Will Evolve's Demise Put AAA-Developers Off Taking Risks On New IP's?

Why ScreenGurus Shaun believes Evolve's failure should give AAA-developers food for thought over they handle new IP's.

[spaceb0y]

Things slowly getting a bit shaky in the video game world...closure of studios, voice actors' strike...

[Kokyu]

The industry has gotten too big and pubs and devs have gotten to greedy. A crash is coming last time it was really good for the industry as a whole.

Edit; People can disagree all they want but having been a consumer, collector and gamer, before it was cool, for the last 30yrs I know what Im talking about. THe industry was better after the first crash because all the major Corps were gone and games got back to being games instead of being just cash software.

[Kingthrash360]

The people who made evolve made a a game, chopped it up into 10 peices and sold the base for 60 bucks. Day 1 over 110$ worth of dlc and a ton of the dlc were just colors. They were doomed to fail...I hope others see that this isn't what gamers want.
We want a whole game for 60 bucks....it dosent have to be a new ip either.....look at sf5. It's has a household name brand..but as soon as we seen it lacking in content (still no arcade mode??!! Gtfo capcom) nobody open their wallet. So no matter who you are, you sell some bs you won't get paid.

[MercyKiller]

Evolve failed because of it being overpriced for the whole experience. They didn't fail because of it being a ne IP.

[Enigma_2099]

Not to mention the blatant admittance of it being a vector for DLC, included micro transactions, shallow gameplay, etc, etc....

[RpgSama]

Yeah a fully priced game WITH a Season Pass that on top of that was nothing more than a vehicle for microtransactions since day one for cosmetic and non cosmetic stuff like characters and monsters that you could not unlock any other way than spending money.

[spicelicka]

Yea it had nothing to do with it being a new IP. It had no campaign, which would be fine if it wasn't lacking content and riddled with DLC bullshit. It felt like I was just playing a small part of a much larger game.

I don't understand why Turtle rock didn't just make it like left 4 dead, hell just make left 4 dead 3, it's one of the best co-op games.

[_-EDMIX-_]

I actually believe evolve fails first at being a bad game.

The reality is even with its crappy distribution model in regards to its DLC if it was an absolutely fun game let's say one of the funnest first person shooters that ever released in history I don't even think it wouldn't matter I actually think majority of Gamers would all be citing the downloadable content being at a ridiculous price simply because of how amazing the game actually is.

It's not. Even with a dedicated team that has made some amazing multiplayer titles, Evolve just falls short I've seen people playing the game and I read a couple reviews and it's clear that the concept they were aiming for they were not able to execute properly.

I think it just has everything to do with it being a bad title first and foremost having overpriced downloadable content for multiplayer game that also fragments the community on the very first day doesn't help.

And you guys know me in this community to be very much supportive of companies doing what they want with their content but not when it begins destroying infrastructure on a title that's kind of meant to be about community in the first place.

[Activemessiah]

It definitely does make being greedy as taking a risk... ask Hello Games, they know about that too.

[Paytaa]

If by risk you mean flooding your game launch with monetized weapon colors and a plethora of other pointless DLC, then yeah, I hope developers don't do that lol.

[StarElite]

Evolve is a good example at what not to do when making a new IP.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Agreed talking about putting the cart before the horse.

I have nothing against downloadable content in the respect that a company is free to do with what they want with the content they legally created, but from a marketing and consumer relations standpoint it doesn't actually make sense to begin selling downloadable content for a brand new intellectual property that people don't even know anything about yet they're expecting people to pay more money pasta main game to play something that they are unaware of in fact I would have been fine if they begin unloading content maybe 6 months to a year out until people actually had time to care about with the property actually was as opposed to selling it to you the very first day.

Like I've said many times they are legally free to do whatever they feel like it with their content it doesn't mean that consumers are going to feel comfortable purchasing a brand new intellectual property only to be sold all this other content that's meant for a multiplayer game in the community is running around with all these different features.

Even if the majority of this was just cosmetic and then it really affect the game how many users would even know this? I feel like with a multiplayer game you could lose a couple matches and have this belief that somebody was beating you because of something that they purchased and pay to win sucks I absolutely agree with that 100% but it's a terrible concept but at the end of the day even if your game is it pay to win if you have a bunch of downloadable content for a multiplayer title it is still going to lead the consumer to believe that that is what your game is actually about even if it isn't.

So at the end of the day even if the game isn't pay-to-win, it is not about what it is or isn't it is more so about the perception of what it is and consumers are going to perceive it to be paid to win, which is never going to help the company itself regardless of what it is truthfully, that doesn't stop people from believing so.

[kindkinesis]

No, just look at splatoon, titanfall, dying light, and the division

[Cmv38]

The division imo doesn't belong in the same sentence as those games. But its improved a lot since launch

[peewee11016]

Nope. Evolve was a BIG money grab. What was it like almost 250 for everything in the game... Was a stupid way. the game killed itself when they did that model thinking it would work out. Free 2Play one. It was good just every char and monster were so over priced for in-game currency it would take u ages to unlocked everything.

[Fist4achin]

I don't have a high opinion of Valve anymore bc they seem to only be about the money versus giving gamers what gamers want.

[feedthereaper]

New IP's are being craved by gamers all the time, but they want IP's that are polished, worthy of the price and has longevity.
What Evolve was, was an attempt to create a new Left4Dead franchise, with co-op players taking on a Monster rather than mutant Zombies. And it could have worked as it was (and is) a good concept that had some great ideas.
Unfortunately, there were also some niggling issues, it felt too "samey" in every level design and overall the price of it was far too high. If they had released this as a shockingly great budget title for less than $15, it would have sold loads, people would have enjoyed it and with a LOT of fast development for new maps and characters, it could have lasted a good year or two with decent player numbers. But instead, it was clear from the Beta it had, that it was over-priced and too slow on the support to fix any issues it had.

The reality is that Evolve incorporated two gameplay mechanics that have proved to be successful (LEFT4DEAD co-op, mixed with OVERWATCH's unique characters/skills/abilities) and will do again in the future if someone builds a game to support them, but they need to have looked at it as an experiment, and priced it accordingly, until they created something incredible.

To put it bluntly, Evolve was an experiment that showed a lot of promise and potential....... but nobody wants to pay AAA-game prices for an experiment......... experiments are for early Alphas or low priced indie games, and they need to learn from this, because it happens too often where good ideas are rushed out into a full price AAA game market and they flop, rather than nurtured and grown to something fantastic over time. Minecraft was developed for years before it was given a full retail launch and even then it was priced fairly as it was an experiment...... Evolve and No Mans Sky was rushed into a AAA price release and flopped.

Develop an idea, test the waters with it, grow it and if it becomes a great product, make money from additional content rather than the experimental title..... and then go AAA release on a sequel or massively updated re-master that vastly improves the experience from an experiment to a full game.

[_-EDMIX-_]

I agree that the game showed lots of promise but I actually disagree that the game not performing well had anything to really do with its downloadable content.

If it's an absolutely fun game consumers could still buy it and play it without ever picking up its downloadable content anyway. I believe that it had nothing to do with being half of a game I think it had everything to do with just simply being a bad game

[Hotabang]

or you know, let devs know that substance is key when charging full price?

[Dan_scruggs]

Probably not. Splatoon did pretty well (5 million well) on a distant third place console. Buy yeah. Best to focus on failures instead of successes.

[Chaos_Order]

Tons of new IPs are successful but no, let's focus on one game that CLEARLY didn't sell poorly because of the micro transactions, double season passes or mixed reviews and claim it speaks for all new IPs.

[Fist4achin]

Just don't be so I checked, or create single player campaigns. MP games are only good until the next best thing comes out. Halo used to be king of the hill, until COD and Battlefield. Now, there's so many to choose from and different types with new MP games in the pipeline, that people and their money is bound to move on.

[Nodoze]

Wait, the blatant anti consumer pricing and attitutude didn't catch on? What a surprise....said no gamer anywhere.

[Tedakin]

Evolve just wasn't a good game. It got old in 30 minutes. Make a great game and people will come.

[Antifan]

Evolve could have been good with a single player story campaign

[ocelot07]

I think with Evolve when it went to free to play it was a matter of to little to late. When the game first released it had like $100 worth of Dlc day one. Plus the game was simply just not all that fun to begin with I'm.

I think devs will continue to take risks. I just hope they learn from this. Don't make stupidly overpriced Dlc and make the game fun.

[cyber_daemonx]

Probably not. Hopefully It'll put em off making online only games.

[Scatpants]

If it means it puts developers off of making content light games with sh!tty cash grabbing DLC schemes then I'm all for it.

[TheColbertinator]

DLC pricing was out of control and the season pass didn't unlock everything. Even EA isn't that shady and that's saying a lot for Turtle Rock.

[Sam Fisher]

I think their mistake was going f2p on pc, and Not on console

[mike32UK]

No it will hopefully deter them from being money grabbing dogs and splitting their game up to high heavens for the sake of DLC and microtransactions.

[Angerfist]

No just make it a enjoyable Game.
And one not based completely on Multiplayer.

The Game actually got pushed hard by Xbox so the new IP Argument doesnt work

[Kokyu]

The game was horrible at launch and had too many microtransactions, special edition and just plain BS. The only thing devs need to learn is dont pimp yourself out, focus on game play and not DLC to make additional money.

[masterfox]

Evolve it deserves to fail!!, freaking game sold at full price , special edition games sold at ridiculous prices, brain dead micro-transaction , repetitive gameplay ! , was only a damn multiplayer game!, even thou with all this nonsense it still manages to sell some games to naive gamers. So don't put at risk the creation of new IPs because the retar#%$ness of the Evolve developers!, creating new IPs is one of the main things to maintain this gaming industry.

[Ninver]

The game was bout for failure

[_-EDMIX-_]

Absolutely not that's probably one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

I have no idea why people keep talking about gaming as if it's an objective concept when in reality it is a subjective concept , there is no perfect way to create a game, all of it is subjective you're creating an art , sometimes people will like it , sometimes people will not care for it in the same way.

I hate even more when people say dumb crap like "you would think developers would learn from titles like Uncharted..."

That's like assuming every movie from after Citizen Kane is going to be this deep perfect thing... Isaiah what it took to create something that good was so obvious and so easy I actually believe it's a disrespect to the developers that they're even trying to compliment because they're suggesting that their entire success rides on a couple things that easily could be copied and mimicked.

The reality is some games do well some games don't every team that is developing a major game I believe even to a degree feels they are creating an amazing game they honestly do not know if they're going to strike fire or if it's just going to be a failure.

I'm pretty positive when Turtle Rock was making Left 4 Dead they probably felt it was going to be an amazing success but I also believe they probably felt this with involve thinking it would be the Natural Evolution to something like Left 4 Dead.

Let's be honest we've had developers released back-to-back amazing intellectual properties before...

No one is going to be able to guess 6s because at the end of the day there's some ideas that literally just sound like they want to be successful and they are some ideas that sound like they just going to be crap and they end up doing better than what people expected.

Risk is still part of releasing any new intellectual property there is no way to ever guaranteed perfection in such a concept.

In an alternate reality Heavenly sword as many peoples believe could have been the next God of War...

If it succeeded I'm pretty sure you would hear a bunch of people saying "well no kidding , well coming off of the success of God of War of course a game like this would do really well"

Another great example is Dying Light if that game went on to do ridiculous numbers I'm sure many people would attribute it to it being in first person and having zombies but that game did not move a ridiculous number of units.

[Mexxan]

On deciding whether to get BF1 or T2 - it's simple, T2 dlc will be free, while BF1 has a season pass of game content ripped from what would be a full game, much like Star Wars was.

[hongthay]

well, if you think about new IPs this gen, game companies are going to be leery. Successful ones, Bloodborne, Destiny and Titanfall (somewhat). Unsuccessful with studio closures, Driveclub and Evolve. Unsuccessful with a lot of harm to the studio, No Man's Sky, The Division and The Order 1886.

[Jayszen]

One of the main reasons for the failure was greed. The developers charged full price for a game that lacked content because most of it was held back to sell as DLC or for microtransactions and most gamers rejected this and rightly so.
If the failure serves as an example to other developers and stops them from similar behaviour, then I am glad Evolve failed.