to get patched). Against both Kraken and Goliath you can reliably pick a fight at early stage 2 at the latest if the hunters know what they are doing.

 

[The Wykydtron]

I remember thinking that Evolve could really do with some more content in its maps, maybe the humans could deny the monster its food by killing the wildlife before it got there? Basically give the humans something to do while the monster is stealth levelling like farming jungle or gathering upgrades for weapons, oh or like activating a radar dish that marks the monster precisely for a length of time. That or if the design is still about the fights between the monster and humans and nothing else inbetween, make the monster easier to find/easier to make mistakes with.

It's a cool idea but the execution could be better. I would buy it but that asking price for a multiplayer only game that you really need a full premade team to have fun with is a massive no. I feel that the game has potential despite how repetitive the maps are because i've played god knows how many games of League and that's only on Summoner's Rift AKA the only map that even remotely matters. Sorry, E-Sports' Rift because Rito fucked the lore over for no reason and summoners are non-canon now. Good job throwing the biggest lore advantage over the other MOBA games Rito. 10/10, would replace the lore team with liberal arts student dropouts on minimum wage again.

 

[Worgen]

I like the game and really repetition can still be fun, I've played a ton of cod and smite. After a time those become somewhat samie. The bit problem with evolve is that it feels like it wanted to be released like a moba, but it has the pricing structure of a normal game. It has a real lack of content for a high price.

 

[Zydrate]

I played two matches during the free beta and frankly, there simply isn't enough to DO in the game. Repetitive or not, other posts have said that every match is the same priority list of following, chasing, dome-throwing. The only attempt the game gives to vary the gameplay is the occasional mob that gives people a buff and that's it. They need to take that same idea but expand it twenty times over.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

I don't really disagree as someone who likes the competitive side of games, though my likes tend to fall more into the fighting game category.

In every fighting game, you are essentially "doing the same thing" every match with the same set of characters, all with the same moves at their disposal which will never change barring eventual patches or updates. And yet, every match is different in that the actions you and your opponent take will be different, or at least in a different order than the last one.

To some extent, this element could probably be compared to tons of other games, since it's a little bit of a vague description. Shooters like Evolve, MOBAs like LoL, etc. Playing fighting games is much like a hobby sport to me in that it tests both my reflexes and skill while still being a fun way to pass the time with friends. You could say the exact same thing for all of those other genres including games that are competitively inclined.

I haven't played a shooter in ages though and will likely never play Evolve, so I can't really comment personally on what I think of the game save looking in disbelief at the DLC prices.

 

[Elfgore]

I rented Evolve... made me so glad I didn't buy it. Within six rounds I was bored. That and the horrific progression system made the game become boring very quickly. Each game was the exact same. We'd trap the monster within five minutes, deal massive damage early on, and then just draw the game out as he struggled to survive. Just a meh game.

 

[RJ 17]

Snip.

The thing is, going by your break-down of that criticism...it really can apply to every multiplayer game out there. What is CoD if not the exact same thing on the same 8 maps over and over again? What about Left 4 Dead?

The problem with Evolve - at least from what I gather (disclaimer: I've yet to play the game) - is that it apparently gets really old really fast. Mostly everyone that I've spoken to that's played it says that after about 6 hours of playing it they're officially done with it.

It needs more variety. From what I gather there's only 3 or 4 monsters and 4 playable classes, each with 1 unlockable character to grind towards. Judging by this they need more character and monster options. I've watched a number of Let's Plays on the game, and 90% of them feature the exact same 4 hunters going after a Goliath. CoD, as a counter-point, gives you many options in terms of a load out to create a large variety of possibilities in the competition you're up against. Evolve you're going to be facing one of three monsters...with 4 of 8 possible hunters. The fact that there's also very few maps certainly doesn't help, either.

I'm not saying this to try to convince you that it's a bad game. If you like the game then rock on, keep playing the game that you enjoy and don't let anyone try to talk you down from it. I'm just trying to help you understand the criticism, as that seems to be the purpose of this topic.

 

[Grumman]

What I think would improve Evolve is strategic mobility. Give the hunters a STOVL that is terrible for tracking or fighting inside arenas, but can be used to run hunters ahead to ambush the monster, or strafe it if it's stupid enough to wander out into the open in front of it.

 

[ffronw]

Here's the thing about Evolve (full disclosure: I reviewed it for The Escapist).

The difference between playing with an experienced team against a good monster and playing with a random group against a bad monster can be HUGE. So often when playing online, you see groups in a Hunt map that simply follow Daisy (the Trapper's pet) around until they catch sight of the monster, which they then chase until the can toss up the arena. Those are the games that people have called "Running Simulator."

But when you get a good group, they're splitting up and anticipating the monster. They're making guesses at where he's headed, and what he's doing using the signs, the map, and the clues in the environment. It goes from a boring chase to an engrossing cat & mouse game, and it's only enhanced if you have a group of friends to play with.

That's another important point. If you have one person who's not filling their role properly, it dramatically affects the game. Evolve's balance is tuned around having the abilities of all four hunters in play, and if someone isn't pulling their weight, it can really pull everyone else's experience down.

I put something like 50 hours into the beta and preview builds I had, and I've clocked another 20+ since release. I'm fortunate that a large percentage of those hours have come in a group of people I know, so I've been able to experience Evolve at its very best.

That said, I can also see the arguments people have for it, and I'm not going even get started on the DLC pricing.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Hey if you enjoy it then just go with that, why are you poking the bees nest here and try to ruin your fun?

For some people the shallow nature of Evolve is just what they were looking for easy entertainment and others demand more, you pick how you want your games to be.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Hey if you enjoy it then just go with that, why are you poking the bees nest here and try to ruin your fun?

For some people the shallow nature of Evolve is just what they were looking for easy entertainment and others demand more, you pick how you want your games to be.

Actually, I think Evolve is the opposite of shallow, but its' simple basic concepts create a misleading impression. Ffronw puts the finger on it, I think, namely the fact that there's a huge skill ceiling in Evolve and it likely takes more than 10 hours to reach the threshold level at which you stop just running after the monster and start actively trying to outsmart the monster player (or the monster player stops doing nothing but sneak around the map).

But mostly I just created this thread because I think it is an overlooked discussion about Evolve. My experience (which admittedly is mostly in a 4 people pre-made of friends) is very different from that of those that keep saying Evolve is "Running Simulator 2015", which made me think that there' a discussion to be had here about the depth of Evolve and how it, just like casual sports, encourage people that enjoy the activity to do it over and over until they learn the nuance of it. Just like there's more to soccer than just taking shots at the goal, there's a lot more to Evolve than just following Daisy around.

 

[Roboshi]

The main problem I see with it is the same I see with most asymmetric multiplayers;

-90% of people want to play the monster
-20% of the positions in a match are the monster


This was the problem with Depth, where everyone wanted to be a shark, but you usually got stuck as a diver.

 

[Dansen]

Hey if you enjoy it then just go with that, why are you poking the bees nest here and try to ruin your fun?

For some people the shallow nature of Evolve is just what they were looking for easy entertainment and others demand more, you pick how you want your games to be.

Actually, I think Evolve is the opposite of shallow, but its' simple basic concepts create a misleading impression. Ffronw puts the finger on it, I think, namely the fact that there's a huge skill ceiling in Evolve and it likely takes more than 10 hours to reach the threshold level at which you stop just running after the monster and start actively trying to outsmart the monster player (or the monster player stops doing nothing but sneak around the map).

But mostly I just created this thread because I think it is an overlooked discussion about Evolve. My experience (which admittedly is mostly in a 4 people pre-made of friends) is very different from that of those that keep saying Evolve is "Running Simulator 2015", which made me think that there' a discussion to be had here about the depth of Evolve and how it, just like casual sports, encourage people that enjoy the activity to do it over and over until they learn the nuance of it. Just like there's more to soccer than just taking shots at the goal, there's a lot more to Evolve than just following Daisy around.

I've seen four different reviewers come to the same conclusion about the game. That this game is not worth the sixty dollar asking price. There simply isn't enough content, one even said it felt like a F2P game. There are only two game modes. Why? Probably because it was rushed out of development like Titanfall(coincidently Titanfall would have made a great 20 dollar download game, not full retail). I also feel like they may have shot themselves in the foot by having locked classes and group composition, as it may have limited unique strategies(like actually waiting for the monster to hit 3 to ambush it). I can see a hard core community forming around this game but I will be surprised if it manages to maintain a good player base three months later. Only time will tell.

However with such a solid base for gameplay they could probably address most issues in an expansion or sequel.

 

[Username Redacted]

I, as someone who hasn't played Evolve, have a couple of questions:

1) What happens if the hunter team and the monster engage one another at the soonest possible moment?
2) How long a time period does that "soonest possible moment" represent?

My suspicion, from everything I've heard about the game, is that the answer to #1 is that the outcome is very predictable (i.e. either the hunters or monster will consistently win) and that the answer to #2 is some variation of "too damn long" possibly with a side of "not enough to do". I'm interested in finding out if I am mistaken.

 

[Kashrlyyk]

I, as someone who hasn't played Evolve, have a couple of questions:

1) What happens if the hunter team and the monster engage one another at the soonest possible moment?
2) How long a time period does that "soonest possible moment" represent?

My suspicion, from everything I've heard about the game, is that the answer to #1 is that the outcome is very predictable (i.e. either the hunters or monster will consistently win) and that the answer to #2 is some variation of "too damn long" possibly with a side of "not enough to do". I'm interested in finding out if I am mistaken.

It can happen that they meet within the first minute of the game and then the monster tries to get away as fast as possible because it is way too weak at that point. It can also happen that they don't meet until the monster reaches level 3 and then the monster is much stronger and you need really good hunter players against a good monster player.