• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Evolve Review Thread

Good to know. I saw the guy unlocking a new hunter yesterday with better guns and thought the game was filled with that.

Well, if they balance the game right, none of the monsters or hunters should be better or worse than any other. Apparently that wasn't totally the case during the betas but they have supposedly done a decent amount of balance tweaking since then.
 
In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.

NVM. Not all reviews are in. Besides, it's a new unproven concept. So i applaud the devs for at least trying.
 
For people reading the reviews and seeing the "stuff takes long to unlock" complaint, here is the Day 1 patch:

Our goals:
Make the Wraith easier to track. Even good Hunters have a hard time keeping tabs on Wraith because she can move so far while cloaked.
Make the Decoy less spammy. It doesn't take any skill to keep punching that ability button and let the AI Decoy go to work. We want to increase the "cost" of using it so that people use it more sparingly/strategically.
Bring Supernova down a notch. It's o.k. if it's her primary damage dealer, but it felt a little on the buff side for a while internally and we saw it prove true during the Beta.
Make Abduction a little easier to land. It's a really fun ability to use and it was underutilized during the beta.
Make Warp Blast a threat. This should be a straight forward damage dealer that also has some nice mobility utility.
Wraith changes:
Wraith can no longer warp while cloaked. If she does, the cloak wears off and the Decoy vanishes (just like when you melee attack). This means that when she cloaks, she normally won't get far and it opens the door for skilled players to do smart things like break line of sight before warping away.
Decoy takes 30% longer to cool down. This immediately makes it 30% less spammy and hopefully results in players saving it for the more opportune moments.
Supernova damage reduced by 10%. Not a huge change, but it will make a measurable difference.
Abduction radius increased by .5 meters (now 3.5). This will make it a little more forgiving.
Warp Blast radius increased by .5 meters (now 8.5). Increasing the radius here has proven a great way to increase the damage output in the past as players are able to hit their targets more often.
Misc changes:
Goliath Rock Throw inner shrapnel radius increased. What this means is if the rock lands close to a target the damage dealt will be more consistent. The overall damage and damage radius doesn't change. The damage just becomes more binary (you either get hit by the shrapnel or you don't.)
Markov Lightning Gun has a smaller lock on angle. Previously it would lock on to a target that was within 30 degrees of your crosshair. Now you need to be within 15 degrees. Still feels good, but players will need to be a little more accurate with their aim.
Hyde flamethrower damage bumped by 5%.
Griffin's maximum harpoon range extended by 5 meters (now 50.) Sucks when your aim was good but the length was too short for a flying Kraken. Should be more reliable now.
Bucket Rocket damage increased to 75 (was 68) per rocket.
Bucket Sentry Gun damage increased to 20 (was 17) per bullet.
Cabot's Radioactive Dusting radius decreased 10% (now 45 meters.)
Jetpack slow climb speed increased 50%.

Mastery Changes
We changed the majority of the numbers, but I'll call out the really big changes. When I say hours, I mean how long it should take people to accomplish the task given the community averages. Time is actual play time (excludes matchmaking, lobby, post round, etc.)

Markov's three star Arc Mines were taking 12.63 hours for people to complete. Should be five now.
Maggie's three star Daisy mastery was taking 17.79 hours. Now 5.
Hank's three star Orbital Barrage was taking 24.97 hours! We reduce the minimum range to 40 meters and set to five hours.
Val's two star Sniper Rifle was taking 14.68 hours. Set to 2.5.
Val's two star Medgun was taking 6.31 hours. Set to 2.5
Val's three star Tranq was taking 12.41 hours. Set to 5.
Hyde's two star Noxious Gas Grenade was taking 5.07 hours. Set to 2.5
Lazarus' three star Lazarus Device was taking 9.64 hours. Set to 5.
Lazarus' three star Personal Cloak was taking 10.79 hours. Set to 5.
Parnell three star Shotgun was taking 18.28 hours. Set to 5.
Parnell three start Rocket Launcher was taking 12.10 hours. Set to 5.
Abe three star Shotgun was taking 9.31 hours. Set to 5
.
 
Are we now in bizarro land where the most direct successor to Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 (both 89's weighted average with plenty of 9s and 10s) is getting mostly 7s and 8s and it is construed as "good scores!"... ?

In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.

1. It's not made by Valve.
2. MS is not putting Titanfall marketing into this game.
 
Are we now in bizarro land where the most direct successor to Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 (both 89's weighted average with plenty of 9s and 10s) is getting mostly 7s and 8s and it is construed as "good scores!"... ?

In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.

It is primarily an online game best enjoyed with friends and such. It is going to have people that love and others that don't. Also reviews today I would argue are trending lower than reviews around the time of L4D and L4D2. Not saying we are still using the full scale but reviews are clustering in the 6.5 to 8.5 range far more, when 8-9.5 seemed to be far more common not too long ago.
 
Jesus people were whining about getting lvl 2 and 3 unlocks that god damn hard? I guess we can't have anything to strive for for more than 5 hours :-/
 
Played the beta and would have scored it in the high 40 or low 50 percent mark.

The game tries to hard to latch on and emulate other games successful game play elements and as a result the entire thing already feels old and after a couple of matches boring as hell.

End review.
 
Sometimes people make up conspiracies in order to let a game down.

Are we now in bizarro land where the most direct successor to Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 (both 89's weighted average with plenty of 9s and 10s) is getting mostly 7s and 8s and it is construed as "good scores!"... ?

In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.

I don't know anything about the relationships between publishers and their critics, but I do know that 2K, Turtle Rock, and possibly Microsoft have invested a lot of resources in order to ensure that Evolve is a success.

Video game sites often have advertisements (paid by the publisher) for the games plastered all over their sites. The same games that they're paid to review. Publishers don't like it when said reviewers give their games a low score, the same reviewers that they're paying to advertise on their site. Reviewers also know this. Despite the outcry for Evolve's (alleged) lack of content, terrible DLC structuring, and timed DLC exclusivity, if they give the game a low score, it makes the publishers that pay for their advertising upset. That means they may pull their advertising, costing the reviewer money, which is clearly a bad thing.

Or maybe they just liked the game and gave it an 8. I don't know. I'm not trying to start any conspiracy, I'm just putting 2 and 2 and 2 and 2 together.
 
Played the beta and would have scored it in the high 40 or low 50 percent mark.

The game tries to hard to latch on and emulate other games successful game play elements and as a result the entire thing already feels old and after a couple of matches boring as hell.

End review.

Yeah Evolve has one huge flaw. It is too much like other games.
 
.

The open beta felt so boring to me. I'm really shocked that this game won so many E3 awards.

still looks pretty meh, idk maybe they shoulda just made an open world co-op rpg instead.

Yeah Evolve has one huge flaw. It is too much like other games.

Doesn't look like an "8" game, not even "7".

Seems like a great $20 buy, but I see what the guys are saying...

The gulf between the reviewers and their readers continues to grow.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached a point that scores are based on how the game " looks" like. This is some legit review right here.

That's not a valid complaint. Lots of people have probably played the beta and are basing their opinions on that.
 
I loved the the beta, I have this bad boy pre-ordered. Seems to be getting good scores too! I'm surprised some people walk away from this game feeling bored but you can't please everyone. I felt like it was pretty unique and requires some good teamwork. Graphics look fucking amazing too. Tomorrow can't come quick enough!!
 
Are we now in bizarro land where the most direct successor to Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 (both 89's weighted average with plenty of 9s and 10s) is getting mostly 7s and 8s and it is construed as "good scores!"... ?

In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.

uhhh what? This year's Titanfall? I think you are confused

Yeah Evolve has one huge flaw. It is too much like other games.

A mostly balanced 4 vs 1 game? I highly disagree. Game is a breath of fresh air when it comes to shooters. They really made an awesome class based game that truly needs all of it's classes to be a whole. I am stoked on the game for that reason alone
 
A mostly balanced 4 vs 1 game? I highly disagree. Game is a breath of fresh air when it comes to shooters. They really made an awesome class based game that truly needs all of it's classes to be a whole. I am stoked on the game for that reason alone

He's sarcastic, look at his next post below yours.
 
Game is probably not for me. Seems like communication is a massive part of this game, and matchmaking is probably insufficient for that.

Really don't want to bother getting more PSN friends.
 
Been waiting for it to unlock for the past hour, still hasn't. Usually Australia gets it before everyone else, i guess not this time
 
The gulf between the reviewers and their readers continues to grow.
I always had issues with some reviews. Dying Light got higher than I really feel it deserved. Seems Evolve is getting the same route.

Also Fantasy Life is one game where I totally disagree. Easily a 8/10 at the lowest.
 
Yeah, I expected 7s and 8s.

The alpha/beta just didn't click with me for some reason. Don't think I'll ever get this.

I feel the same. I didn't find anything in my experience with the game that sold me. I mean, I can tell WHY it should be good, but I don't think I'm in the competitive shooter boat as much nowadays.

Matches just felt largely the same to me, and I never felt a sense of accomplishment when I won, and losing didn't hurt, either.
 
I don't really care where the metacritic lands for this, but you've got to divide whatever score it is by 2, since to get all the content for this game you'll have to throw down the price of the game twice.

I hope you are applying this same practice to the majority of modern games.

Seems standard practice at this point, admittedly their messaging was just terrible. The one argument you could easily make is the prices are too high for the content, which would be fine.

I would argue that you are a sucker for purchasing DLC either way. I can count on one hand the amount of compelling DLC content that has come out in the last decade.

Played the beta and would have scored it in the high 40 or low 50 percent mark.

The game tries to hard to latch on and emulate other games successful game play elements and as a result the entire thing already feels old and after a couple of matches boring as hell.

End review.

I hope you are applying this same practice to the majority of modern games.

I would argue that your conclusion is off. Asymetrical multiplayer? Movemment system based off of Arena-shooters? Distinct classes? These mechanics don't really exist in the AAA space.
 
I had fun with this in the beta but I can't imagine playing this with randoms and I didn't have as much fun playing as the monster as I thought I would. Going to wait and see on this one.
 
Pretending to have a single player mode is a cardinal gaming sin, and one that Evolve is guilty of. This game shouldn’t be played alone, and as such, lone wolves need not apply.

I hate when reviewers do this. Maybe people want to learn more about the mechanics in a non competitive environment first.

Is it wrong if I want to be a monster all the time? I don't even find the concept of playing as the humans appealing.
 
I played the Beta for a bit, and it was a gorgeous-looking, pretty intense game... That just failed to grab me. Then again, I played with random people, and I am pretty sure that playing with friends will make this much more enjoyable. But since my friends aren't getting the game, neither am I.

So yeah, waiting for Steam's Summer Sale. Maybe I can entice a few of my friends to hop on board when it is -50% in price.
 
I hate when reviewers do this. Maybe people want to learn more about the mechanics in a non competitive environment first.

Is it wrong if I want to be a monster all the time? I don't even find the concept of playing as the humans appealing.

They gave the option. The option is better than no option. Can definitely be a tool to try and master different techniques to improve your gameplay
 
uhhh what? This year's Titanfall? I think you are confused

Am I mistaken in thinking that MS, in trying to closely asociating themselves with the franchise, would apparently very much like Evolve to become this year's go-to multiplayer FPS until the big guns hit around fall? (as they do each year)

The only difference with the situations is that here they don't have a multi-million $ contract like the EA one that allowed them to go console exclusive, and the delay on Battlefield Hardline means that the competition has something to counter as early as mid March (again, nothing is exclusive here, we are talking co-marketing agreements).

Obviously, I am talking here in terms of market (online FPS) and demographics, not in quality of games or mechanics, as until Evolve releses and is judged by actual gamers after extensive playtime we won't know what the consensus is.
 
I hate when reviewers do this. Maybe people want to learn more about the mechanics in a non competitive environment first.

Is it wrong if I want to be a monster all the time? I don't even find the concept of playing as the humans appealing.

I think it's more a problem that the ai doesn't actually play like people, and they don't use items appropriately or intelligently or they don't use the mechanics, so you aren't actually learning anything about how the game works.

That's what they (usually) mean when they comment on awful single player
 
I'm adding everything here as well as linking to this review thread:

http://www.techingames.net/Games/Details/70?selectedTab=Reviews

As a fellow gaffer, I thought you guys might like something like this. We can all add reviews, links and scores, and the nice thing I think about the way I set it up is that you can:

- review specific versions, not just XboxOne, PC or PS4, but version Alpha, version 1.0, version 1.06, etc. This will give options to

- add your own modifiers (or soon, also exclusions/inclusions) to modify scores from sites that always score too high or too low. You can even do somewhat complex calculations like *0.9+50

- it aggregates in 0-1000 scores, so you get that extra precision ;) (plus its an homage to the excellent ACE Magazine that I was subscribed to now 25 years ago)

- you can track and review individual parts of the game, like the framerate, or the online multiplayer, etc., again, always per version of the game, so if the game gets much better a year later ...

More details here:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=916546

You ask for any feature you think is missing, and there's a good shot I'll add it. I'm thinking for instance that I would allow users to add a 'tag' so you could do something like split out the user scores to NeoGaf members specifically.

Anyway let me know what you think, and apologies if this is out of place, then I'll delete the post.
 
Anyone happen to know what time this unlocks in NA? I might need to preorder this on the PSN shop right now if it comes out at midnight est.
 
Are we now in bizarro land where the most direct successor to Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 (both 89's weighted average with plenty of 9s and 10s) is getting mostly 7s and 8s and it is construed as "good scores!"... ?

In a vaccuum, it would be rather average at best, but with the devs' pedigree and MS's weight in marketing and tech expertise gunning for it to be this year's Titanfall (86 weighted average), it is pretty bad imo.
7 and 8s are good... 5 or 6s are average scores. People are spoiled now a days if a game is a 7 or 8 nope not worth full price.
 
Jason Schreier has got a point

iBQ9nVaKw9vjm.png

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/564797789620940800
 
To me, a 7-8 means if I was interested, i'll enjoy it, and if I was on the fence, I should avoid it.

I wasn't interested in this game at all, so the reviews had to be really great for me to give it a shot. However, if you like the concept and what you played in the alpha/beta i'm sure you will be pleased.
 
I'm excited for the game but I still stand by the idea that 2K is trying to get every last ounce of money out of this. They spent 10.8 million just to get the rights to publish Evolve, and who knows how much more they've dumped into it in marketing.

I'm curious how lucrative it would be if they chose a F2P structure instead of what they have now. It's a lot more top heavy currently, which, again, leads me to believe they are trying to salvage as much as they can as quickly as possible.
 
Top Bottom