Poll: Evolve. A Possible Problem? (Poll).

[shintakie10]

Left 4 Dead always required teamwork as the weak survivors. Looks like this will require even more. I mean, if a trapper throws one of those domes at the wrong time. He/She fucks up their entire team and gets some of them killed. They seem to be putting a lot of effort towards making the classes unique and interesting to play as.

The survivors were hardly "weak." A great player could fire three rounds and save three teammates. As it stands with Evolve, I'm seeing it a fair bit skewed to the monster since the mechanics don't punish sloppy monster play as much as sloppy hunters. If a fight isn't going the monster's way, it can outrun damage rather easily even when slowed. If forced into a fight, the arena is large enough to give the hunters the run around until it goes away. The extreme mobility of the monster lets a smart player manipulate these arena by avoiding open areas when the arena is deployed.
The game needs a lot of fine tuning and player learning of the mechanics. The hunters will grow smarter, I just think the monster will grow smarter faster.

Heck, if anything the infected were horribly weak. Two equal teams facing each other should end in a perfect draw since the infected are so horribly gimped against survivors. On top of that it has Sources shitty netcode that makes melee hard as balls to pull off even with little lag.

On topic!

Personally I like to play on the side with more people. Its the same when I play maps like The Thing in Starcraft 2. When I'm by myself, especially if I'm new at it, I tend to wander and fail pretty spectacularly. When I'm with a group I can at least do something without being a complete drag on the entire game.

One person on the four player side sucking doesn't mean the games a waste. One person on the one player side sucking means yall might as well not play.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Sorry but where have you been living for the past decade... what in the blue blazes makes you think modern matchmaking will give anyone a choice in the matter?
That shit will all be RNG and yes people will be pissed, but not nearly as pissed as when devs start chopping up the community with DLC packs.

 

[Yuno Gasai]

Your poll should have an "all of the above" option. If I'm playing with friends, it doesn't matter who is doing what job, we're having fun. We all enjoy versus Left 4 Dead matches. While we each have our favorites (Francis and Boomer being mine) what we really enjoy is each other's company. Should be the same here.

Of the hunters, so far I like the Trapper concept best. The monsters are very mobile, able to get into and out of fights. Being the guy who denies that escape, tethering the monster in the right place at the right moment so the team can pour bullets on it....yeah, I think I'll enjoy that.

You've hit the nail on the head for me.

That being said, I'm actually more excited about playing as a Hunter rather than being the Monster. I relish co-operative play, and the classes look excellent and diverse compared to the Survivors back in Left 4 Dead.

I see myself bagsy-ing the Medic before my friends can, though. OTL

 

[Colin Bagley]

Sorry but where have you been living for the past decade... what in the blue blazes makes you think modern matchmaking will give anyone a choice in the matter?
That shit will all be RNG and yes people will be pissed, but not nearly as pissed as when devs start chopping up the community with DLC packs.

I get your concern about DLC.

IF they do stuff like new maps, then yes it will "Chop up" the community.
But if they do stuff like new Hunters / Monsters/ Weapons/ Perks, then I can imagine them getting to work without dividing the player-base.

If they just bring out new maps, then obviously all 5 players must have the same combination of map-packs, or it won't work. And since all players wont, it wont work.

However, they could patch in the new guns, so everybody's game can handle them. Then offer DLC to let you use them. That way, everybody still gets to play together, but the DLC Customers still get their extra stuff.
The challenge then would be not making the game "Pay To Win."

 

[Davey Woo]

I'm guessing that each session will probably last around 20 or 30 minutes at the most, so if the same 5 people stick together then maybe 3 or 4 of the 5 players would have a chance to be the monster in an hour, even if it's just randomly picked. I'm hoping that they'll implement a better system than just RNG though.

I tend to pick support type roles in co-op games, so when with friends I;d be happy to play as hunters, however I wouldn't want to be using a support role with random players online, so then I'd prefer to be the monster.

 

[Robert Marrs]

Im sure I will be playing as medic most of the time. Can't trust anyone else to do it properly in games these days.

 

[Colin Bagley]

So I think we're all in agreement that a simple RNG will not work.

Let's hope that this general consensus finds it's way to Turtle Rock.


I like the idea of quitters getting a penalty to stop them from getting Monster for a while.
And I like the idea of people who are selected for Monster Duty, getting the option to turn it down if they don't want it. (Imagine being the guy who wants Monster, but it goes to somebody who won't enjoy it.)

I also like the idea of there being both Private Lobbies with their own rules, and Public Lobbies with standard "Fair" rules.



One thing I've not mentioned yet, is if I can't be Monster; I don't know which Hunter I'd rather be. Since they all look really good fun.
I just wouldn't want to be Hunters more than about half the time.

 

[Colin Bagley]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdbm9K2CsqU

A video of a game from the Kraken's perspective.

It does indeed look rather difficult for the Monster. Which I suppose will help deter some people from constantly trying to Monster. (Although, Dark Souls is a thing. So perhaps the difficulty will encurage others?)